Discussion: Lights for Night-O (rules)

Night orienteering is done by a small but enthusiastic group. As technology has evolved, lights have become brighter, lighter and less expensive. It is now possible to carry devices that light up the night like the day so that you can see distant contours, etc. The Rules Committee has tried to work with the issue of brightness of lights and JJ Cote is correct in saying that if there is a rule, it has to be one that the Grievance Committee can live with.
People buy brighter lights because it is easier to do night orienteering with them. Those with the bright lights obviously have an advantage. Using wattage or lumens to limit the brightness of lights is good in theory buy may not work in practice because the people advertising their products may not state either value very precisely. Is there any way that the brightness of night orienteering lights can be regulated with a simple rule that can be enforced.

Do the nordic countries have any rules about lights? If so, they might provide a good template for you. If not, then you should really consider not regulating this.

I'm with J-J, bring your microwave oven. (As long as it doesn't have a built-in GPS screen.)

There are not any rules in the nordic countries. I would say it is not possible to control that kind of rule and finally there is no sense for a rule you cannot control.

So a "small but enthusiastic group" like to race at night. They must be enjoying it and like the advances in technology. Quickly, come up with a rule to ban them

FFS

Does this enthusiastic group consist of those who just happen to carry their lights but not use them?

A rule here seems silly, for the reasons outlined above. But also because, in the forest, a bright light only makes the trees in front of your face brighter, it doesn't necessarily make it easier to see the stuff across the hill.

The opinion that I'm stating here is from the perspective of the Grievance Committee, and as an electrical engineering professional. If there is a rule limiting some parameter of lights, then it has to be a parameter that can be determined in some way, in case there's a question about a particular light. Measuring luminous flux is something that really can't be done outside of a laboratory, and measuring electrical power consumption is both difficult in practice and of questionable value when dealing with lights of differing efficiencies. As far as parameters stated by manufacturers, I view those primarily as hype (and perversely, as numbers that would tend to get jacked up by the manufacturers with the effect that the lights would run afoul of a rule and not be allowed).

The previous (i.e. current) version of the rules call for a limit on the product of voltage and current (specifically 20 VA), assuming an incandescent bulb, and do not take LEDs into account (they were not particularly a factor when that rule was written). The rule does not explain how voltage and current are to be determined, and I've had an issue with it since the day it was written. Fluorescent lights are also mentioned, with the same electrical power limit. Chemical lights of any brightness are specifically allowed, and flames are prohibited. A backup light of no more than one watt is also allowed.

My own personal opinion as a competitor about what sort of lights should be allowed for night orienteering is something that I am not stating here (although I have alluded to it in an email to PGoodwin among others).

There are better ways for OUSA to spend its time. What c.hill said.

Perhaps print quality of maps should be limited too, start by banning offset, and north lines should really be a little wiggly, and as for Icebugs...

Which sports have a limitation on technology/equipment, and which ones don't?

Isn't having a brighter light like having a heavier golf club or a larger tennis racquet?

Also, what about night vision goggles?

I dare you to try race with night vision goggles.
They are pretty funky with perspective!

It would just seem strange that the national assiosation would make such a big deal out of a very minarioty part of the sport in the US. There are no rules in Scandi that I know of, so why introduce them in the US?

I know it was tried in Ireland where people didn't want to pay extra money on a big light - if you don't want to spend the money, then don't!

How about the people that want to ban big lights, try find a sponsor for the Senior Team, they will thank you for it, more so than having the small percentage of the small percentage of nighto'ers(?) attack you for ruining their fun.

If you're buying a flashlight, you might as well spend $40 and get a super-bright LED headlamp, in which case you're outfitted to the point that the limiting factor is your orienteering ability and not your light.

I suggest OUSA completely gets rid of the night-O rules and stops sanctioning night-O races, seeing that nobody is interested in holding sanctioned night races anyway except the night champs, and even that only barely. Why waste effort beating a dead horse?

Sounds reasonable - let people who put on night-o's do so however they want. No sanctioned night-o's means no grievances, right?

Exactly.

