Jim GM4DHJ ... presented the following explanation :
what about other languages they need a universal sign not letters

They need to learn English then :-)

On 28/03/2021 09:52, Rod Speed wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 19:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 09:39, Chris J Dixon wrote:
alan_m wrote:

Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Chris


Although different colour indicators I don't use my fog lights
enough to know/remember which indicator is for front or rear.

Surely a big F and R or B should be obvious enough.

what about other languages

****em, they are just wogs.

they need a universal sign not letters

They should be speaking english.
totly ron

On 28/03/2021 12:30, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... presented the following explanation :
what about other languages they need a universal sign not letters

They need to learn English then :-)
totly

In article ,
NY wrote:
What I don't understand is why the Construction and Use regulations haven't
been given powers to say to car manufacturers "this is not adequate for
purpose - putting indicators right next to headlights or brakelights makes
them considerably less visible". But they are more concerned with the exact
relation with respect to bumpers and ground, than with proximity between one
light and another.

The lighting regs are the usual civil service nonsense. Probably egged on
by the various trade bodies etc, or others with an axe to grind.

There is a blanket ban on aftermarket HID and LED, to a car originally
fitted with tungsten. Regardless. Yet many new vehicles cause dazzle.

The regulations should state beam pattern and intensity. Both are easy
enough to check at MOT time.

--
*What happens when none of your bees wax? *

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

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 27/03/2021 13:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Chris J Dixon wrote:
Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Mine shows the beam pointing down for front fogs and straight ahead for
the rears. Which makes some kind of sense.

Those are the standard symbols - however, I have to look at them and
think carefully. I'd much prefer plain English labels, but they are not
allowed, it has to be cryptic symbols.

Think exports. To produce them in every single language - and make it
clear to read - isn't going to be easy.

--
*How many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost? *

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

Steve Walker wrote:

I remember, back in the days of Ford Sierras, some had combined
tail/brake lights and separate foglights and some had combined
tail/foglights and separate brake lights. They were exactly the same,
except for how they were wired. I always thought that the latter
arrangement was better - two lights on and another, unlit pair,
illuminating brightly when you braked, rather than one pair lit and
brightening when braking, while a second bright pair was already lit.

Indeed, when I built my trailer, I wired it that way, even though the
wiring diagram and wire colours for the lights suggested the first option.

Agreed.

On the subject of trailers, why are they allowed to disguise the
mandatory reflective triangle in a trendy light cluster, so that
it is often impossible to distinguish it in daylight?

I can accept that it may be more important at night, but not to
the extent that it can be invisible otherwise.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

On 28/03/2021 14:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
NY wrote:
What I don't understand is why the Construction and Use regulations haven't
been given powers to say to car manufacturers "this is not adequate for
purpose - putting indicators right next to headlights or brakelights makes
them considerably less visible". But they are more concerned with the exact
relation with respect to bumpers and ground, than with proximity between one
light and another.

The lighting regs are the usual civil service nonsense. Probably egged on
by the various trade bodies etc, or others with an axe to grind.

not just any civil service, the European civil service: the bulk of the
Regulations came from Directives from the mid-70s onwards



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 28/03/2021 14:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
On 27/03/2021 13:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Chris J Dixon wrote:
Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Mine shows the beam pointing down for front fogs and straight ahead for
the rears. Which makes some kind of sense.

Those are the standard symbols - however, I have to look at them and
think carefully. I'd much prefer plain English labels, but they are not
allowed, it has to be cryptic symbols.

Think exports. To produce them in every single language - and make it
clear to read - isn't going to be easy.
A trivial extra cost though and so much better for drivers.

Indeed, I would go further. The EU mandated OBD2. What it should also
have mandated is for cars to include an LCD screen (a small text only
one would be fine), so that owners could have read errors in their own
language, without having to pay a garage to read them out. Although that
is no longer a problem, as OBD2 readers are cheap and widely available now.

On 28/03/2021 14:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
NY wrote:
What I don't understand is why the Construction and Use regulations haven't
been given powers to say to car manufacturers "this is not adequate for
purpose - putting indicators right next to headlights or brakelights makes
them considerably less visible". But they are more concerned with the exact
relation with respect to bumpers and ground, than with proximity between one
light and another.

