UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,772
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements ?
They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a lot
fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. We had a
circular from the contractors / council come through the door, which made
some claims about how much money they had already saved by switching off
half or more of all the lights in domestic streets, and just about all of
the lights on the main roads. They then went on to make some further claims
about how much more money they were going to save as a result of fitting
these new LED based lights. Both myself, and my neighbour, who is an
industrial electrician of many years experience, think that the claims being
made are fairly outrageous, and that the numbers, as presented, don't stack
up. The previous lights were low pressure sodium, and when the guy came to
replace a faulty lamp in the one between our houses, my neighbour asked him
what the power rating was. It was 35 watts, which really isn't a lot. OK, I
know that there will be some losses in the ballast, so let's add another few
watts to that and call it 40 watts all in.

Looking on the 'net, it seems that the LED equivalents start at about 28
watts, with a further 9 watts lost in the driving engine, so 37 watts, which
doesn't seem like a whole bunch different from the sodiums that we had
before. Apparently, the new ones are going to dim down at 2 am, so that
will, admittedly, save a bit more, but it still seems to me that the figures
are being presented in a less-than-straightforward manner, which seems to be
the way of all government propaganda, both central and local, nowadays.

Last night, they switched on some of the new ones at the other end of the
street, so tonight, I drove round to take a look. My neighbour said that
when his missus came home last night, she reckoned that they had dazzled
her. I could see what she meant. They were actually quite unpleasant to
drive under. It seems that they have given them a wide dispersion angle in
an effort, when coupled with the extra height over the original lights, to
fill in the pools of gloom left by setting fewer of them further apart. The
result is that they shine down into your face from quite a distance away.

They also claimed that night time colour rendition would be better, because
the replacement lights were going to be white. Well, they *are* white - sort
of. But actually, the light is quite a creamy colour. But setting that
aside, I really don't see why night time colour rendition is of any
importance, over the fact that one of the main reasons that sodium lighting
was first introduced, was because it improved visibility in fog by a huge
amount. I can still remember driving in fog when street lighting was
predominantly by conventional linear white fluorescents, and it was a much
improved situation when the yellow sodium lighting was introduced.

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

Arfa

  #2   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,701
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements


No one has any long term experience yet - they are brand new!
I strongly suspect that early adopters will get comprehensively shafted.

? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a
lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. We


Yes. They are installing them in Salford and Manchester at the moment
under some deranged PFI scheme that has all the hallmarks of a buy now
pay through the nose later con merchants paradise. The predicted savings
in the publicity blurb made no sense to me either and I have a pretty
good idea about what works and what doesn't. More details:

http://www.urbanvision.org.uk/projec...fit-programme/

Take a look and draw your own conclusions if it is genuine. It is
unfortunately short on numbers, all pictures and rather content free.

I contributed to the UK Select Committee on light pollution in the UK -
in favour of low pressure sodium street lights (which are easy for
astronomers to filter) and by far the most energy efficient lamp known.

had a circular from the contractors / council come through the door,
which made some claims about how much money they had already saved by
switching off half or more of all the lights in domestic streets, and
just about all of the lights on the main roads. They then went on to


Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.

make some further claims about how much more money they were going to
save as a result of fitting these new LED based lights. Both myself, and
my neighbour, who is an industrial electrician of many years experience,
think that the claims being made are fairly outrageous, and that the
numbers, as presented, don't stack up. The previous lights were low
pressure sodium, and when the guy came to replace a faulty lamp in the
one between our houses, my neighbour asked him what the power rating
was. It was 35 watts, which really isn't a lot. OK, I know that there
will be some losses in the ballast, so let's add another few watts to
that and call it 40 watts all in.


It depends what the lighting in the street already is. If it is HPS
peachy white at present then the energy used is broadly similar or
slightly less, but if it is LPS orange yellow then it is over 2x higher.
There is nothing yet that can compete with low pressure sodium lamps
even if they do have a rather monochromatic soft yellow light.

Looking on the 'net, it seems that the LED equivalents start at about 28
watts, with a further 9 watts lost in the driving engine, so 37 watts,
which doesn't seem like a whole bunch different from the sodiums that we
had before. Apparently, the new ones are going to dim down at 2 am, so
that will, admittedly, save a bit more, but it still seems to me that
the figures are being presented in a less-than-straightforward manner,
which seems to be the way of all government propaganda, both central and
local, nowadays.