The big change in lights happened once we got away from 300lm halogen lights and now to white lights with 900lm. I noticed a big difference in night orienteering. After that, there really is a diminishing return on how much more light you want. Up to about a few years ago, it was really a lumens game, but now its more of a beam pattern game, and who can make the lightest equipment. I remember someone on attackpoint saying that no matter how much light you have, its not the same as having light coming from above you, which I thought was very smart said.

I think the revolution in lights has been a good one, as now they are bright, easy to use and affordable to every person, and it will result into more people doing night orienteering. And sooner or later it will be part of woc, which it should have been a long time ago. Im pretty sure 50 years from now, people wont be running with much brighter lights.

If I can buy a thousand lumens for a fraction of the price of a single wheel on any MTBO bike, what's the point?

Agreed, any brightness rule is difficult to measure and enforce. And every runner must trade off illumination for weight. So let's not bother with any limit. It is just more hassle.

Also, is there any rule that specifically says you can't carry and use more than one light.? (yes a rule mentions a backup light but I don't think it specifically limits you to a single primary) If people want to use a twin beam headlamp or carry both a headlamp and a handheld, why not? Just as we have two eyes, using two lights greatly improves depth perception. My opinion, a handheld light at waist level makes it much easier to avoid small branches and trip hazards than a headlamp that is so close to eye level that all shadows from that single source go directly away from your eyes.

As a personal anecdote, a number of years ago, using a single headlamp, I crashed into the end of a cut log at chest level knocking the wind out of me and releasing a scream heard at the finish a kilometer away. If it had been pointier, I might have been skewered. I'm quite confident that if I had been using the two light system I often carry (headlamp plus a handheld), I would have seen it in time to avoid.

What is the rationale for limiting brightness?

Peter's original post suggests that it is a question of fairness - someone with a brighter light has an unfair advantage over someone with a less-bright light. But anyone can go out and buy a brighter light.

So is the concern then that someone is unfairly disadvantaged because they can't afford to buy a brighter light, or because a stronger competitor could carry a heavier light than a weaker one? If so, that should be the target of the rule - limit the price or weight of the light + batteries to whatever is deemed to be within everyone's means. (And require that competitors provide a receipt at the start line to prove the purchase price; the meet organizer can provide a scale.)

Personally, I think such a rule would be silly. (Why consider only night-O? More expensive equipment conveys an advantage in ski-O and MTBO, too. Or what about the more expensive faster-settling compasses? Or...) How to make orienteering (of any flavor) accessible to as many as possible is worthy of discussion, but I don't think artificially limiting the price of the equipment one is allowed to use is the solution.

If the concern is that bright lights make the orienteering too easy, that's a different matter. Open that question for debate, and, if the consensus is that there is a problem, consider all the ways in which the technical difficulty could be addressed. Brightness of lights is one (big) factor, but maybe there shouldn't be reflectors on controls...

Rather than asking what they do in Scandinavia, you could perhaps seek out whether the other socialist countries have a rule?

Just to level set the conversation, the current OUSA rules for Night-O lights are:
---------------
I.4 COMPETITOR'S EQUIPMENT
I.4.1 Equipment for night orienteering includes that allowed by the Orienteering USA Rules for Orienteering, Section B.36, plus the competitor is also required to carry a light source. A backup light source may be carried in case of failure.
I.4.2 In a Night Orienteering event, artificial illumination carried by the competitor shall be subject to the following limitations.
a) If the light source is an incandescent bulb, its maximum wattage shall be 20 W.
b) If the light source is a fluorescent lamp, its maximum wattage shall be 20W.
c) If the light source is a chemiluminescent light source, any brightness may be carried by the competitor.
d) A secondary light source that does not consume electric power greater than 1.0 VA, and may be used as needed to read the map and other associated materials and devices.
e) A chemiluminescent source may be used for this function.
f) No open or contained flame shall be used by a competitor, except in the case of emergency. In the event of such an emergency, the competitor will be given a SPW finish.
-------------------------------------------
I think the discussion here is (or should be) on whether section I.4.2 should be modified or deleted.
My thought is that it should be deleted (or as feet suggests - just do away with Night-Os as a sanctioned race category).
I am a bit up in the air on if section I.4.1 is necessary - if someone wants to attempt a night-O without a light, more power to them.
However, as J-J has stated just prior to each Wicked Hard Night-O at UNO's September Camping Weekends in Pawtuckaway - "don't expect anyone to come looking for you until it gets light out"

To arthurd's last comment on tecnical challenge and not using reflectors on controls, section I.5.1 says "The control site marker may be illuminated, carry a reflective device, or neither, as the event organizers shall decide and publicize." A non-reflective control would certainly change things...

