Are brake lights at junctions the new front fog lights?
Discussion
djc206 said:
Liquid Knight said:
That comes back to my "Top Trumps" comment before about drivers aids in general.
Manufacturers are adding automatic headlights, parking sensors, reverse cameras, self parking and a myriad of other nonsense because...
...wait for it...
They think their customers are a bunch of thickies who can't drive their products themselves.
So automated parking brakes that leave the brake lights on are nothing more than another example of this.
And they’re right those things are most definitely not nonsense and will contribute to fewer parking shunts, fewer morons running into the back of stationary cars, fewer low speed accidents where automatic emergency braking would have prevented them etc etcManufacturers are adding automatic headlights, parking sensors, reverse cameras, self parking and a myriad of other nonsense because...
...wait for it...
They think their customers are a bunch of thickies who can't drive their products themselves.
So automated parking brakes that leave the brake lights on are nothing more than another example of this.
The biggest cause of accidents is the human behind the wheel so automation is inevitable and beneficial from a safety perspective.
My point about the education system in this country being aimed at passing exams. Much the same as schools teaching kids how to pass GCSE's and "A" levels for Offsted statistics and therefore funding driving instructors teaching newbies how to pass the test but not necessarily how to drive.
If a driving instructor boasts about a 90% or more pass rate; avoid them.
A number of times I have heard about kids passing their tests in brand new cars with so many drivers aids Bono should release a charity single for then stacking their twenty year old Corsa into a tree within a month because the car they learned to drive in was a basically autopilot in comparison. I always suggest that for every hour new drivers spend in a school car they should spend at least three in the car they will drive when they pass their test.
I do go on various tangents but I think we're on the same page.
If a driving instructor boasts about a 90% or more pass rate; avoid them.
A number of times I have heard about kids passing their tests in brand new cars with so many drivers aids Bono should release a charity single for then stacking their twenty year old Corsa into a tree within a month because the car they learned to drive in was a basically autopilot in comparison. I always suggest that for every hour new drivers spend in a school car they should spend at least three in the car they will drive when they pass their test.
I do go on various tangents but I think we're on the same page.
Edited by Liquid Knight on Sunday 2nd December 18:32
DoubleD said:
Lots of kids years ago learnt to drive in cars with no driver aids, and they still crashed their own car after passing their test, so unfortunately that has no relevance.
Brilliant argument I have no rebuttal. New drivers crashing cars has been the way of life since the inception of the automobile.
I do however stand by my advice of driving their car three times as much as the driving school car.
Interesting direction we have gone here.
How about an Australian system where new drivers have to display "P" plates and have limitations in vehicle capacity (no turbos), curfew and other restrictions.
The closest we came to it was the Pass Plus. I did this because I needed to drive on motorways. Twelve years before I passed my driving test I took my CBT. My instructor and now good friend Mick showed me a collection of photos of injuries sent to him when previous students were knocked or fell off. Some gravel rash to dismembered limbs.
Again looking at Australia and New Zealand to a degree their road safety adverts are incredible.
If children or shall we say "troubled" new drivers be shown something as hard hitting would it have as positive effect as they have in Aus'?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sXX1OEn5iA
How about an Australian system where new drivers have to display "P" plates and have limitations in vehicle capacity (no turbos), curfew and other restrictions.
The closest we came to it was the Pass Plus. I did this because I needed to drive on motorways. Twelve years before I passed my driving test I took my CBT. My instructor and now good friend Mick showed me a collection of photos of injuries sent to him when previous students were knocked or fell off. Some gravel rash to dismembered limbs.
Again looking at Australia and New Zealand to a degree their road safety adverts are incredible.
If children or shall we say "troubled" new drivers be shown something as hard hitting would it have as positive effect as they have in Aus'?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sXX1OEn5iA
M4cruiser said:
DoubleD said:
Boosted LS1 said:
I disagree. Those drivers are merely resting their foot on the brakes, not pressing firmly. If the foot slips off because of being rear ended how can that be safer then the handbrake that has to be manually released?
I cant see it making much difference either way in a rear end shunt.If you foot is firmly on the brake pedal and you are hit from behind all of the impact energy is absorbed by the two vehicles. Great if you have kids in the back. Sorry; had kids in the back.
If your foot is knocked off the brake pedal you could roll into oncoming or other traffic. This second, third or more collision would not only be your fault but would also cause more damage and potential injuries or death.
If you're using your handbrake like you are supposed to and as the law requires so the same rear end collision would be enough to move your vehicle spreading the energy of the impact but not enough to knock you into other traffic.
djc206 said:
Can you show me where the law says you must use your handbrake?