The lighting regs are the usual civil service nonsense. Probably egged on
by the various trade bodies etc, or others with an axe to grind.

There is a blanket ban on aftermarket HID and LED, to a car originally
fitted with tungsten. Regardless. Yet many new vehicles cause dazzle.

That is not quite correct. They can only be fitted with E-marked
replacements, so if an E-marked headlamp assembly is available, it can
be retrofitted.

The regulations should state beam pattern and intensity. Both are easy
enough to check at MOT time.

Beam pattern is the big one. With the correct beam pattern, intensity is
far less important.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a blanket ban on aftermarket HID and LED, to a car originally
fitted with tungsten. Regardless. Yet many new vehicles cause dazzle.

That is not quite correct. They can only be fitted with E-marked
replacements, so if an E-marked headlamp assembly is available, it can
be retrofitted.

HID lamp units have motorised self levelling, so would generally need more
than just plugging in. Unlike after market HID conversions or the simpler
LED.

The regulations should state beam pattern and intensity. Both are easy
enough to check at MOT time.

Beam pattern is the big one. With the correct beam pattern, intensity is
far less important.

My car has projector (bullseye) dips. These give a perfect beam pattern
with tungsten, HID or LED. To do with the flag which cuts off the top
being exactly in the focal plane, which gives a very sharp cut-off. Plain
reflector types give a lot more scatter regardless of bulb type.

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

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

On 29/03/2021 01:07, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
There is a blanket ban on aftermarket HID and LED, to a car originally
fitted with tungsten. Regardless. Yet many new vehicles cause dazzle.

That is not quite correct. They can only be fitted with E-marked
replacements, so if an E-marked headlamp assembly is available, it can
be retrofitted.

HID lamp units have motorised self levelling, so would generally need more
than just plugging in. Unlike after market HID conversions or the simpler
LED.

However, not all cars type approved and factory fitted with HID or LED
headlamps have self-levelling or wash systems - the MOT rules have had
to take this into account and a vehicle can fail for such systems not
working, but cannot fail for them not being present. If such lights were
an option for your vehicle, you can retrofit them.

The regulations should state beam pattern and intensity. Both are easy
enough to check at MOT time.

Beam pattern is the big one. With the correct beam pattern, intensity is
far less important.

My car has projector (bullseye) dips. These give a perfect beam pattern
with tungsten, HID or LED. To do with the flag which cuts off the top
being exactly in the focal plane, which gives a very sharp cut-off. Plain
reflector types give a lot more scatter regardless of bulb type.

Which is why retrofitting LED lamps into existing housings does not meet
type approval. Wheareas fitting complete E-marked lamp assemblies can.

In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
However, not all cars type approved and factory fitted with HID or LED
headlamps have self-levelling or wash systems - the MOT rules have had
to take this into account and a vehicle can fail for such systems not
working, but cannot fail for them not being present. If such lights were
an option for your vehicle, you can retrofit them.

Think you'll find all HID equipped cars have headlight washers. And if not
self levelling headlights, self levelling rear suspension. And since the
latter may not be fitted across the range, changing to E-marked non self
levelling headlamps to a vehicle without it could be against the regs.

The whole thing is badly thought out.

--
*Half the people in the world are below average.

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

On 29/03/2021 14:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
However, not all cars type approved and factory fitted with HID or LED
headlamps have self-levelling or wash systems - the MOT rules have had
to take this into account and a vehicle can fail for such systems not
working, but cannot fail for them not being present. If such lights were
an option for your vehicle, you can retrofit them.

Think you'll find all HID equipped cars have headlight washers. And if not
self-levelling headlights, self-levelling rear suspension.

No, they definitely do not. It was (and may still be) a problem for
MOTs. Under EU rules, any vehicle given type approval by any other EU
country has to be accepted in all others and some were approved without
self-levelling or washing. It was also accepted that some (sports) cars
with very stiff suspension would not require self-levelling either. To
allow for that, here the rules specify that not being fitted with
self-levelling or washing is not a reason for failure, but in Northern
Ireland, the same exemption was not written in and caused failures of
some type approved vehicles. I don't know if NI has changed the rules
there since.