As an odd aside, the existing rules that jima cites above were not written by an American.

My thoughts are that it would be great to have more night-O's, but at this juncture there are not enough night-O events to warrant a championship status event, sanctioned events or endless deliberations about what kind of equipment can be used.

I say ax the current rules, but encourage clubs to host night events and let the local event directors set rules appropriate for the venue, courses and whims of the director.

If, at some future time there are enough regularly held local night events and there is interest in national level champs, then the issue of rules can be revisited.

Just my 2 cents...

In the rules committee discussion, there have been a number of voices saying that night-o should have no rules and also shouldn't have a championship night-o. There are few events held by local clubs so people don't get to practice it much. Often, the only night-o people run in a given year is the championship. Is this line of thinking reasonable? It is often hard to get clubs to host them although this year OCIN is doing a night-o with the relay and ultra-long.

I typically attend 3 Night-O events each year. That's probably more than most people. They are all local events.

I don't care what kind of lights other people are using. If I feel like I'm at a disadvantage due to having a weaker light, then I'll go buy a brighter one. I use enough light that I feel comfortable with what I can see.

I do use two lights - a Petzl LED headlamp and a small handheld Maglight. It looks like that's technically against the current rules?

feet's suggestion makes a lot of sense to me. Let the International Rogaining Committee, or whatever it is called, adopt night O and see what they can do with it.

sock's question is a good one. Golf is something that I always look to as an example of a (relatively) anachronistic sport that has had to come up with rules to regulate technology, and has, IMHO, done a reasonably good job getting in front of it. Although not entirely.

Actually nothing in the rules specifically says you can't carry more than one light.

If I were rewriting the rules I'd keep I.4.1 that you must CARRY a light source. You don't have to use it but if you are injured or come upon an injured orienteer, light could be essential for safety. If you suffer an immobilizing injury or are losing consciousness, the light could be used to help others effect a rescue.

I'd eliminate all of I.4.2 about brightness, etc, except subsection f regarding open flames, which I think is appropriate environmental responsibility for our sport.

By the way OCIN will host a night score O this Saturday. Come join us and get some night practice.

And the Night O Championships will be Friday evening, November 30, a full week after Thanksgiving.

I have a question. Suppose Orienteering USA goes along with feet's proposal and no longer sanctions Night-O. If you excise the night-O section from the existing Rules, nothing in what remains appears to prevent an organizer from putting on an event wholly or partially in the dark. Lights, however, would be outlawed in such competition because they would presumably be used for navigation, not simply carried.

This is not entirely hypothetical, since Get Lost!! is seriously thinking about applying for a sanctioned Night Sprint on a college campus in March of 2013. There is probably enough lighting so that people can get around without a light, but continuously shifting from being able to read a map to not being able to do so may be quite annoying for some competitors.

Hahahahahaha

OMG, I just realized that glasses can be used for navigation! Are they forbidden for orienteering!?!

I think I'm OK. I was really only carrying them so I could look hipster-cool if I met a cute girl on the course. I suppose I should be safe and cover the lenses with tape before I head out.

Whew. I just realized that line B.36.3 explicitly allows flashlights, glasses, and canes for daylight orienteering.

My super-sexy orienteering kit with glasses is still legal. Thank goodness. It took me ages to find rims that matched my custom trimtex skinny jeans.

Orienteering is the perfect hipster sport. Nobody's heard of it.

Most of my night navigation is done during rogaining, and people seem to have settled on the bright LED bike lights like Magic Shine or the Deal Extreme knockoff, which are affordable. These are bright enough and have the duration to do a pretty good job.