Actually not - there is some manufacturer and installer collaboration
behind it all and financial engineering that will only come to light
when the predicted savings turn into a cascade of lost money.

I had the opportunity to take one apart at a pro-LED publicity event at
Salford Observatory and I have to say that they are US designs over
engineered for our high latitude which means they cost more and need
complete replacement of the poles to take the heavier cast aluminium
heatsink. On the plus side single point failure should be impossible.

The power LEDs are on a back board and there is a deep parabolic
reflector in front and for control freakery cast clear acrylic lenses in
from of that. Surprisingly the inside acrylic envelope is smooth and the
outer surface is curved to make it more difficult to clean.

I guess they did this to throw more light sideways but it causes glare.

Last night, they switched on some of the new ones at the other end of
the street, so tonight, I drove round to take a look. My neighbour said
that when his missus came home last night, she reckoned that they had
dazzled her. I could see what she meant. They were actually quite
unpleasant to drive under. It seems that they have given them a wide
dispersion angle in an effort, when coupled with the extra height over
the original lights, to fill in the pools of gloom left by setting fewer
of them further apart. The result is that they shine down into your face
from quite a distance away.


They have to put some more light sideways to cover the ground more
uniformly at a wider spacing. On the plus side they are close to full
cutoff with almost no light going upwards from the luminaire.

They also claimed that night time colour rendition would be better,
because the replacement lights were going to be white. Well, they *are*
white - sort of. But actually, the light is quite a creamy colour. But
setting that aside, I really don't see why night time colour rendition
is of any importance, over the fact that one of the main reasons that


Mainly because paranoid homeowners feel safer in dazzling white light.
Why do you think sheds sell 500W PIR insecurity lights inside tin cans?

sodium lighting was first introduced, was because it improved visibility
in fog by a huge amount. I can still remember driving in fog when street
lighting was predominantly by conventional linear white fluorescents,
and it was a much improved situation when the yellow sodium lighting was
introduced.


Classic low pressure sodium lamps still hold the record for efficacy and
by a very long way. The only problem with them is that in the UK the
luminaire designs are not properly implemented and send 30% of all light
they emit upwards to the sky. Look down from an plane over the UK and
you have direct line of site into the bright lamp.

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

Arfa


Time will tell if they actually save money but I am not optimistic. YMMV

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,998
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Well I can tell you this, when I was partially sighted the orangey lights
were much much better for me, creating less bleaching and though colours
were odd you could see even in a bit of fog. However the led lights I did
see bfore I lost the central macular kind of hazed up things a bit like a
hard white tube does, the only other thing is that to me at least, flicker
on mains sourced leds is far worse.

I imagine there are pros and cons to all lights though, but it will be
interesting to see what shakes down here. Certainly I believe Surbiton are
not going completely LED yet, not ready they say.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements ?
They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a lot
fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. We had a
circular from the contractors / council come through the door, which made
some claims about how much money they had already saved by switching off
half or more of all the lights in domestic streets, and just about all of
the lights on the main roads. They then went on to make some further
claims about how much more money they were going to save as a result of
fitting these new LED based lights. Both myself, and my neighbour, who is
an industrial electrician of many years experience, think that the claims
being made are fairly outrageous, and that the numbers, as presented,
don't stack up. The previous lights were low pressure sodium, and when the
guy came to replace a faulty lamp in the one between our houses, my
neighbour asked him what the power rating was. It was 35 watts, which
really isn't a lot. OK, I know that there will be some losses in the
ballast, so let's add another few watts to that and call it 40 watts all
in.

Looking on the 'net, it seems that the LED equivalents start at about 28
watts, with a further 9 watts lost in the driving engine, so 37 watts,
which doesn't seem like a whole bunch different from the sodiums that we
had before. Apparently, the new ones are going to dim down at 2 am, so
that will, admittedly, save a bit more, but it still seems to me that the
figures are being presented in a less-than-straightforward manner, which
seems to be the way of all government propaganda, both central and local,
nowadays.