And since the
latter may not be fitted across the range, changing to E-marked non self
levelling headlamps to a vehicle without it could be against the regs.

But not where other vehicles in the range were approved without
self-levelling and washing.

The whole thing is badly thought out.

I can agree with that.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
It's a legal requirement in some countries that there is only one rear
fog. Presumably to avoid confusion with brake lights.

I wondered if that was the case, given that a lot of recent cars have
only one fog light. My previous cars had two white lights in the clusters
for reversing and two red lights for fog, but there was no bulb in the
nearside fog light - so I added one, on the grounds that (IMHO) *all*
front and rear lights should be in pairs, to define the car's width.

Trouble is that its then easy to confuse with a car
heading towards you in your lane in heavy fog.

If it was heading towards you (assuming it wasn't reversing!) you would see
its two *white* lights - either sidelights, headlights or front fog lights -
at the front.

I was talking about having two *red* lights at the back - in pairs, as for
all other lights such as tail lights and brake lights (OK, there's usually a
third central high-level brake light).

No-one complains about having two tail lights, and fog lights are (to my
mind) just extra-bright tail lights which allow your car to be seen (and an
estimate made of its distance away, from the separation of the lights) from
further away than tail lights allow through fog. They do the same job as
tail lights - "I'm here and this is how wide I am, so you can judge how
close you are to me". They just need to be brighter than tail lights -
firstly because the fog scatters light and secondly because you want to
maintain a greater distance from the car in front than you would in clear
conditions.

"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message
...
NY explained on 27/03/2021 :
I've seen some older cars (probably 1950s or before) which had this, but
it seems to have been outlawed here around 1960 (am I correct with that
approximate date?).

I would guess a decade at least later than that, but just a guess. An easy
conversion with an amber coloured lamp glass.

My mum's 1960 Morris Minor had orange (not red/white) indicators, at least
when mum bought it second-hand in 1966. They may have been fitted
after-sale, because it also had trafficators that still worked. I wonder if
Mum had them fitted when she bought the car.

My dad's C-reg Austin Cambridge and his E-reg Ford Corsair had them.

Older cars (eg 1950s Ford Zephyrs, and very early pre-Aeroflow 1962 Ford
Cortinas) had flashing white indicators at the front, but I'm not sure about
the indicators at the back.

So it looks as if new cars got them from the early 60s. I'm not sure when
flashing white/red on older cars actually became illegal and needed
modification to amber.

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 14:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2021 13:11, jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
do fog lights and especially rear fog lights require a warning light
that they are on ?

They have done since at least the 1961 lighting regulations, possibly
earlier.

Still doesn't stop plenty idiots leaving them on. ;-)

Not necessarily idiots. Many years ago I took my car for an MOT and the
inspector left the foglights on. Driving home, my dipped headlights were
off, so the foglights didn't come on. The next morning, driving to work, I
needed my dipped lights on and did not notice that the foglights were on
for some time - the switch and indicator were positioned badly, so they
were not easily seen anyway and were completely hidden by my right arm
whilst driving.

How widespread is an interlock between lights switch and foglights, such the
turning off the sidelights resets the fogligh swithc to the off position.

"Chris J Dixon" wrote in message
...
On the subject of trailers, why are they allowed to disguise the
mandatory reflective triangle in a trendy light cluster, so that
it is often impossible to distinguish it in daylight?

I can accept that it may be more important at night, but not to
the extent that it can be invisible otherwise.

Why do you need to see the reflective triangle during the day, apart from in
poor visibility (fog, heavy rain)? I presume it still reflects properly (in
order to comply with the law) so is there a reason that you need to
distinguish it from other parts of the rear of the trailer?

Is it to allow you to distinguish between the back of the trailer and the
back of the towing car? If so, I can't say I've ever thought of it meaning
"this is a trailer", just that its the standard reflector that all vehicles
have in addition to tail lights.