If you want to increase the challenge, omit reflectors from the controls. Often it is easier to find controls at night than during the day, as you can pick up the flare off the reflectors from a long distance. I've pinned some down from a km away in open terrain. The recent world champs in Czech had no reflectors. You had to find the feature, and then the control. With one or two exceptions, this was reasonable as the terrain was fairly open and the controls were hung high on distinct features and not hidden behind bushes.

Ban Americans, that'll solve the problem.

Like OCIN, NEOOC (NorthEast Ohio) has ramped up night-O this fall - three events this season. A nice chance to prep for the champs if you're in the neighborhood. Perhaps more local clubs are doing nightO elsewhere?

MNOC has four night events this year. Good times.

I advocate bright lights, as bright as you can afford. The more lumens you are casting ahead, the safer your run will be. Brightness=Safety. Let's let people be as safe as they want.

There is a very sensible rule in the current set that should be retained, saying basically that starts need to be set up so that the event is either entirely in the light, or entirely in the dark, or if it straddles dawn or dusk then you have to use a mass start so that everybody gets the opportunity for the same amount of sunlight.

One key difference between rogaine night navigation (kadley) and night orienteering navigation is average competitor speed. Typical rogaine pace is a walk or slow run; you are generally not sprinting through the dark forest. A typical night O race might last an hour and involves more fast running and sprints. So the optimal lighting for safe travel might be different. A rogainer doesn't want to change batteries four times a night, where a night orienteer only needs them to last a couple hours. So the weight versus brightness equation might be evaluated differently.

That doesn't mean you need rules about what you are allowed to use (other than no naked flames - well duh)

This whole thread is pretty funny

Agreed with fletch. No limits on numbers or power of light sources. Prohibition on open flames as idiot-proofing.

What if you are in a relationship and wish to introduce your significant other to night orienteering, can you bring your flame along then? Probably best if he/she is not naked though.

tRickey, Your last two comments show that its better to wait for the opening for a riposte than to jump too soon with a pot-boiler.

Many years ago (1982) I wrote a manual about how to orienteer. The entry for night orienteering consisted of: "The man with the biggest lamp wins".
Of course that was frivolous and night orienteering is enjoyable and testing in different ways to daylight. Nowadays it has high relevance to those who want to hone their adventure racing skills.
However the US rules above suggest to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with how we conduct our sport. They are at once ridiculous, irrelevant and unenforceable and honoured only in the breach. How they were ever written and approved for regulation escapes me and has deep implications for how orienteering governs itself.

This issue was addressed at the 2008 British Night-O Championships, they had a Jar and Candle course to level the playing field.

http://tinyurl.com/jarandcandle

As KipNip said, regardless what regulations on light you have, night-O is still sufficiently different to have merit as its own discipline of orienteering. Don't worry too much about levelling the playing field. A light that is good enough to win Tiomila/Jukola (where there are no regulations) doesn't cost more than a trip to the US champs when it's in on the wrong side of the country...

More powerful light doesn't automatically mean any advantage. There is an sweet spot, balance. Beyond that you can very easily blind yourself with reflected light from trees and bushes in forest with dense undergrowth up to the point that you cant read the map anymore. I am constantly using setting with only 70% of my LED lamps max.

The problem of reflected light blinding you can be solved by technology.

Consider the Petzl NAO, discussed in this thread. It has a light sensor to measure reflected light and automatically dims the lamp as appropriate.

I suggest that lights be limited much like the Billygoat rules address following and kitchen sinks:

A competitor may use any light or combination of lights, as long as the competitor carries both the light and its power source for the duration of the race. Electrically-powered lights are encouraged; chemical lights are acceptable unless they pollute excessively or are banned by law due to dry conditions or the risk of fire; and nuclear-powered lights are discouraged.

Given the nature of my employment, I cannot agree with the discouragement of nuclear powered energy. It is our saviour.

They're only discouraged, not banned...