Last night, they switched on some of the new ones at the other end of the
street, so tonight, I drove round to take a look. My neighbour said that
when his missus came home last night, she reckoned that they had dazzled
her. I could see what she meant. They were actually quite unpleasant to
drive under. It seems that they have given them a wide dispersion angle in
an effort, when coupled with the extra height over the original lights, to
fill in the pools of gloom left by setting fewer of them further apart.
The result is that they shine down into your face from quite a distance
away.

They also claimed that night time colour rendition would be better,
because the replacement lights were going to be white. Well, they *are*
white - sort of. But actually, the light is quite a creamy colour. But
setting that aside, I really don't see why night time colour rendition is
of any importance, over the fact that one of the main reasons that sodium
lighting was first introduced, was because it improved visibility in fog
by a huge amount. I can still remember driving in fog when street lighting
was predominantly by conventional linear white fluorescents, and it was a
much improved situation when the yellow sodium lighting was introduced.

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

Arfa



  #4   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements
? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a
lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. ...


If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is
still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it
makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs
along the road.

Colin Bignell
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,397
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
snipThey then went on to
make some further claims about how much more money they were going to
save as a result of fitting these new LED based lights. Both myself, and
my neighbour, who is an industrial electrician of many years experience,
think that the claims being made are fairly outrageous, and that the
numbers, as presented, don't stack up.

/snip

snip to fill in the pools of gloom left by setting fewer
of them further apart./snip


It'll be the lower number of lights and the night-time dimming that save
money, not the efficiency.

Andy


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
GB GB is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,768
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 08:50, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements
? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a
lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. ...


If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is
still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it
makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs
along the road.


LOL

Usually, they are staggered on opposite sides of the road. Is the 183m
measured diagonally across the road in that case?



  #7   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,936
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:

Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements


? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a


lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. ....




If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is

still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it

makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs

along the road.



Colin Bignell


I thought that idea had been done away with, no ?

It was eliminated in the Republic of Ireland, and at the same time the placement of speed limits into the hands of brain dead morons at the beck and call of local idiots. It is utterly arcane. Varying speed limits with no indication whatsoever of what limit is in operation in a particular area apart from the initial signs.
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 09:41, fred wrote:
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:

Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements
? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a
lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. ...


If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is
still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it
makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs
along the road.


I thought that idea had been done away with, no ?

It was eliminated in the Republic of Ireland, and at the same time the placement of speed limits into the hands of brain dead morons at the beck and call of local idiots.


It still applies in England and Wales, where the spacing is 183 metres,
and Scotland, where the spacing is 185 metres.

It is utterly arcane. Varying speed limits with no indication whatsoever of what limit is in operation in a particular area apart from the initial signs.


The street lights are the indication. Anything other than 30mph in a
built up area has to be signed with repeaters.

Colin Bignell
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 876
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:

Yes. They are installing them in Salford and Manchester at the moment
under some deranged PFI scheme that has all the hallmarks of a buy now
pay through the nose later con merchants paradise....


A depressingly wonderful summary of much of what is now going on across
the board in public infrastructure.

A bunch of people who have no idea what they're talking about (i.e. the
managers responsible for hitting "targets") (not the engineers of course
-- oh crikey no!), talking to another bunch of people who also, almost
certainly, do not know what they're talking about (the salesmen sent out
to "hunt and kill").

John
:-(
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 09:33, GB wrote:
On 13/03/2013 08:50, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements
? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a
lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires.
...


If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is
still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it
makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs
along the road.


LOL

Usually, they are staggered on opposite sides of the road. Is the 183m
measured diagonally across the road in that case?


Provided both sides properly light the road (some convictions have been
overturned by showing they do not) the measurement would be along the
road centre line.

Colin Bignell



  #11   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,175
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article ,
"Arfa Daily" writes:
Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements ?


I've watched this being done, and then abandoned, in a number of places.

The reasons for fitting them a
1. The maintenance company makes money out of doing the work, and so puts
a lot of effort into selling it to the council.
2. The promise of maintenance-free lighting looks attractive to the council.
3. The energy savings look attractive and easy to sell to the public (even
though, as you say, they aren't very significant, particularly when
replacing low pressure sodium which is very efficient).
4. The promise of good colour rendering.

These points actually resolve out more like...

1. only makes sense if the existing lights are at end of life, and I've
often seen this done when that's not the case.