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 15:18, NY wrote:
My ideal grouping of rear lights would be:

- indicator
- side
- fog
- reflector
- brake

I prefer:

Indicator
Reverse
Tail/fog
Reflector
Brake

There is no need for a separate tail and fog light, allowing a smaller
cluster - what is the point of a tail light when the fog lights are on?

Reverse to separate Indicator and Tail/Fog. Reflector to separate Tail/Fog
and Brake.

Yes that works even better than mine, in that it puts a light that is rarely
used (or a reflector) between the ones that need to be distinguished:
indicator and brake.

I wonder why the normal grouping puts tail and brake in one housing and fog
in another, when tail/fog and separate brake is much better, since tail and
fog do the same job in different types of visibility - I think of foglights
as brighter-than-normal tail lights for use in fog.

In article , NY wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message
...
NY explained on 27/03/2021 :
I've seen some older cars (probably 1950s or before) which had this,
but it seems to have been outlawed here around 1960 (am I correct
with that approximate date?).

I would guess a decade at least later than that, but just a guess. An
easy conversion with an amber coloured lamp glass.

My mum's 1960 Morris Minor had orange (not red/white) indicators, at
least when mum bought it second-hand in 1966. They may have been fitted
after-sale, because it also had trafficators that still worked. I wonder
if Mum had them fitted when she bought the car.

My dad's C-reg Austin Cambridge and his E-reg Ford Corsair had them.

Older cars (eg 1950s Ford Zephyrs, and very early pre-Aeroflow 1962 Ford
Cortinas) had flashing white indicators at the front, but I'm not sure
about the indicators at the back.

They should have had amber bulbs - my Cortina did from new.

So it looks as if new cars got them from the early 60s. I'm not sure when
flashing white/red on older cars actually became illegal and needed
modification to amber.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
Surely a big F and R or B should be obvious enough.
what about other languages they need a universal sign not letters

My brain probably works differently from many people's. I find it easier to
interpret a foreign word than a symbol - I quickly learn that a certain
German word means "brake" etc.

Symbols are fine - and they are language-independent, but there is an extra
stage where your brain has to work out "what does this symbol depict - WTF
is it?", which is a much harder task than the trivially easy follow-on step
of "what action do I take if I see it".

Standard symbols like (square) || (round red dot) are widely
understood from tape recorders and all similar playing/recording devices.
Likewise road signs - and they are drawn to a standard: every British "bend"
sign is the same as every other one. But less common, more esoteric symbols
are a lot harder.

I was once driving my Dad's Ford Sierra which had a panel of warning lights
in the centre of the dashboard. Suddenly an amber one with an undecypherable
symbol started flashing insistently.

Amber: warning, not an emergency "you must stop ASAP"
Flashing: "you really need to take note of this"
On the centre panel, not the dashboard: "It's not critical for driving"

But WTF was that symbol supposed to be a picture of? I stopped and looked at
the manual. First find the page for the warning lights, then try to match
the symbol on the light to the various ones in the manual, given that one
was not an exact copy of the other.

It turned out to mean "windscreen washer level is low". Useful to know. I
stopped at a garage to fill it up with water (it was before the days of
ready-made or concentrated screenwash being used in non-freezing
conditions). But a flashing light? Did it need to grab my attention like
that?

The best of both worlds is a symbol *and* the word in English, given that
English is probably the most common second language outside the UK market.

"Marland" wrote in message
...
Still doesn't stop plenty idiots leaving them on. ;-)


Getting a lot rarer than it used to be as most vehicles seem them to turn
them off to a greater or lesser extent, some by a mechanical action that
turning off the stalk headlight switch also turns off the the fog lamp
ring
switch others with a more sophisticated method within the vehicles
electronics
after headlights are turned off or the vehicle parked up.

Was that as a result of legislation or just good practice by
manufacturers?

It has certainly cut down on those who could justify their use in morning
November fog
but still displayed them on the way home in a dark drizzle annoying
those
behind .

I find that the greatest offenders are not those who accidentally leave
foglights on the morning after a foggy night before, but those who
consciously turn them on in inappropriate conditions such as rain (*) or
when there is no fog, just normal darkness.