Some important considerations are raised in this article suggesting that some restrictions should be placed on allowed light output

I agree with furlong47 - it want a bigger light, go buy one. I've done many night-os and rogaines and my lights are on the average size but I've had decent success. I finally have a LED model with maybe a 1 watt bulb which is plenty bright - it allows you to sneak in to a control without bring too bright.
Until we can measure the light output, let's leave well enough alone and have fun. If you feel the competitors lights are too large then don't compete.

Don't all laugh at once.

There are nuclear powered lights, and I see no reason to discourage them, although I'm not aware of any bright enough to be useful for night-O. A long time ago they used radium decay, that was replaced by promethium decay, and in recent years they've used tritium. Typically used for things like watches. You can't really turn them off, though.

So....... what should the board do? I started this and at times the discussion has digressed but there has also been some very good input. Should the board get rid of Night-O championships? Should the board make some rules as to brightness (that may be hard to enforce and leave JJ's committee dealing with unsolvable problems, or should the brightness of lights be up to the competitor. Some posts have indicated that too bright a light is a problem, others indicate that brighter is better. I also appreciate the foreign comments and enjoy the thoughts that this whole thread is maybe absurd. But what should be done? As I see it, there are three possibilities outlined above.

For those concerned about too much light brightness, charge $5 more for your event and hand out whatever dealextreme headlamp meets your reduced performance specs.

Keep the night champs and don't put any restrictions on lights.

Even though I'm in another country and don't suffer from this phenomenon known as 'night-time', I agree with the post immediately preceding mine.

My vote is, for what it's worth: no brightness rule(s). If a club wants to do the work for a sanctioned event, why not sanction it?

Simple solution: foggy-night-o champs. Super bright light = can't see squat.

I have a super bright, experienced the fog-blindness most recently on the ride into work this morning.

What Spike said, but also allow for sanctioning of non-Championship night events.

In fog, take the light off your head and hold it as low as you can (e.g. thigh level). Works much better that way.

Agree with T/D.

Agree also w/ T/D.

Don't allow flare guns.

Absolutely agree with Spike and T/D. Keep the Champs. No limits on lights.

My preference would be to keep the Night-O Champs, not restrict the light output. Not only is the brightness hard to measure, it is hard to specify (e.g. what solid angle can that 900 lumens be concentrated in?) It is still a lot different running in the dark with even a very bright headlamp than running during the daytime with even a very cloudy sky and pretty near dawn or dusk. And if OUSA is looking for sponsorship from equipment manufacturers, it is a lot harder to get if there is hardly any high tech gear out there that orienteers are allowed to use.

This may be a bit off topic, but there's something that I don't understand.

For as long as I can remember, the US of A has been portrayed (around here) as the land of the free, a place of entrepreneurship, and a level of material wealth that we could only dream of. Yet the fact that this even needs discussion, and many other AP conversations, suggests the opposite.

Agree with the previous agree-ers. Good lights cost a lot less today than they did back when these rules were written. And they weigh less, too. Keep the races and drop the light regs.

Some posts have indicated that too bright a light is a problem, others indicate that brighter is better.

I read through this thread pretty carefully, and I can't find any posts supporting any restrictions on lights, or expressing any objection to unlimited lights, other than the very first post.

Michael, it is the land of the free speech. Please do not interrupt.

If the Night-O Champs remain, there is an addition to the rewritten rules calling for the race to be of "Long" distance. I would think Middle would be more appropriate for night. Or better yet, let the organizers decide whether it should be middle, classic, long, or even sprint distance.

Oh, and retroreflective material on the control, visible from any direction, should be required for sanctioned night-O.

Why? You don't need reflective flags to be able to find them surely? (I've night orienteered and rogained without them many times with no iswsues at all) reflective material would take out any challenge and make the light source more of an advantage

I'll chime in to add my support for no rules on the brightness of lights. Don't make rules for what you can't regulate.

I'm also in support of not requiring reflective markers. That should be up to the meet director.

To answer PGoodwin's 3 points:
>Some posts have indicated that too bright a light is a problem,<

Reading back through the posts, I don't find any that support limiting light output. If you read carefully, the only "problem" alluded to is that too much light can be detrimental to your night vision or reflection off nearby objects.

