Alert: *NEW* & AMENDED NATIONAL ROAD RULES, FEEDBACK PLEASE

[zetec]

Originally Posted by Deadman

No. I see a car with fog lights on and I simply see a car with 4 lights. Wow. The haze and confusion is dumbfounding...

Ever seen any Commodore made in the last 10 years? The haze and confusion can be momentarily dumfounding and blinding. It only takes a split second to miss that child crossing the road. This is no joke.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by zetec

Ever seen any Commodore made in the last 10 years? The haze and confusion can be momentarily dumfounding and blinding. It only takes a split second to miss that child crossing the road. This is no joke.

Zetec, your actually refering to the VX-VY SS units.

These are the 'recognised glaries'. Made in South Korea and imported by a known local provider and forwarded to GM/H as 'supply', these delightful gems do not bear an E Mark of Compliance. They show two distinct flat planes of light and a central 'hot spot' whem put against a light wall, certainly not a normal Compliant front fog light.

Evidence of Compliance with ADR was issued to DOTARS and this was automatically accepted. The lamps are utter cow dung. THNAKFULLY, the SS once again ius using E Marked units so the glare levels (and complaints) will be reduced.

The HSV cars have always used E Marked units.

Now, in effect, if Holden had wanted to sell in England the SS, the car would be knocked back on that basis alone. Simply, the lamp must be E coded for that market.

The E Mark can be considered a mark of photometric compliance/quality. Proper alignment and wiring is a must under ADR & UN/ECE, and then 'use' comes into play as road code.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

OK well yelling at my response on every occasion you corrected my terminology, like I didn't "get it" after the first correction etc., serves little purpose as written text differs from live conversation by ones inability to elapse back in time and remove noted repeats of said mislabelling of technology. I stand corrected, thankyou.

[B]Yes sorry, I mean no offence, but it helps to discuss the light as it is Compliance coded./B]



However, my opinion that the misalignment of a careless road users' headlights pointing directly at my eyes is more dangerous or distracting than another road users' properly adjusted headlights being supported by a pair of properly adjusted factory fog lights lighting up 30 - 50 whatever metres in front of them still stands.

Look absolutely, mis-aligned headlights, a defect really, are glary and distracting and hearin is the danger. The issue with this - is that aside from a Blue Slip Inspection, as we have in NSW for unregistered vehicles, is the only time headlights et al are checked 'for alignment'. Not appropriate, but some folks argue 'show me the bodies before we tighten up testing of this item. All very convienient. I know if I had my way, alignment and wiring would be tested at Pink slip level. These are STATE issues in relation to the enforcement of the National Vehicle Standards.


I AM a road user, and I HAVE been "blinded" by cars with low-beam headlights pointing any-which-way, same as by pricks who leave their high-beams on, or miraculously forget to turn them off until I've flashed them twice or thrice.

Agreed, here-issue of defect and road user behaviour/innatention, a penalty applies. Take note of the suggestion to INCREASE the 200 metre point at which you must switch off high-beam. NTC needs to hear from people if 500 metres is appropriate, certainly better.


Also by spot lights, which to my thinking include large rectangular after-market lights bolted into the bumper,

Per comment immediately above.


but never by what you have categorized as fog lights and I had assumed were driving lights

Yes, code B for fog, R for driving lamp.


(whereby they are used for normal night driving, including inclemant whether, but not specifically bright or coloured to pierce through fog).

You *can* use a white optic front fog light as a 'driving lamp' IF the unit is wired ONLY to operate on high-beam, the problem is it will not outsee the cars normal high-beam.

The current Camry high-beam is good for some 220 metres, the range at which better dedicated driving lights begin to show their worth, Driving lamps less than that merely 'supplement' the existing high-beam, such are typically smaller diameter units you might fit to say a small car like an Echo or Focus, better than nothing, but I'd still be going one pencil beam and one broad-beam.

You will see Pencil Beam driving lights will not bear an E mark, Australia will not likely penalise this owing our unique wide open spaces.