I try to switch my foglights on/off as conditions vary, and to turn them off
once I can see the headlights of the car behind (if I can see him, he is
probably close enough to be dazzled by my fog lights). But a lot of people
just turn them on in the slightest mist and leave them on (or turn them one
whenever it's dark).


(*) Very heavy, cat-sand-dogs cloudburst rain may warrant fog lights, given
that the tail lights of a car may be difficult to see, but not normal rain
or drizzle, when the bigger hazard is smearing of the rain on the
windscreen, or because of the lens action of raindrops before the wiper
blade has cleared them. Or on a motorcyclists's helmet visor - which rarely
has a wiper! I presume the anti-wetting coating that you can get for
windscreens is very important on helmet visors so raindrops are blown off
quickly instead of leaving a film that can cause glare around lights.

"charles" wrote in message
...
Older cars (eg 1950s Ford Zephyrs, and very early pre-Aeroflow 1962 Ford
Cortinas) had flashing white indicators at the front, but I'm not sure
about the indicators at the back.

They should have had amber bulbs - my Cortina did from new.

So it looks as if new cars got them from the early 60s. I'm not sure when
flashing white/red on older cars actually became illegal and needed
modification to amber.

My impression is that whenever I saw a car with white flashing lights, it
was an old one with white indicator glass. Maybe this is because the amber
coating had worn off the bulb (which it does very quickly) or the bulb has
been replaced with a standard white one when the original amber one blew.

I keep a bit of orange sweet wrapper in with my spare bulbs to convert a
white bulb (or an amber one where all the paint has flaked off) into an
amber one until I can buy a proper amber bulb.

Why do modern car designers think it looks trendy to have clear indicator
plastic (requiring amber bulbs) rather than using amber plastic in the
cluster as they used to? They don't do it for the side/tail lights - those
are always red plastic, not clear plastic that require red bulbs.

NY wrote:

Symbols are fine - and they are language-independent, but there is an extra
stage where your brain has to work out "what does this symbol depict - WTF
is it?", which is a much harder task than the trivially easy follow-on step
of "what action do I take if I see it".

Standard symbols like (square) || (round red dot) are widely
understood from tape recorders and all similar playing/recording devices.
Likewise road signs - and they are drawn to a standard: every British "bend"
sign is the same as every other one. But less common, more esoteric symbols
are a lot harder.

Indeed they are. I reckon the most misunderstood pair of signs
are "Oncoming vehicles have priority" and "You have priority over
oncoming vehicles", especially amongst workers deploying signs
around road works.

I have seen works protected by identical pairs of signs of either
the above types. This is an example:

https://www.facebook.com/chris.j.dixon.5/posts/10154583887147332

On chatting with the men, at a location (not the one above) which
was signed so as to advise drivers approaching from both
directions that they had priority, they were convinced that they
had done it right, and showed me the comprehensive printout of a
3D layout showing them exactly what they had to do.

Unfortunately, they had failed to appreciate how important it was
to have _precisely_ what the sheet showed, not merely something
similar, because that was all they had on their wagon.

Circles give orders, triangles warn and rectangles inform. There
is, sadly, little understanding of these important distinctions.

"Oncoming vehicles have priority" is circular, "You have priority
over oncoming vehicles" is rectangular. When used correctly,
there should be one of each. They may not be inverted in an
attempt to reverse their meaning.

This reminds me about MOTO service stations. Whilst under
Granada ownership, they decided that they would like to apply
their own house style to their traffic signs, and asked the
relevant Department is this was OK. It seems that they got the
thumbs up.

The result is a rag-bag of signs which in most cases differ
considerably from the obligatory designs for road use. For
instance, the "Give Way" signs are circular. Service stations
can be quite stressful places, and the layouts are not intuitive,
so it is important that signs are clear and unambiguous.

The Department, too late, realised the error of their ways. The
specification for new service stations IIRC clearly requires
traffic signing to be compliant with the same standards that
apply on the roads.