>Should the board get rid of Night-O championships
Actually the question is whether to sanction them. Some dissenters, but overall seems like the the feelings is, "Keep the night champs and don't put any restrictions on lights.......but also allow for sanctioning of non-Championship night events."

Not sure what the 3rd point was..........
But some discussion seems to center around whether to have reflectors on the controls. Perhaps some guide lines on the area of the reflector could be discussed.
Overall:
>There are better ways for OUSA to spend its time>
ndobbs

No restrictions on lights, no restrictions on course distance and technical level. Perhaps a party after should be required.

I am conflicted on reflectors. They're really nice in green areas to make controls less bingo-ish, but they totally give it away in open areas. I worry that it encourages setters to tuck the controls away a little too much. It's not a problem for an A-meet, because hopefully an A-meet is well-vetted, but for a small event, it might all fall on the setter, which I guess is a normal and reasonable outcome.

Ideally, I'd like to enforce a light output rule. I play softball, and we're allowed only to use use bats that have been approved by the ASA, and before each game, the ump goes around and checks to see if each bat has the ASA approved tag on it.

My thought is that light output for night-o is the biggest equipment advantage in any discipline of orienteering, and because of how bright the technology is, there should be a fair limit. Everyone talks about shineback in the woods, but consider that night-o could conceivably be held at Anza Borrego, Moses Lake, Laramie, etc.

Anyway, I think there should be a limit (like softball bats, tennis racquets, golf clubs, swimsuits, etc), but there's no good way to regulate. As Alex said, if you can't regulate it, why bother?

I'd also eliminate night-o champs, because night-o doesn't matter (if it mattered, we'd see more than 1 sanctioned night-o a year). We're too championship-happy in this country, where every event has to be a championship event of some sort. And if it's not a national championship, just make up your own regional championship. I just found out that there's going to be a Washington Sprint Championship in March. The hosting club just made it up, without any input from the two largest clubs in the state. Lame.

I'd still allow sanctioning for night-o, but wake me up for a championship when there are enough sanctioned events to actually have one mean something.

I would argue that the biggest equipment advantage is being able to pay for transportation to your so-called championship events. If not everyone is there, because some of us have limited budgets and time, how much does it really mean?

Cost for a totally sufficient night-o light is <$45.

...I just found out that there's going to be a Washington Sprint Championship in March. The hosting club just made it up, without any input from the two largest clubs in the state...

That's nothing new in sports. Professional boxing, for example, has WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF. However if you really want get confused - try figuring out all the minor professional hockey or baseball leagues.

Here in Norway/Scandinavia we had a max light output rule for a very short while, the "20W halogen/300 lumen" standard was supposed to be the limit, but I think that rule only lasted for a single year or even less.

BTW, Night-O is a lot of fun and extremely good technique training!

I run about 15 night-O events/year, mostly in fall/winter/spring of course, plus Jukola in June.

I did my first night-O races in class G2 (Men 13-14) around 1970 and my first Tiomila night leg in 1975, in those days we had 10W incandescent bulbs and non-rechargeable batteries which we used for multiple events (but always use new set for Tiomila!).

When the 20+10W dual-bulb halogen lamps with NiCd batteries turned up it was a huge step forward, suddenly you could see well enough that you could run almost as fast at night as during daytime events.

Currently I have a couple of Lupine lamps, with the Betty X the one I normally use.

This lamp is supplying at least 3X the light levels of my old halogen lamps, which should more or less compensate for the fact that I now, as a H55 runner needs 3X as much light as a 20 year old.

The aging eyes and need of older orienteers for more light is a definite argument for not having any light limits. In addition to difficulty of measurement and enforcement.

I think no restrictions on lights, like most prefer is good.

I also agree with "Night-O is a lot of fun and extremely good technique training!"

For the control markers, I'm not really sure if I actually prefer bags or reflectors but I think it is good to require a certain type of markers for sanctioned events. One good thing with orienteering is that you more or less know what to expect without having to read detailed rules for each race. At day-O you know you are looking for orange/white bags every time (even if you travelled halfway around the world).

Unfortunately, I have only run a few night-O's in the US, five I think, including one A-meet (the champs). The first time I was very surprised to not find the roughly footlong 1.5 inch in diameter cylinder with reflective material at the first control. Granted I had only done night-O in a few countries before, but I had never seen anything else in a race. After that I tried to figure out before what we should be looking for. Sometimes you just had to see at the first control.

If there is a marking that all (most) nations use. I think the best would be to require that one for sanctioned events. The second best I think would be to require some specified marking. At the very least the organizers should be required to clearly state what kind of marking they are using.

This actually has a lot in common with the GPS thread.

It seems to me the whole point of night-O is to train in the winter when the days are short and the nights are long. It's really not to be stealthy or anything. It's to have fun. When someone starts winning because they've got a headlamp brighter than a train engine, then we can clamp down.

The biggest headlamp problem in the US is that too few people have lamps that are bright *enough*.

A few years ago I was stumbling along with a modest headlamp at the WHNO at Pawtuckaway. A foggy night, and I was able to see about 6 ft in front of me. Late in the course PG came by with his new lupine tesla and lit up a hillside in front. What a revelation! Much more fun than orienteering essentially by feel. I bought a lupine maybe not the next day, but certainly within the week.

This actually has a lot in common with the GPS thread.

Except on this thread everybody seems to agree.

The typical incandescant light turns 2% of its energy into light, and the rest into hot air. So does this thread.

Although my 1 W Petzl is enough for me, I see no reason to limit the power of lights. Reflectors should be up to the organizer. I would hope that this discussion would prompt other clubs to add night-O to their A-meets. When I saw that OCIN was having an A-meet in December, I had second thoughts because of likely weather conditions, but their addition of the night event convinced me to put it on the schedule. Daytime orienteering is a challenge, but night-O is pure adventure!

A night-O race might be a good addition to an "Urban World Championship" program, if that ever gets back on the agenda Not exactly street O, but near city; intricate contour/rock terrain is not as essential for Night O.

One of the reasons there is event sanctioning is to (attempt to) assure that the participants' experience is within a reasonable range of expectation. When the organizers wish to do something outside that range, they can seek a exception (waiver) of the rule(s) in question.

The type of marker used at control locations is probably the most standardized aspect of orienteering. The marker used for night orienteering, at least in sanctioned events should be similary standardized. Under the cover of darkness, it is reasonable for that standard to include retroreflectivity.

In the case of very open terrain -- like near Laramie, WY -- the organizers could request a waiver to use regular O-flags as markers, without reflectors.

For me, too much light caused too much glare on the map case thus making map reading near impossible. If that were a problem for others I'd thik the light level issue would be self-regulating.
However does anyone else remember the US Night-O Champs near Palm Desert CA many years ago? Besides being my first experience with SI and a cactus needle penetrating my calf and causing part of my right foot to feel numb ever since, my lasting memory is the sight of many headlamps dotted across the hills and valleys while not being able to see the hills and valleys themselves. I could have used a little more illumination there.
Here's the point: In most forests there are a lot more trees and other objects around to rebound one's light and improve visibility. In the desert light just dissipates in to the distance. A one-size rule will not fit all.

Some times I was using an very cheep and not very bright LED headlight. But it had an interesting feature: At the power switch you could choose between two white LEDs and one red LED. If the night wasn't dark as hell and you could get with your own eyes a sufficient impression of the landscape I just switched on the red one for a short time to take a look on the map. It was enough for reading and not too bright for blinding my dark-tuned eyes.
I absolutely disagree to the statement that the one with the brightest lamp will win. So any rules seems to be nonesense.

Based on this thread, which seems to be a discussion by people who like night orienteering and have done it a lot, the imposition of rules on brightness should not occur at this time. (One person did indicate that if lights became as bright as train headlights, there might be a problem.) Bright lights are now much less expensive than the plane fare to the meet (or even the cost of driving). Also, as JJ pointed out early in this discussion, assessing brightness of any light is not easy. I thank all of you who posted and thank you for the input.