2. Many LED lamps have turned out to have very low reliability. They're
often manufactured by newcommers to outdoor lighting, newcommers to
outdoor electronics, and the result is very short life - shorter even
than the relamping periods for current lamps.

3. Unfortunately, these decisions are often made by councillors, who
are not technically competent to make them, nor to read past the
selling claims of the installers.

4. LEDs can have good colour rendering, but LED streetlamps rarely
give enough lighting to trigger colour vision, so you are effectively
locked into black-and-white moonlight vision mode.

The other thing is that they are very directional and only light the
road surface. Areas outside this such as front gardens and doorways
are in darkness, which makes many people feel a lot less safe.


My observation is that councils give up with LED lighting in about 2
years, and switch over to fluorescent lanterns, although they aren't
likely to replace the areas already fitted with LEDs.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In message
,
Another John writes
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:

Yes. They are installing them in Salford and Manchester at the moment
under some deranged PFI scheme that has all the hallmarks of a buy now
pay through the nose later con merchants paradise....


A depressingly wonderful summary of much of what is now going on across
the board in public infrastructure.

A bunch of people who have no idea what they're talking about (i.e. the
managers responsible for hitting "targets") (not the engineers of course
-- oh crikey no!), talking to another bunch of people who also, almost
certainly, do not know what they're talking about (the salesmen sent out
to "hunt and kill").

John
:-(


Exactly what's been happening in the NHS for years!

--
Simon

12) The Second Rule of Expectations
An EXPECTATION is a Premeditated resentment.
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,703
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article , Arfa Daily
writes

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

If you want to keep your options open for a complaint after the event
then it might be worthwhile borrowing a lux meter to measure current
illumination levels for comparison with those after the replacement. It
would let you counter any lies they tell about lighting levels and
evenness of illumination. Readings in middle of road, one in line with
the lamp and one equidistant between adjacent lamps?
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,204
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:21:23 AM UTC, usenet2012 wrote:
In message

,

Another John writes

In article ,


Martin Brown wrote:




Yes. They are installing them in Salford and Manchester at the moment


under some deranged PFI scheme that has all the hallmarks of a buy now


pay through the nose later con merchants paradise....




A depressingly wonderful summary of much of what is now going on across


the board in public infrastructure.




A bunch of people who have no idea what they're talking about (i.e. the


managers responsible for hitting "targets") (not the engineers of course


-- oh crikey no!), talking to another bunch of people who also, almost


certainly, do not know what they're talking about (the salesmen sent out


to "hunt and kill").




John


:-(




Exactly what's been happening in the NHS for years!


And in education.



  #15   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article ,
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
My observation is that councils give up with LED lighting in about 2
years, and switch over to fluorescent lanterns, although they aren't
likely to replace the areas already fitted with LEDs.


What's actually wrong with high pressure sodium? Reasonable mix of colour
rendering, efficiency and life. Dunno about replacement costs. I'll bet
LEDs will be more.

--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/13 11:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
My observation is that councils give up with LED lighting in about 2
years, and switch over to fluorescent lanterns, although they aren't
likely to replace the areas already fitted with LEDs.


What's actually wrong with high pressure sodium? Reasonable mix of colour
rendering, efficiency and life. Dunno about replacement costs. I'll bet
LEDs will be more.

Not a lot is the short answer.

Color is good for fog..

efficiency is good.

I hate em, but that's personal. Id rather have no lights at all then low
intensity sodium.


LEDS may score in total cost of ownership. They certainly do in
comparison to incandescent.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

  #17   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,175
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" writes:

What's actually wrong with high pressure sodium?


Already sold, lamps are cheap, lighting industry makes no money.

Same with low pressure sodium and to a lesser extent with metal halide.

Hence the pressure from the lighting industry to move to new technology.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,772
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...



"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:
snipThey then went on to
make some further claims about how much more money they were going to
save as a result of fitting these new LED based lights. Both myself, and
my neighbour, who is an industrial electrician of many years experience,
think that the claims being made are fairly outrageous, and that the
numbers, as presented, don't stack up.

/snip

snip to fill in the pools of gloom left by setting fewer
of them further apart./snip


It'll be the lower number of lights and the night-time dimming that save
money, not the efficiency.