It would be interesting to see what action could be taken against
somebody disregarding one of Moto's traffic signs.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

On 29/03/2021 18:41, NY wrote:
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 14:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2021 13:11, jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
do fog lights and especially rear fog lights require a warning light
that they are on ?

They have done since at least the 1961 lighting regulations, possibly
earlier.

Still doesn't stop plenty idiots leaving them on. ;-)

Not necessarily idiots. Many years ago I took my car for an MOT and
the inspector left the foglights on. Driving home, my dipped
headlights were off, so the foglights didn't come on. The next
morning, driving to work, I needed my dipped lights on and did not
notice that the foglights were on for some time - the switch and
indicator were positioned badly, so they were not easily seen anyway
and were completely hidden by my right arm whilst driving.

How widespread is an interlock between lights switch and foglights, such
the turning off the sidelights resets the fogligh swithc to the off
position.

It is normal on modern cars, but not older ones. Some are electronic and
some are simply by using the same switch for sidelights/headlights and
fog lights.

On 29/03/2021 19:47, NY wrote:
"charles" wrote in message
...
Older cars (eg 1950s Ford Zephyrs, and very early pre-Aeroflow 1962 Ford
Cortinas) had flashing white indicators at the front, but I'm not sure
about the indicators at the back.

They should have had amber bulbs - my Cortina did from new.

So it looks as if new cars got them from the early 60s. I'm not sure
when
flashing white/red on older cars actually became illegal and needed
modification to amber.

My impression is that whenever I saw a car with white flashing lights,
it was an old one with white indicator glass. Maybe this is because the
amber coating had worn off the bulb (which it does very quickly) or the
bulb has been replaced with a standard white one when the original amber
one blew.

I keep a bit of orange sweet wrapper in with my spare bulbs to convert a
white bulb (or an amber one where all the paint has flaked off) into an
amber one until I can buy a proper amber bulb.

Why do modern car designers think it looks trendy to have clear
indicator plastic (requiring amber bulbs) rather than using amber
plastic in the cluster as they used to? They don't do it for the
side/tail lights - those are always red plastic, not clear plastic that
require red bulbs.

My Vauxhall Zafira has clear lenses, with amber bulbs for the indicators
and red bulbs for the tail and brake lights - but also with coloured
plastic covers inside the main housing, close up to the bulbs.

On 29/03/2021 19:16, NY wrote:
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 15:18, NY wrote:
My ideal grouping of rear lights would be:

- indicator
- side
- fog
- reflector
- brake

I prefer:

Indicator
Reverse
Tail/fog
Reflector
Brake

There is no need for a separate tail and fog light, allowing a smaller
cluster - what is the point of a tail light when the fog lights are on?

Reverse to separate Indicator and Tail/Fog. Reflector to separate
Tail/Fog and Brake.

Yes that works even better than mine, in that it puts a light that is
rarely used (or a reflector) between the ones that need to be
distinguished: indicator and brake.

I wonder why the normal grouping puts tail and brake in one housing and
fog in another, when tail/fog and separate brake is much better, since
tail and fog do the same job in different types of visibility - I think
of foglights as brighter-than-normal tail lights for use in fog.

Exactly the way my mk2 Sierra was wired from the factory (although
others were the other way around) and the way I wired both of my
trailers (2 because the first one was stolen).

On 29/03/2021 19:12, NY wrote:
"Chris J Dixon" wrote in message
...
On the subject of trailers, why are they allowed to disguise the
mandatory reflective triangle in a trendy light cluster, so that
it is often impossible to distinguish it in daylight?

I can accept that it may be more important at night, but not to
the extent that it can be invisible otherwise.

Why do you need to see the reflective triangle during the day, apart
from in poor visibility (fog, heavy rain)? I presume it still reflects
properly (in order to comply with the law) so is there a reason that you
need to distinguish it from other parts of the rear of the trailer?

Is it to allow you to distinguish between the back of the trailer and
the back of the towing car? If so, I can't say I've ever thought of it
meaning "this is a trailer", just that its the standard reflector that
all vehicles have in addition to tail lights.

It is not particularly important on a trailer or caravan towed by a car,
as following drivers can distinguish easily, but it is helpful to
distinguish between and 7.5 tonner and an artic or a truck towing a trailer.