Driving Without Due Care and Attention (consideration). Failure to drive to the standard expected of a competent driver. Highway Code section 114 said:
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
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
Any "competent" driver who passed their test in the last seventy years should be well aware of the Highway Code and the practical application of it. use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
As mentioned above depending on the driving test assessor you may be marked down for failing to use the handbrake during a standard driving test. It demonstrates either inability to fully control the vehicle or unfamiliarity of the controls.
From recent experience with PSV and HGV driving. You literally have a maximum of four to five seconds from coming to a stop to applying the handbrake or else; it's an instant fail.
Anyway back to the original question. This afternoon as I waited to go on to the A47 at King's Lynn's notorious Hardwick roundabout nine vehicles were ahead of me and they all had their brake lights illuminated by their own ineptitude or by design.
Four were in the wrong lane and cut others up.
Three shot off the line like the start of a quarter mile only to have to brake and avoid the traffic they could clearly see was ahead of them the whole time.
None of them used their indicators when they entered or left the roundabout.
So in this case all nine who failed to use their handbrakes also failed to drive to the standards expected of someone capable of passing a test.
Again from PSV and HGV experience who have to do a CPC every five years. Why not have a repeater test for all drivers every five years?
Think of it as an MOT for the driver.
If they fail they are back to provisional and "L" plates until they can pass a full test.,
Four were in the wrong lane and cut others up.
Three shot off the line like the start of a quarter mile only to have to brake and avoid the traffic they could clearly see was ahead of them the whole time.
None of them used their indicators when they entered or left the roundabout.
So in this case all nine who failed to use their handbrakes also failed to drive to the standards expected of someone capable of passing a test.
Again from PSV and HGV experience who have to do a CPC every five years. Why not have a repeater test for all drivers every five years?
Think of it as an MOT for the driver.
If they fail they are back to provisional and "L" plates until they can pass a full test.,
djc206 said:
So it’s not illegal then.
Highway Code rule 144 said:
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
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
As you missed it. use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
jamei303 said:
So on street-lit roads who turns their headlights off when waiting in traffic, and waits on sidelights until moving off?
Depends how long I'm waiting. Traffic lights not so much but railway crossings I turn my engine (and therefore headlights) off as soon as there is someone behind me. Also at night I use side lights (drls) when I leave my driveway. It's a bit of a slope and that avoids dazzling anyone who might be driving by.
Le Controleur Horizontal said:
Not really when you see this thread....basic courtesy to our fellow man it seems is dead.
Common sense and common courtesy aren't very common these days. 
Ageism based trolling? Okay...
Older people know how to do a hill start with a handbrake. We have already covered that it is not taught by some driving schools.
Older people are more considerate of others in general and on the road.
Older people can remember when brake lights were bulbs made of glass, filled with gas and used a metal element not LED's that are visible from space.
Older drivers use their mirrors properly and more often.
I gave a friends son a driving lesson and he spent more time looking to see if his phone had a message than anything to do with the operation of the vehicle. A habit he has picked up from his parents who both have had points for using the phone whilst driving. I ended up putting his phone in the glove box for the last few minutes and as soon as we stopped he took it and sat with the screen open for the rest of the afternoon. A twenty minute long lesson without prompting he only checked his mirrors about five or six times. If I had a Pound for every time I had to say "Mirror" I would be able to retire now.
This was never meant to be an age based debate. That's a whole other tin of worms.
Older people know how to do a hill start with a handbrake. We have already covered that it is not taught by some driving schools.
Older people are more considerate of others in general and on the road.
Older people can remember when brake lights were bulbs made of glass, filled with gas and used a metal element not LED's that are visible from space.
Older drivers use their mirrors properly and more often.
I gave a friends son a driving lesson and he spent more time looking to see if his phone had a message than anything to do with the operation of the vehicle. A habit he has picked up from his parents who both have had points for using the phone whilst driving. I ended up putting his phone in the glove box for the last few minutes and as soon as we stopped he took it and sat with the screen open for the rest of the afternoon. A twenty minute long lesson without prompting he only checked his mirrors about five or six times. If I had a Pound for every time I had to say "Mirror" I would be able to retire now.
This was never meant to be an age based debate. That's a whole other tin of worms.
DoubleD said:
He has obviously picked up some bad habits from older people, like his mum and dad!
Old and young can be good or bad at driving, both sides feel that they are the better drivers.
Very true to a degree. Some of us young, old or anywhere between don't see driving on the road as a competition. Save that for the track. Old and young can be good or bad at driving, both sides feel that they are the better drivers.
Munter said:
That's just a reason to include eye sight tests in a retesting program, night/day licences and improved transport options for the elderly. And less about when people should display that they are slowing/stationary.