Andy


My thoughts exactly, and figures actually based on when all of the LPS
lights were on, rather than the savings that had already been achieved by
switching lights off. The way it has been presented makes it look like there
is going to be a ****load more savings as a result of changing to LED
lights, but I feel that there may only be an additional small saving from
having still fewer lights with the new spacing, and dimming them at whatever
time that they are doing that. I'm sure that similar savings could have been
made much more cheaply, by retro-fitting a time clock or whatever, to work
in conjunction with the twilight sensor, to similarly turn off the LPS
lamps. The fact that all of the existing lamposts are being ripped out and
replaced, must represent a staggering additional cost to the council. It
seems to me that this is largely another eco-bollox initiative that has
little justification, other than to make lots of money for the
manufacturers, and the contractors (a major UK civil engineering company)
who are putting them in. I wonder what sort of scrap value is being given
for the removed lights, and who's getting that ...?

Arfa

  #19   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
ARW ARW is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,161
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 09:41, fred wrote:
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:

Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light
replacements ? They've just started replacing all the lamposts
in my street, with a lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts
fitted with LED luminaires. ...

If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that
it is still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater
than that, it makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless
they fit repeater signs along the road.


I thought that idea had been done away with, no ?

It was eliminated in the Republic of Ireland, and at the same time
the placement of speed limits into the hands of brain dead morons
at the beck and call of local idiots.


It still applies in England and Wales, where the spacing is 183
metres, and Scotland, where the spacing is 185 metres.

It is utterly arcane. Varying speed limits with no indication
whatsoever of what limit is in operation in a particular area apart
from the initial signs.


The street lights are the indication. Anything other than 30mph in a
built up area has to be signed with repeaters.


And you would not believe how many people I know that have been on a speed
awarness course now seems to think that there is a 30MPH speed limit
wherever there are streetlights!

BTW is it not the streetlights that define "built up" and not the presence
of any houses?

--
Adam


  #20   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 13/03/2013 12:36, ARW wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

.....
The street lights are the indication. Anything other than 30mph in a
built up area has to be signed with repeaters.


And you would not believe how many people I know that have been on a speed
awarness course now seems to think that there is a 30MPH speed limit
wherever there are streetlights!

BTW is it not the streetlights that define "built up" and not the presence
of any houses?


In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it is the
provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified spacing that
makes it a restricted road. A system of street lighting is deemed to be
three or more lights.

Colin Bignell


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
ARW ARW is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,161
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 12:36, ARW wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

....
The street lights are the indication. Anything other than 30mph
in a built up area has to be signed with repeaters.


And you would not believe how many people I know that have been on
a speed awarness course now seems to think that there is a 30MPH
speed limit wherever there are streetlights!

BTW is it not the streetlights that define "built up" and not the
presence of any houses?


In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it is
the provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified
spacing that makes it a restricted road. A system of street lighting
is deemed to be three or more lights.


You have managed to word that better than any website I have ever seen.
Should I ever go on a speed awareness course I'll take that quote with me.

I have a feeling that speed awareness courses are dumbed-down after
listening to some of the feedback from people who have been on them.


--
Adam


  #22   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,772
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...



"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , Arfa Daily
writes

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

If you want to keep your options open for a complaint after the event
then it might be worthwhile borrowing a lux meter to measure current
illumination levels for comparison with those after the replacement. It
would let you counter any lies they tell about lighting levels and
evenness of illumination. Readings in middle of road, one in line with
the lamp and one equidistant between adjacent lamps?
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .


That's a good thought, Fred

Arfa
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
ARW ARW is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,161
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Arfa Daily wrote:
"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , Arfa Daily
writes

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations
that anyone might have.

If you want to keep your options open for a complaint after the
event then it might be worthwhile borrowing a lux meter to measure
current illumination levels for comparison with those after the
replacement. It would let you counter any lies they tell about
lighting levels and evenness of illumination. Readings in middle of
road, one in line with the lamp and one equidistant between
adjacent lamps? --
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .


That's a good thought, Fred



And video youself taking the lux readings. No sneakily covering the meter
with a piece of paper.

--
Adam


  #24   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,703
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article , Jethro_uk
writes
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:25:35 +0000, fred wrote:

In article , Arfa Daily
writes

I'm interested in any thoughts, facts, experience or observations that
anyone might have.