And as for the cornering lights, I see your point having them mounted on the front of a car; the cars I had more in mind have lights mounted in the fender, pointing towards the curb, ground, etc., though I can't think of a modern example right now.

Ford, Nissan Maxima, Holden Calais -



The point I make is you are reffering to a 21W incandescent globe, which by its nature is housed in a spread-beam design, thus NOT projected towards an oncomming driver, as it is not a projector lens,

Its not the lens that does this, here it is the parabol. The parabol sends the light out like a torch, the lens will act to diffuse it a little. Complexities involved and I'd have to study carefully each design.


nor are they unidirectional LEDs - its just a little 21W globe and assits the driver with highlighting the area s/he is about to cover.

Think of a white rear fog light or reveing light or daytime running lamp and we'll start to get the picture:-)


Though useless at 100km/h, indeed travelling faster than you can react over its short span, it serves no hinderance as a low-aimed spread beam light, of a mighty 21 W, I can not possibly forsee "blinding" an oncomming driver - especially as they're only a few inches below high-powered headlights I challenge anyone to see, through the two circles of natural glare on your own windscreen these fog/cornering lamps on a car approaching at 100 km/h.

The cornering lamp shines a light out accross the road way diagonally and certainly into the path of oncoming traffic approaching offset, it has 'reach'. That is the beam and they are certainly seen on approach and from the rear as the equipped car approaches. Indeed they can and do outshine the 21 watt lead flasher. The flasher is not a beam of light, the cornering lamp is, it is in effect 'torch-like'.

UN/ECE will in time have these wired to only operate at low speed.

Another issue is some folk cannot leave these alone, I have seen two cars with them wired full time!! Hanging is in order.


Of FAR more concern to me, is poorly adjusted lights. Regardless if they've been upgraded or not, if using Xion H.I.D.s or plus 50s, etc., even standard modern lights can cause severe anguish for a few seconds if they are pointing into the oncomming lane. I reffer specifically to a number of CE Lancers, VR/S Commodores, and one of the local AU taxis here I see regularly, though I'm sure no car is immune to being misaligned through poor maintenance or 'minor' bumps and shunts. I realise policing such an issue is impossible, and having a police officer defect my car because he didn't like where my lights are aimed is completely stupid, however I stand strongly convinced that legislating against the use of 'fog lights' at night per-sé serves absolutely no benefit to any member of the transport system, and serves only to hinder those drivers who can benefit in some situations from a small circle of light on the road directly in front of the car.

HID aftermarket kits and do it yourself modifications to headlamps as Certified are illegal, owing glare. Often HID advocates who have fitted such kits think they don't blinding oncoming traffic, typically judged on the 'beam pattern as they see it. The sharp cut-off you see is not where the glare (for oncoming traffic or lead traffic) stops, this 'sharp point' has virtually no relevance to that 'glare' of concern.

Issues of of headlight height adjusters etc and so on. Each installation is different.

The fitting of a PLUS 30 or PLUS 50 bulb headlight replacement globe is perfectly legal. The bulbs MUST be E Marked, and usually are. Headlight Compliance is based on the standard wattage, with these E Marked alternatives you are not increasing that wattage, merely the construction type of globe, the photometric performance of the globe will fall within 'normal' chromatic allowance and hence its E Mark approval.

None of this addresses the issue of mis-alignment and illegal modification of headlights. The Road Rule update is targetting soley the use of cars and lights.

Mike, remember, IF the AAA affiliates get their way our fleet (new market) will have daytime running lamps. I don't support the move, considering it unnessary. Another waste of effort.

See: www.lightsout.org

Your argument basically is that you want front fog lights to act as both daytime running lamps and as helper lights otherwise, I would suggest many would feel otherwise. One should take this to the aus.cars newsgroup too to see the opinion of these long term cranky advocates and engineeers. Some of the folk there support summary roadside execution for front fog light abuse.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Full Noise

You’ve brought up a good point Roger. Another example of how the law hasn’t kept up with technology. These days a bloody Dolphin torch with a new battery will just about reach 200 metres.

Cheers, Danny

If yours only goes 200metres Danny you need new batteries!

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

but I'd still be going one pencil beam and one broad-beam.

Have you been looking at my old car? 2 Cibie Oscar's, one pencil and one flat beam = Instant daylight
... I could'nt afford Super Oscar's :(

[deesun]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Have you been looking at my old car? 2 Cibie Oscar's, one pencil and one flat beam = Instant daylight
... I could'nt afford Super Oscar's :(

OSCAR was my friend too. Gee I miss him.

[Big Mike]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

[B]Your argument basically is that you want front fog lights to act as both daytime running lamps and as helper lights otherwise

Actually no, I don't have my lights on during the day unless its really dark and inclement. I am only reffering to using my "front fog lights" as helper lights at night.

[Terraformer]

Originally Posted by flappist

YES..... finally a road rule that has an actual sensible purpose.

In clear conditions there is enough bright light without any extra.

Of course the "look at me" brigade will burr up a bit........

What a load of rubbish!

How can a vehicle approaching in daylight cause a person to be confused lol

All it does is make them more visible & so is safer not unsafe!

It has nothing to do with look at me rubbish!

Drivers are so poor these days you need to make yourself visible somehow specially when you have a dark vehicle!

Most of us wear sunglasses for driving which cuts back visibility specially in underground carparks & yet many fools do not put lights on when entering such a place or even worse on really dark rainy days!!!

Wake up people & stop whinging about something which does you no harm & is safer for all!!!!

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Terraformer

What a load of rubbish!

How can a vehicle approaching in daylight cause a person to be confused lol

All it does is make them more visible & so is safer not unsafe!

Here, you are directly or indirectly advocating DRL's...


It has nothing to do with look at me rubbish!

It does you know, often.


Drivers are so poor these days you need to make yourself visible somehow specially when you have a dark vehicle!

In which case mate, drivers have always been poor, or have our eyes collectively gotten worse with each birth of a baby??


Most of us wear sunglasses for driving which cuts back visibility specially in underground carparks

I don't wear sunglasses in underground car parks, nor for that matter trenchcoats.


& yet many fools do not put lights on when entering such a place

In Europe is is law that you must use low beam when entering a tunnel and the like. . .

or even worse on really dark rainy days!!!

Agreed, AND it IS an offence to not do so, by using one of the following: Your low-beam hedlights AND/OR front fog lights, which by wiring requirement mean the tail and front position lamps (parkers) come on.


Wake up people & stop whinging about something which does you no harm & is safer for all!!!!

Front fog lights are not daytime running lamps, use your low beam. IF you choose to break the proposed front fog prohibition law and take a chance you won't get booked, then TURN-OFF your low-beam headlights.

This lighting position is the best under seriously reduced visibility AND it allows your front idicators to NOT be masked by the low-beam headlight.

Me? I keep my front fogs off till needed as per design intent. For DRL effect, I use low-beam.

[superduper]

Originally Posted by Voodoo65

When I had my BA XR6 in the country area's up here on the Sunshine coast I had them on all the time, it's mostly back roads around where I live. A lot of Roo's around, and being able to see the edge of the road better helps.....

Last year I drove to Sydney just came up to the approach to the bridge before North Sydney and was pulled over by a RBT at 1030 at night, the roads where wet but just at this present time it had stopped raining....

The Pol told to turn of the fog lights.... I said that is was inclement weather to which he replied "It's not now"....... I think he was then going to try and give me a ticket as he went to the front of the car (saw Qld plates) then came back in a huff gave me a breath test and told me that it was an offence to drive with them on..... unless it was Inclement Weather.

Brett

Voodoo65: I think your expectation that you were about to have an encounter with an intelligent, independent thinking, life form with with that NSW Highway Patrol Officer (HPO) were unrealistic. If, in the scheme of things, that same officers number of bookings over the past whatever period were as high for offences like: not using indicator to turn, not using indicator to change lanes, holding mobile phone while driving, holding Big Mac with coke while driving, crossing double center lines etc were as high as for, oh I don't know, lets say 'exceeding speed limit by 5k's' .... then I'd respect them. Not as people (that's not the issue) but simply as competent public servants. Overall now I simply view them as incompetent public servants.
I don't blame the front line HPO, it's the level of poor management in the Highway Patrol above the front line that is incapable. ps: just so it's clear in my opinion anyone breaking the road laws deserves the consequences - my gripe is with the selective enforcement driven by Highway Patrol management due to corruption.

[Casper]

Keepleft, you have mentioned "The UN Convention" in your posts a few times. Who are they? What is the "convention"? Is it anything to do with that 'traffic cop on valium' bunch of hopeless beauroctrats called the United Nation's?

Secondly.. whats the UN Convention on speed cameras and the use of them to collect revenue from 3kph above the limit when the actual design specifications of the countries vehicles allow for in excess of 10kph variance to actual speed as indicated?

Finally, would it be considered extream to force the likes of Bracks and his moronic cronies to drive a normal family car (BA or VZ) from say Geelong to Wodonga with cruise control disabled... the kicker being the 4000 volt electrodes attached to their anus that go off every time they travel 3kph under or over the posted speed limit. I'm betting by the end of the trip they are all incapable of sitting and wishing they had the 10% tolerance again..... better throw Scuby in the car too... I'd like to see him cop a few thousand volts on a regular basis too.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by Casper

Better throw Scuby in the car too... I'd like to see him cop a few thousand volts on a regular basis too.

I could think of somewhere even better to hook up the electrodes. :hihi:

Cheers, Danny

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Casper

Keepleft, you have mentioned "The UN Convention" in your posts a few times. Who are they? What is the "convention"?

Take this link to the 1968 Convention. Generally, a Convention has a greater 'legal bite' on a states party (country) than does a 'treaty'. The particular Convention Australia,- in regards 'roads etc' signed/contracted was the 1949 Convention on Road Traffic, Road Signs and Signals. 92 or so nations did so then. That said, Australia did not ascede to the Road Signs portion, though we use signs from it. In doing so, we are obliged to accept each signs meaning.

The Convention (including all amendments and the later 1968 version) effectively harmonises world traffic in driving matters, lane-use and a whole host of road user issues. When you read it, and you will need to take your time, you will see much of what is written familiar to what we have learn't over the tens of years. In effect, so that familiarity is recognised when you go overseas and drive, or when the tourist or newcomer arrives here.

Hence in signs, the UN Convention has these as 'symbolic' in nature, rather than in 'language'. Here, to overcome such language issues. NZ and Fiji use a large portion of them, more so than we. AUS likes to design some of our traffic signs ourselves, we then complain loud when 'bloody foreigners' can't read our signs. Or that we think they need too! They - wouldn't need to read English road signs, IF - we used what is already designed and created, and used in most of the world today.

This is one Convention that is worth every bit. It orders countries to set speed limits, and articles allow to set derestriction too, here, the country remains, and this will remain a sovcereign right, to set speed limits, belt law etc and so on.

The very fist I recall was under the old League of Nations back in 1922.

The 1968 Convention, Pdf:
http://www.unece.org/trans/conventn/crt1968e.pdf

Secondly.. whats the UN Convention on speed cameras and the use of them to collect revenue from 3kph above the limit when the actual design specifications of the countries vehicles allow for in excess of 10kph variance to actual speed as indicated?

This does not relate to the UN Convention on Road Traffic, Road Signs & Signals. Rather, the issue here has to do with our adoption of the "Global Technical Regulations" which are under CONSTANT review and update owing ongoing technical improvement. Our ADR's are further harmonising with these, hearin known as UN/ECE or United Nations/Economic Commission for Europe. Europe you say? Yes, since it is Europe which bore the worlds first technical specifications.

NOWADAYS, Europe, the ECE, will recognise ONLY UN/ECE Regulations, and for the meantime/years, - will work with the UN to update them NOW, as do other nations like the USA, Japan and so on, rather than past European practice of making a rule or update, - purely for ECE, which would then be 'passed on' if you will to the UN for world adoption.

Australian academics and business would be well advised if they want to get their messages across, to advocate in that direction - but should be aware they will likely face, some of them, firm,-yet diplomatic resistance by what are called 'working parties' (basically experts in the subject field) to some of the 'ideas' they try on here in Australia domestically.

ADR 18, has merely 'harmonised' fully with UN/ECE so that at 100km/h the speedometer will be 100% accurate, but above that, could read higher than actual. Our old ADR was basically our own and had greater intolerant potential.

Finally, would it be considered extream to force the likes of Bracks and his moronic cronies to drive a normal family car (BA or VZ) from say Geelong to Wodonga with cruise control disabled... the kicker being the 4000 volt electrodes attached to their anus that go off every time they travel 3kph under or over the posted speed limit. I'm betting by the end of the trip they are all incapable of sitting and wishing they had the 10% tolerance again..... better throw Scuby in the car too... I'd like to see him cop a few thousand volts on a regular basis too.

Well, they'd probably keep speeding?? Scruby is a full-on dedicated chap, but just not in touch with the bush or semi-rural folk, if I recall - he loves bullbars and four wheel drives:-) Remember, www.walk.com.au is just one cranky lobby group at war with the people, one of his others is Ausflag.

[deesun]

Talk about Harrold, the latest Mazda 3 comercial shows a car on opposite lock in a corner but I've seen no disclosures about closed roads and would have thought Ol' Harry would have been hot on the whingn' whinin' keyboard by now.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

[B]Well, they'd probably keep speeding?? Scruby is a full-on dedicated chap,

So were Charles Manson, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Starlin. Strange about that I guess.

Originally Posted by Keepleft

but just not in touch with the bush or semi-rural folk,

or reality it would seem

[MrSparkle]

Originally Posted by Casper

So were Charles Manson, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Starlin. Strange about that I guess.
or reality it would seem

Dammit, beat me to it!

Scruby, his financiers, and his cronies are doing the country a world of no good. His egocentric, narcissistic agenda is based on the fetishes of his own twisted mind and this is a fact, since he doesn't care about people who question or oppose his views. The fact he gets so much airplay and continues to get funding from some equally perverted entities, is really doing its' part in bending this country over and doing it dry.

Thank you Harold for perpetuating such a misguided, costly, dangerous and life-threatening set of values. :

Now, back to the topic. The summary so far, if anyone would like to correct me -

1) We should drive cars fitted with NO lights of any variety for a multitude of reasons, each one based on the fact that lights themselves can kill children
2) Motorbikes are weapons of mass destruction and should be removed entirely from the roads, and they too can kill children all of their own accord
3) Safety triangles save thousands of lives each year in inner western Sydney
4) There is no such thing as an "accident" because each and every road and car in the country is in perfect order
5) If your name is Harold Scruby, you are allowed to hit pedestrians (joggers specifically) and get away with it. You are above the law. In fact you should be the one MAKING the laws, isn't that right! Just ask yourself!

4:

[Casper]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle

Dammit, beat me to it!

Scruby, his financiers, and his cronies are doing the country a world of no good. His egocentric, narcissistic agenda is based on the fetishes of his own twisted mind and this is a fact, since he doesn't care about people who question or oppose his views. The fact he gets so much airplay and continues to get funding from some equally perverted entities, is really doing its' part in bending this country over and doing it dry.

Thank you Harold for perpetuating such a misguided, costly, dangerous and life-threatening set of values. :

Now, back to the topic. The summary so far, if anyone would like to correct me -

1) We should drive cars fitted with NO lights of any variety for a multitude of reasons, each one based on the fact that lights themselves can kill children
2) Motorbikes are weapons of mass destruction and should be removed entirely from the roads, and they too can kill children all of their own accord
3) Safety triangles save thousands of lives each year in inner western Sydney
4) There is no such thing as an "accident" because each and every road and car in the country is in perfect order
5) If your name is Harold Scruby, you are allowed to hit pedestrians (joggers specifically) and get away with it. You are above the law. In fact you should be the one MAKING the laws, isn't that right! Just ask yourself!