Good idea, I have suggested before that all drivers should be retested every five years. When I have made that suggestion some are very vocal about how much of a bad idea they think it is. Coincidentally they tend to be bad drivers. A couple of years ago there was a Parish Council meeting about reducing the speed limit outside the schools and having a speed camera on the main road. Four locals objected and within a year two had crashed and another was banned. The only people who have a problem with speed cameras are those who break the speed limit. Funny that.
Pit Pony said:
I can't be arsed.
That edited quote epitomises everything wrong with the standard driving in the UK right now. People don't indicate; because they can't be arsed.
People don't use the handbrake; because they can't be arsed.
People don't put their phone down; because they can't be arsed.
People don't go round mini-roundabouts; because they can't be arsed...
...and so on; and so on: and so on. Until they crash because they couldn't be arsed to stop at give way line, they hit a cyclist because they couldn't be arsed to wait more than a few seconds to overtake safely, they end up in prison for thirteen years because they couldn't be arsed to stay on the left side of of the road tuning a right hand blind bend and killed a family in a head on collision.
"I can't be arsed"
Is the reason Britain will never be Great again.
Catatafish said:
I'm amazed there is a subhuman offshoot species amongst us.
This weak-eyed human variant will astound and delight the anthropology community as they try to understand how this evolutionary dead-end persists in the gene pool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwZ0ZUy7P3EThis weak-eyed human variant will astound and delight the anthropology community as they try to understand how this evolutionary dead-end persists in the gene pool.
That film should be part of the National Curriculum.
Just a little point some of you have raised about being held up a fraction of a second while someone does a start with a handbrake.
You do realise you are not supposed to go until the vehicle in front of you has right?
I don't know how you ever passed a test but if something as simple as "Do not try to occupy a space that isn't there" appears to be beyond your capabilities you may want to think about getting a bus pass.
If I'm behind someone at a set of lights I always leave a gap and hardly even look at the lights. I pay attention to the vehicle ahead and surrounding traffic. When they go I can go. Never before. Sometimes depending on the conditions I even wait to ensure a two or more second gap before I set off. That way I won't end up blocking a box junction, pedestrian crossing or if they have any kind of issue (that has happened before) I have room to stop safely.
Idiots who go on green even though there are vehicles ahead of them and simply have to get through the light are the type of impatient cretins who sit on the brake pedal and clutch to save a precious fraction of a second or so.
They're the ones who will tailgate you. Completely unaware of anything outside their pathetic little world other than you. Then they will either overtake (seldom with any regard to their safety or anyone else on the road) if you have the audacity to stick to the speed limit or eventually move back just in time for the next light. They will try to go though on amber even if you are stopping in front of them. Emergency stop, horn blasting and hand gestures while sat millimeters from the back of your car until they try to go on the "a" of the amber/red again (even though you are still in front of them and haven't moved yet).
You do realise you are not supposed to go until the vehicle in front of you has right?
I don't know how you ever passed a test but if something as simple as "Do not try to occupy a space that isn't there" appears to be beyond your capabilities you may want to think about getting a bus pass.
If I'm behind someone at a set of lights I always leave a gap and hardly even look at the lights. I pay attention to the vehicle ahead and surrounding traffic. When they go I can go. Never before. Sometimes depending on the conditions I even wait to ensure a two or more second gap before I set off. That way I won't end up blocking a box junction, pedestrian crossing or if they have any kind of issue (that has happened before) I have room to stop safely.
Idiots who go on green even though there are vehicles ahead of them and simply have to get through the light are the type of impatient cretins who sit on the brake pedal and clutch to save a precious fraction of a second or so.
They're the ones who will tailgate you. Completely unaware of anything outside their pathetic little world other than you. Then they will either overtake (seldom with any regard to their safety or anyone else on the road) if you have the audacity to stick to the speed limit or eventually move back just in time for the next light. They will try to go though on amber even if you are stopping in front of them. Emergency stop, horn blasting and hand gestures while sat millimeters from the back of your car until they try to go on the "a" of the amber/red again (even though you are still in front of them and haven't moved yet).
I drove a Mercedes yesterday and the automatic handbrake was completely useless and wouldn't hold a fart let alone a two ton limousine. I ended up having to put the car in Park to take my foot off the brake pedal, reapply the brake when the lights started to change, select Drive and go instead of sitting there with my foot on the brake pedal.
It was noticeably slower than a manual and I imagine the reverse light flash may have been a concern for whoever was behind me but it was the only way.
It was noticeably slower than a manual and I imagine the reverse light flash may have been a concern for whoever was behind me but it was the only way.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff