Super-bright LEDs in public places?

[GB]

Treated cataracts? Or untreated?

The biggest danger is coming downstairs. If you miss a step going up, you don't fall far.

[ARW]

Discourage or displace?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I must lead a sheltered life. I've never seen anyone injecting themselves with illegal drugs in a tube station. Far more likely in a toilet cubical.

[Bill Wright]

Well the railway companies rob you blind, now they want to dazzle you blind as well.

Bill

[ARW]

Not a problem for those of us that do not use a train.

[Weatherlawyer]

Maybe it is to help the baggage handlers in Gate 3 lose your bags more easily? How much would it cost to switch them off is someone fell over?

[James Wilkinson]

They shouldn't be stopping people from doing what they like to their own bodies.

[James Wilkinson]

All they care about is nobody can say "poorly lit area, sue them".

[James Wilkinson]

It should be.

[James Wilkinson]

Nothing is as bright as a daytime running light.

[NY]

If a DRL wasn't bright, it wouldn't be worth having - in order for a DRL to stand out from the surroundings, it needs to be brighter than normal sunlight or bright cloudy light reflected off something white - the purpose of DRLs is to be seen.

Hopefully they are no brighter than sunlight off a mirrored surface (eg paintwork, chromework, windscreen) and hopefully the intensity reduces as the level of daylight does.

Yes, DRLs are fairly bright but I don't find them dazzlingly so, mainly because they are at the front of cars and therefore are only seen by oncoming traffic for a short time before the car has passed you. And I don't notice them being more dazzling on a dull day or at dusk than on a bright sunny day, which makes me think that there's some adjustment for ambient light level.

What I *do* find dazzling are rear fog lights when there's no fog, or brake lights when the driver in front of you in a traffic jam sits stationary, a few feet ahead of you, with his brake lights on instead of using his handbrake, or park gear if he's got an auto. I find bright, highly saturated (monochromatic) lights more distracting and inclined to leave after-images on my retinas than highly unsaturated white lights.

But we're all different.

[James Wilkinson]

All they do is draw your attention to every single car, you should only have your attention drawn to ambulances etc. I can see a car with no lights on it perfectly well during the day. Adding lights is utterly pointless.

I shouldn't be seeing sunlight off a mirrored surface everywhere.

And when driving in a city, you have a constant stream of them. Your irises close to compensate, so you see pedestrians less easily. DRLs are dangerous, proven by studies, and banned in some countries.

Every car is different (anything from sidelight brightness of 5W to even brighter than full beam (absurd), so you can't do that comparison with random cars.

I've never switched on a fog light in my life. If people are having difficulty seeing taillights in the fog, they ought to slow down to reduce their stopping distance to the distance they can see them at.

Nope, they're 21W minus the 2/3rds absorbed by the red plastic. Nothing like 65W.

I hate timewasters using their handbrake every time they stop.

I've never heard of someone thinking monochromatic is more distracting.

[Richard]

You share cubicles? Oh well, each to his own.

[Steve Walker]

Just as easy to sue for "unable to see due to glare."

[Steve Walker]

Don't drive behind my kit-car then. Flat rear panel, with entire bodyshell constructed from mirror finish stainless-steel!

It certainly discourages people from dazzling me in my mirrors at night.

That is certainly a risk there, although you also have to take into account the vehicles that are made more noticeable to other vehicles and to pedestrians about to step out, so possibly avoiding accidents that way.

Far worse though, in our leafy suburbs, are the pedestrians that step out from the shadows between the trees and bushes at night, away from the bright areas around the LED streetlights and wearing dark clothing from head to foot. Or the unlit cyclists, equally darkly clad, swerving out from between parked vehicles.

All the ones I have seen have only two or three brightnesses - full (for daylight), an optional dimmed level when other lights are on (to act as sidelights) and off.

The point is that when you slow down, your foglights are visible further through the fog than you tailights and hopefully it stops the next person, who may not have slowed down enough, from running into the rear of your vehicle. You are protecting yourself from those that have failed to slow enough.

I have only needed foglights a few times - once when visibility was so bad that vehicles had to crawl at walking pace along the side of the centre-line and the kerb wasn't visible at all.

I have certainly found LED brakelights where the manufacturer has pulsed them at too slow a rate annoying. As you move your eyes or turn your head, you end up with a row of separate after-images. I also have the same problem when I catch sight of the red man on crossings out of the corner of my eye as I pass.

[James Wilkinson]

You'd have to be going slower than me fort that to happen.

Those are cool when you see your own car in the reflection.

What about during the day?

Making everything more noticeable is pointless. People have x amount of concentration. All you can do is shift it to things like blind people, roadworkmen, ambulances.

It doesn't matter how a pedestrian is dressed, they should be looking before crossing the road.

I don't know how many settings they have as I don't have them myself, but I've seen cars with all different brightnesses from 5W to about 90W.

When I slow down, my brakelights are on, which are identical to foglights.

That's the other thing I don't like about them. If I'm behind someone with foglights on, I don't know when they brake.

We were once sent home from work early because it had got very foggy and was dangerous to drive. They must have thought it was possible to get worse later? It didn't, it was about the heaviest I'd seen as we left. I almost drove into someone waiting at a farm road exit on a corner, as I thought the road went straight ahead until I saw the side of his car and swerved right.

The brakelights aren't as bad as the taillights, as they pulse them less to make them dimmer. WTF possessed car manufacturers to make pulsed lights in the frequency range they must know people can see, from experience of CRTs etc? And why the f*ck (is that still WTF?) isn't there legislation on LED lights?

[Bob Eager]

There is a pedestrian crossing near here which has LED lighting in the poles. The pulsed effect is *very* noticeable.

[polygonum]

In my experience, I don't think I have ever driven at night when rear high intensity lights have been appropriate. However, I have had quite a few occasions in daylight hours when they have seemed sensible. For example, on a motorway with spray, mist, rain and low cloud - I have seen that vehicles I was following have simply disappeared despite having their ordinary rear lamps on.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Yup. You'd think it pretty obvious that if you have difficulty seeing the rear of a car in daylight because of heavy rain, etc, it would be logical to switch on the rear fogs. But you're far more likely to see them on when not needed.

[Chris]

These super-bright ones are nothing to do with discouraging drug use. I've seen them installed - to take just one example - at the staircases of Gatwick airport rail station; the platform that specifically serves the airport; a very busy thoroughfare indeed. No one's going to attempt to shoot up in a highly public place like that with loads of passengers, staff and coppers around!