4:

You forgot:
6) people who make or try to make stupid laws for cars for the specific purpose of raising revenue should have (and probably enjoy) excessive amounts of electric shock treatment to their anus's (or other appropriate bodily appendage)

[Big Mike]

Ahh the list. I wish I could think of something clever to add. Very funny, and very true.

Maybe I'll just re-instate something I said earlier: This country is not in the heart of Europe, we have different wildlife, different climates, different sunrise/sunset times, different working hours, etc. etc. While uniformity can be a positive thing, there are some things that SHOULD REMAIN UNIQUE

[Big Mike]

SHOULD REMAIN UNIQUE to our country. Our laws and our rules CAN NOT necessarily, automatically be replaced by everything the U.N. comes up with, despite what some beaurecratic morons believe.


Anyone remember the NRMA/RAA/whatever report 12 months after the 50km/h zones were introduced? The people initially behind the changes manufactured all this rubbish WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY PROVEN TO BE FALSE, claiming a reduction in fatalaties, accidents, etc., until the truth finally arose.

What about these National Speed Signs? Australia's National Speed is 100km/h - South Australia's State Speed is 110km/h; though where the crossed out circle is we have to go back to 100. There are also some 110 zones in western NSW, amonst others I'm sure. While the National Limit is 100, N.T. has open speeds for THE SAME INTERNATIONAL SIGN (of crossed out circle).

As for ADR's and speedometers - No manufacturer can make a guage perfectly accurate at any speed, other than zero. I believe the rule was 10% tollerance in speedos, and the National LAW states 10km/h allowance, though Vic Govt like to play with 2 and 3 km/h. And just to clarify my point about manufacture, the difference in rolling diameter of a new tyre versus a tyre ready to be replaced represents a GREATER DIFFERENCE than the 2~3% you Victorians are talking about. Thus, as tyres naturally wear, and speedos aren't laser-guided yet, it is IMPOSSIBLE to make a speedo consistantly accurate.
My 1973 Ford Coupe needle throbs more like 5%. My V12 BMW's speedo goes to 320km/h, so a difference of 5 kays is less than a needle-width, and driving at 50km/h in third gear requires I keep on the brakes.

Sorry about broken post. Oh, and I especially like item 1 on the list above.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

What about these National Speed Signs?

The (///) sign is an International road traffic sign with international legal meaning at law. It is Catalogued in the Signs Convention as C,17a.


Australia's National Speed is 100km/h
No, because States and Territories have sovereignty over the speed limits or derestriction they wish to impose.


- South Australia's State Speed is 110km/h;
South Australia's State rural default is 100km/h. It does signpost a numerical 110km/h on some roads.


though where the crossed out circle is we have to go back to 100.
They tell you that, because they choose, mistakenly, to believe the sign means rural default. It does not. In any case they should have been mostly removed by now form SA.


There are also some 110 zones in western NSW,
These are numerical posted speed limits. The 'default' rural speed limit in NSW is 100km/h. NSW has removed 99% of derestriction signs, very very few remain.

A posted NUMERICAL speed limit applies to the particular road. If you turn off this road and onto another, then either one of the two default speed limits will apply, OR another numerical signposted speed limit.


amonst others I'm sure.
ACT rural default is 100km/h, WA rural default is 110km/h, QLD rural default is 100km/h. Any state or territory can use a numerical signpost to allow a higher speed limit than the default, per above, it will only apply to a particular stretch.

While the National Limit is 100,
Again, there is NO 'national' speed limit in any of the two 'defaults'. What is harmonised is the requirement of having two 'defaults'. What they are in 'allowance' really remains a purely State or Territory issue. That said, the jurisdictions feel it wise simply to try and harmonise both defaults, I have no problem with that because it helps when going from state to state.


N.T. has open speeds for THE SAME INTERNATIONAL SIGN (of crossed out circle).