If you want to keep your options open for a complaint after the event
then it might be worthwhile borrowing a lux meter to measure current
illumination levels for comparison with those after the replacement. It
would let you counter any lies they tell about lighting levels and
evenness of illumination. Readings in middle of road, one in line with
the lamp and one equidistant between adjacent lamps?


To what purpose ? Once TPTB have decided, they have decided. Down is up
and up is down, white is black and black is white. Even if you got them
to acknowledge 10 is less than 15 (you'd be surprised) you'd only get a
load of horse**** about "the complete picture", "overall", "when you take
the adjusted figures" &c &c &c.


The benefit is that you can comment in an informed manner, objective
comments carry more weight than subjective.

Also, don't underestimate the lying f'ck factor, if you can show that
facts have been grossly misrepresented then at the very least it gives
you an advantage in an future argument.

And finally, if you don't take measurements before the old lights are
removed then the opportunity has been lost, you lose any chance to make
informed comment on the differences.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .
  #25   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14,085
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:02:08 GMT, Jethro_uk wrote:

To what purpose ? Once TPTB have decided, they have decided. Down is up
and up is down, white is black and black is white. Even if you got them
to acknowledge 10 is less than 15 (you'd be surprised) you'd only get a
load of horse**** about "the complete picture", "overall", "when you
take the adjusted figures" &c &c &c.


Which you then proceed to take apart bit by bit and prove their phalases.
It wouldn't be at all surprising that they have taken makers values or
data sheets and extrapolated the data from them but without due regard to
any tolerance on thos figures or the real world, for example the glare
aspect.

There is a set of traffic lights near hear that they replaced with LED
jobbies, at night the green is so fing bright you can hardly see where
you are going and as they control the entrance to a single track bridge
with a bend isn't that driver friendly. Fine in bright sunshine, you can
see the lights but at night...

--
Cheers
Dave.





  #26   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14,085
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:27:40 -0000, ARW wrote:

In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it is
the provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified
spacing that makes it a restricted road. A system of street lighting
is deemed to be three or more lights.


You have managed to word that better than any website I have ever seen.


Aye, I've always wondered what constitutes "street lighting". Some small
places around here have just one or two lights at less than 183m...

I have a feeling that speed awareness courses are dumbed-down after
listening to some of the feedback from people who have been on them.


Well of course they have, the easy "street lights = 30mph" rule is simple
enough for the dumb fuppers that get caught speeding to understand. B-)

The type of road, the vehicle you are driving, and street lights (as
defined) should be all the information you need to know what the speed
limit is. If the speed limit varies from that there *must* be repeater
boards every few hundred metres.

--
Cheers
Dave.



  #27   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,936
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 9:55:59 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 13/03/2013 09:41, fred wrote:

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC, Nightjar wrote:


On 13/03/2013 02:28, Arfa Daily wrote:




Has anyone got any long-term experience of LED street light replacements


? They've just started replacing all the lamposts in my street, with a


lot fewer - and 2 metre taller - lamposts fitted with LED luminaires. ...




If they have increased the spacing, you might want to check that it is


still no more than 183 metres. If the spacing is greater than that, it


makes a 30mph speed limit unenforceable, unless they fit repeater signs


along the road.






I thought that idea had been done away with, no ?




It was eliminated in the Republic of Ireland, and at the same time the placement of speed limits into the hands of brain dead morons at the beck and call of local idiots.




It still applies in England and Wales, where the spacing is 183 metres,

and Scotland, where the spacing is 185 metres.



It is utterly arcane. Varying speed limits with no indication whatsoever of what limit is in operation in a particular area apart from the initial signs.




The street lights are the indication. Anything other than 30mph in a

built up area has to be signed with repeaters.



Colin Bignell


Yes but my point was they have done away with this concept in the Republic of Ireland. Repeaters not necessary and speed limits independent of street light placement. Real p.i.t.a.
  #28   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 726
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

"Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:27:40 -0000, ARW wrote:

In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it is
the provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified
spacing that makes it a restricted road. A system of street lighting
is deemed to be three or more lights.


You have managed to word that better than any website I have ever seen.


Aye, I've always wondered what constitutes "street lighting". Some small
places around here have just one or two lights at less than 183m...

I have a feeling that speed awareness courses are dumbed-down after
listening to some of the feedback from people who have been on them.


Well of course they have, the easy "street lights = 30mph" rule is simple
enough for the dumb fuppers that get caught speeding to understand. B-)

The type of road, the vehicle you are driving, and street lights (as
defined) should be all the information you need to know what the speed
limit is. If the speed limit varies from that there *must* be repeater
boards every few hundred metres.


I've driven on plenty of urban dual carriageways where the repeaters seem
to be at least a half mile apart. Certain it feels like they're too far
apart.

What's the legally required interval for repeaters?

Tim
  #29   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In article o.uk,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
There is a set of traffic lights near hear that they replaced with LED
jobbies, at night the green is so fing bright you can hardly see where
you are going and as they control the entrance to a single track bridge
with a bend isn't that driver friendly. Fine in bright sunshine, you can
see the lights but at night...


Given the costs of traffic lights and the ease of dimming LEDs, you'd have
thought they would have been designed to react to ambient light?

--
*Never put off until tomorrow what you can avoid altogether *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #30   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,736
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?



  #31   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 14/03/13 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Actually the data says otherwise.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Based on arbitrary assumptions no doubt.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

  #32   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,736
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:43:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 14/03/13 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Actually the data says otherwise.


What data?

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Based on arbitrary assumptions no doubt.


No.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

  #33   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 14/03/2013 10:39, Tim+ wrote:
"Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:27:40 -0000, ARW wrote:

In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it is
the provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified
spacing that makes it a restricted road. A system of street lighting
is deemed to be three or more lights.

You have managed to word that better than any website I have ever seen.


Aye, I've always wondered what constitutes "street lighting". Some small
places around here have just one or two lights at less than 183m...

I have a feeling that speed awareness courses are dumbed-down after
listening to some of the feedback from people who have been on them.


Well of course they have, the easy "street lights = 30mph" rule is simple
enough for the dumb fuppers that get caught speeding to understand. B-)

The type of road, the vehicle you are driving, and street lights (as
defined) should be all the information you need to know what the speed
limit is. If the speed limit varies from that there *must* be repeater
boards every few hundred metres.


I've driven on plenty of urban dual carriageways where the repeaters seem
to be at least a half mile apart. Certain it feels like they're too far
apart.

What's the legally required interval for repeaters?


Legally, 'at regular intervals'.

The DfT issued Traffic Advisory Leaflet 1/95 in 1995 giving recommended
spacings, but they are not legally enforceable. The distance varies from
400m for a 30mph limit to 900m for a 70mph limit, where consecutive
signs are on the same side of the road and from 250m to 600m, where they
are staggered on opposite sides of the road.

Colin Bignell

  #34   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,701
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents. Criminals using
torches in the dark draw attention to themselves.

Cars have headlights and most drivers are smart enough to use them.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Presumably that was the outcome they were hoping for. Do nowt.

Politicians just love policy based evidence and will invent it to suit
whatever hair brained scheme they are trying to foist on the public.

Fear of the dark is primordial superstition - ghosts and demons.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #35   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,558
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 14/03/2013 13:04, Martin Brown wrote:
On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at night affects either crime rates or road accidents.


RoSPA do not agree with you:

http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advi...-lighting.aspx

The presence of lighting not only reduces the risk of traffic accidents, but also their severity ...

In some locations, a reduction in lighting quality may not increase the risk of an accident. However, there is the danger that an unconsidered
removal or reduction in quality could actually increase accidents and their severity.

Colin Bignell


  #36   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On 14/03/13 13:04, Martin Brown wrote:
On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents. Criminals using
torches in the dark draw attention to themselves.

Cars have headlights and most drivers are smart enough to use them.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Presumably that was the outcome they were hoping for. Do nowt.

Politicians just love policy based evidence and will invent it to suit
whatever hair brained scheme they are trying to foist on the public.

Fear of the dark is primordial superstition - ghosts and demons.

more like wolves and bears.

BUT actually I feel a lot safer in the dark than by day. I don't feel
illuminated as a potential target. Hiding is easy. Find deep shadow and
be still.

Any attacker must then use a light..





--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

  #37   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,736
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:04:27 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents. Criminals using
torches in the dark draw attention to themselves.


There is plenty of evidence that shows effective street lighting
reduces crime. See, for example, Home Office Research Study 251
Effects of improved street lighting on crime: a systematic review
David P. Farrington and Brandon C. Welsh

Cars have headlights and most drivers are smart enough to use them.


But effective streetlighting does also help to reduce the number of
accidents and their severity.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Presumably that was the outcome they were hoping for. Do nowt.


Wrong. It was a case where the experts were allowed to do their job
without politicians interfering.

Politicians just love policy based evidence and will invent it to suit
whatever hair brained scheme they are trying to foist on the public.


Like switching off the street lighting?

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

  #38   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
ARW ARW is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,161
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:27:40 -0000, ARW wrote:

In law, the correct term is a restricted road and, as you say, it
is the provision of a 'system of street lighting' at the specified
spacing that makes it a restricted road. A system of street
lighting is deemed to be three or more lights.


You have managed to word that better than any website I have ever
seen.


Aye, I've always wondered what constitutes "street lighting". Some
small places around here have just one or two lights at less than
183m...

I have a feeling that speed awareness courses are dumbed-down after
listening to some of the feedback from people who have been on them.


Well of course they have, the easy "street lights = 30mph" rule is
simple enough for the dumb fuppers that get caught speeding to
understand. B-)


My mate who is a lorry driver went on one - he loved it and he is a good
driver. Of course he found out the hard way that SOME speed cameras also
take into account the weight of the vehicle that is passing. He was doing
48MPH on a NSL single lane carriageway.

--
Adam


  #39   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,938
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.


But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents. Criminals using
torches in the dark draw attention to themselves.

Cars have headlights and most drivers are smart enough to use them.


Interesting that a lot of drivers slow down when they come to the end of
the lit stretch.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.


Presumably that was the outcome they were hoping for. Do nowt.

Politicians just love policy based evidence and will invent it to suit
whatever hair brained scheme they are trying to foist on the public.

Fear of the dark is primordial superstition - ghosts and demons.


--
Tim Lamb
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,772
Default OT. Street lights revisited ...



"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 14/03/2013 13:04, Martin Brown wrote:
On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.

But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.


Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents.


RoSPA do not agree with you:

http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advi...-lighting.aspx

The presence of lighting not only reduces the risk of traffic accidents,
but also their severity ...

In some locations, a reduction in lighting quality may not increase the
risk of an accident. However, there is the danger that an unconsidered
removal or reduction in quality could actually increase accidents and
their severity.

Colin Bignell


A very interesting reference document. It is now in my favourites. As to
driving in the dark, I think a lot depends on your age. I don't know if it
is a general physical degradation in your night time vision, or just a
perceived thing. What I do know is that I am a lot less comfortable now
driving in the dark, than I was 20 years ago. Asking among my friends of a
similar age to me, I find that most share this feeling. Which concerns me a
little, because the chances are that these lighting change and reduction
schemes, are being designed by twenty or thirty-somethings with a shiny
degree and 'young' vision, and no understanding of the needs of older people
when driving at night. A couple of weeks ago, we had some really thick fog
around here - the thickest that I had seen in some years. The existing low
and high pressure sodium lamps that we had all over the village before they
started on the change to white LEDs, saw through this fog without too much
trouble, which was one of the original - and valid - claims for sodium
vapour lighting when it was first introduced. It will be interesting to see
how these white LED lamps perform in similar conditions.

Another of the claims by the council when the leafleted us, was that night
time colour vision would be improved because of the better CRI of the LEDs.
This has always been a bit of an issue on a Thursday night because it was
hard to see what colour bin the smart-arse across the road who always gets
it right, had put out. Well, tonight, I drove round the other end of the
road where they have the new lights installed and working, expecting to see
all the bright green bins out. Instead, setting aside the fact that the new
lights dazzled me, making it hard to see anything through the retina
'burns', the colour of the bins was actually no clearer than it was under
the sodiums ... :-\

Arfa

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dimming street lights? Dave Plowman (News) UK diy 3 May 27th 11 07:29 PM
Dimming street lights? The Medway Handyman UK diy 140 May 25th 11 09:37 PM
LED Street Lights ... Arfa Daily UK diy 1 March 6th 09 04:36 PM
Why street lights on all night? terry UK diy 107 January 24th 09 06:08 PM
Why street lights on all night? terry Home Repair 99 January 13th 09 01:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"