NT simply has not adopted a rural default as held at Rule 25 of the ARR. Nor for that matter has WA.

NT, and indeed ANY state can adopt a rural default of say 100 or 90km/h AND STILL USE DERESTRICTION for a SPECIFIC LENGTH of road.

This is called 'linnear' posting. I would suggest speed derestriction signs only be used on top class lengths of intercity freeway and some remote rural roads.

The speed derestriction sign is included in current Australian Standard 1742.4 of 1999. Here, it tells you 'that no speed limit applies to the road beyond the sign'.

Between 1986 or os it read 'default speed limit'. Here, the Australian Standard was in legal error. Because Australia, or the private company 'Standards Australia', are NOT the legal owners of this International Road Traffic sign. The United Nations are, and prior to the The League of Nations.

In International law the sign means: "END OF ALL LOCAL PROHIBITIONS IMPOSED ON MOVING VEHICLES".

Hardly 'rural default', hardly speed limit 100km/h, hardly speed limit 110km/h.


As for ADR's and speedometers - .

ADR18 has been upgraded to harmonise with UN/ECE requirements, those 'Global Technical Regulations". Under the new, it *will* be accurate at an indicated 100km/h, but may read a speed up to 10% above,- when at a speed higher than 100km/h.

[svo347]

...................................

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

This is a European/United Nations Standard hazard-warning ИИИИИИИИ for use at crash scenes (to prevent secondary), and breakdowns.

This just a little off topic but can anyone tell me why Keepleft's sig has been censured? Or is tri-angle a rude word now

(my hyphen to outwit the censor, sorry admins)

[Keepleft]

See the Site Support thread.

A few *might* have taken deep and serious offence, - to the point that I may have destroyed their mortgages at my horrid advocacy of this EXCELLENT Ford safety item, here is the Fiesta example:

http://www.ford.com.au/range/popup/p...=35&category=5

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

See the Site Support thread.

A few *might* have taken deep and serious offence, - to the point that I may have destroyed their mortgages at my horrid advocacy of this EXCELLENT Ford safety item, here is the Fiesta example:

http://www.ford.com.au/range/popup/p...=35&category=5

Yep, their the same type our company keep in our trucks.
FWIW it's illegal to drive a truck without tri-angles. When pulled up by our hard working, underpaid, misunderstood highway patrol (hey, ya never know who's reading this!) the first thing they ask for is your log book. The second thing is to see ALL THREE tri-angles!
From memory it's about $270 if you dont have them.

[TuMor]

About the fog lights thing, yeah ive found them dangerous in the daytime. Ive seen a commodore with fog lights, and as usual one of them wasnt working. At a glance it looked like an indicator and i thought he was turning off the roundabout. I came close to pulling out in front of him.....

Ive heard that you cant have foglights on without having low beam on aswell. A mate has been fined for having them on (in the daytime) but it was because lowbeam wasnt on aswell ?!?

[Casper]

I am converted... I have seen the light (tribanana actually). Praaaaaaaaaaise the lord.. BEHOLD, the safety AU!!!!



No one shall besmeech my motor vehicle again!

[DivHunter]

Originally Posted by Casper

I am converted... I have seen the light (tribanana actually). Praaaaaaaaaaise the lord.. BEHOLD, the safety AU!!!!



No one shall besmeech my motor vehicle again!

That's one safe AU. We'll fix this traingle love, call them 'speed triangles' and they'll be banned :

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by TuMor

About the fog lights thing, yeah ive found them dangerous in the daytime. Ive seen a commodore with fog lights, and as usual one of them wasnt working. At a glance it looked like an indicator and i thought he was turning off the roundabout. I came close to pulling out in front of him.....

Right, rem the VX-VY SS units are the ones RTA and state authorities recognise as 'glaries', they are discontinued.

Ive heard that you cant have foglights on without having low beam on aswell. A mate has been fined for having them on (in the daytime) but it was because lowbeam wasnt on aswell ?!?

On the contrary, Australian Road rule 215 (3) ALLOWS that you may keep your low beam off IN DAYLIGHT if under hazardous weather conditions you have your front fog lights on instead.

Your friend *might* have been fined for doing the same at night.

The problem with this particular ARR is that it goes against the design intention and function of front fog light use as intended when under 'severe conditions' where it IS SAFEST to switch off low beam to further reduce glare (caused by low beam), here, your driving with your parkers (position-sidelights) and your front fogs alone.

The particular ARR arrived by a QLD Transport persons advocacy, simply put, the person was ignorant of a front fog lights operational parameters under the ECE and the rule as it stands IS NOT functional with the ADR. At ARR development of this rule (1993-1998) I was too late to change things, but this *will* change, it will be clarified to allow for this operation day and night.

Using front fog lights with just the parkers is the SAFEST method of driving under seriously reduced visibility conditions, and naturally, your speed will be reduced by the prevailing circumstance.

NOW, that said, WA through seperate state regulations allows operation of front fog lights when the headlight switch is on 'park', this is appropriate.


=NSW SITUATION - LIGHTING=

NSW too HAS NOT adopted the Australian Road Rules in relation to lighting.

We too allow the operation, day or night of front fog lights, along with the parkers via the:

Road Transport (Safety & Traffic Managment) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999

Here-

Part 53 - Lights required when driving in the dark.
Clause (1) - References Schedule 4 (below), - basically headlights that must be on) and all other vehicular lighting etc and so on blah blah blah, NOW;

Clause 2 dis-allows clause one above, where the light operation is allowed under;

Schedule 4 of the "Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 1998" and here front fog lights at 113 (b) allows operation WITHOUT low or high beam. NOW:-

PART 55 of the "Road Transport (Safety & Traffic Managment) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999" from above, RESTRICTS in the generic term 'fog light use' vis: any fog light affixed to a motor vehicle on a road to be lighted except in fog, mist or under other atmospheric conditions that restrict visibility, or and it goes on to spotlights etc blah blah blah.

Therefore;

Tumor - IF your friend was fined for this ARR offence in NSW (or WA), have him overturn the fine through the appropriate channels.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Casper

I am converted... I have seen the light (tribanana actually). Praaaaaaaaaaise the lord.. BEHOLD, the safety AU!!!!



No one shall besmeech my motor vehicle again!

Casper, Casper Casper -

YOU have been converted (humour I know) by the worlds SECOND-BEST triangle design, sourced into our national Standards from North America, a standard built suited to the then US maximum speed limit 55MPH (88km/h).

The units you show are made compliant to Australian Standard 3790 but when compared to the Ford UN/ECE Standard product, are frankly "rubbish", I'd like to say the manure word squire, but....

Your units, despite being sand filled, *will* blow over or more likely out of alignment, I know this from years of crash attendance, in fact I detest them but will use them as an absolute last resort;

The inner daytime triangle performance is second rate to the UN/ECE version sold by Ford;

The reflex reflectors are a tragic joke (11-12lux and small diameter-width!) when compared to UN/ECE 27 Regulation in Transport type (13-14lux WIDE);

Some are so easily pleased:-)

The only triangles worse than the set of three you show are those tin based, very lightweight $3.00 joys from Supercheap, more crap that poor women buy thinking 'their safe' for doing so.

IF you want the worse UN/ECE R27 compliant triangle I can find, to compare to the AS3790 items you show, goto ANY autoparts store and order supplier "Pro-Kit" Item RG9212 ($20 - 23), this item EASILY outperforms what you show in your pic, the Pro-kit item is actually quite good for the budget seekers.

The Ford item, even better, with much higher wind bufetting resistance too, a vital parameter!

The UN/ECE units 'are accepted' under AS3790, it just that they easily better that Standard.....

[Casper]

I wondered why they blew off 1/2 track.. obviously secondrate gear. Admittedly though no one hit me or the car during the day so they "just" managed. Must have been because I used 3 instead of 1.

"By the combined power of three.... I am Captain Triangle!"