On 28/03/2021 12:31, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 28/03/2021 09:52, Rod Speed wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 19:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 09:39, Chris J Dixon wrote:
alan_m wrote:

Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Chris


Although different colour indicators I don't use my fog lights
enough to know/remember which indicator is for front or rear.

Surely a big F and R or B should be obvious enough.

what about other languages

****em, they are just wogs.

they need a universal sign not letters

They should be speaking english.
totly ron

Does that include the Scots ? :-)

In article , Chris J Dixon
writes
alan_m wrote:

Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Chris
Very
--
bert

In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
writes
On 27/03/2021 19:11, Rod Speed wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 27/03/2021 09:39, Chris J Dixon wrote:
alan_m wrote:

Both my factory fitted fog lights have front and rear dashboard
indications that they are on.

How easy is it to remember which symbol is for front and which is
the rear?

Chris


Although different colour indicators I don't use my fog lights
enough to know/remember which indicator is for front or rear.
Surely a big F and R or B should be obvious enough.
what about other languages they need a universal sign not letters
Watched a you tube film, on TSR2 recently. Apparently they had a
committee for cockpit design and they took days to agree lettering on
one particular switch. They had to change it in practice because the
pilots could never figure out wtf it meant.
--
bert

Chris J Dixon wrote:
NY wrote:

Symbols are fine - and they are language-independent, but there is an extra
stage where your brain has to work out "what does this symbol depict - WTF
is it?", which is a much harder task than the trivially easy follow-on step
of "what action do I take if I see it".

Standard symbols like (square) || (round red dot) are widely
understood from tape recorders and all similar playing/recording devices.
Likewise road signs - and they are drawn to a standard: every British "bend"
sign is the same as every other one. But less common, more esoteric symbols
are a lot harder.

Indeed they are. I reckon the most misunderstood pair of signs
are "Oncoming vehicles have priority" and "You have priority over
oncoming vehicles", especially amongst workers deploying signs
around road works.


If they had stopped with different sized arrows I think the signs would be
a lot less confusing, but no, some bright spark decided to emphasise one
arrow with colour. Now my brain has to work out whether size or colour is
the more important attribute of the arrow denoting priority.

Definitely a poor sign IMO.

Tim


--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Saturday, 27 March 2021 at 15:18:26 UTC, NY wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
alan_m wrote:
If factory fitted (and possibly self fitted) they must be working for a
MOT. There may be only one rear fog light (drivers side) although on
some cars there may be just a reflector on the passenger side without a
light.

It's a legal requirement in some countries that there is only one rear
fog. Presumably to avoid confusion with brake lights.
I wondered if that was the case, given that a lot of recent cars have only
one fog light. My previous cars had two white lights in the clusters for
reversing and two red lights for fog, but there was no bulb in the nearside
fog light - so I added one, on the grounds that (IMHO) *all* front and rear
lights should be in pairs, to define the car's width. My current car has
only one white light on the nearside (which is a bugger when reversing at
night and the offside of the road behind is not lit) and only one red light
on the offside. I tend to put my fog light on when reversing at night, so
both sides of the car (eg walls/hedges that I'm reversing between) are lit
up in either white or red.

I think the "some countries" are making a very serious safety error in
mandating only one foglight. I find in fog that it is essential that I can
see both rear lights (and fog lights do the same job in fog as tail lights
in clear conditions, in defining the width of the car when seen from a
distance) and so can judge (from the apparent spacing) how far away the car
is when all I can see of it are its fog light(s).


My ideal grouping of rear lights would be:

- indicator
- side
- fog
- reflector
- brake

in that order (or the opposite) so the indicator is some distance from the
brake and fog lights, and so the fog and brake lights are separated and
therefore can be distinguished (I always look for the third high-level brake
light if I'm unsure whether it's fog or brake). I'd group side and fog,
except that this would place the bright fog light right next to the
indicator, making it hard to see the indicator if the car has its foglights
(or brake lights) on.

Those considerations *far* outweigh any aesthetic rules about how "pretty"
the clusters look.

VW are terrible: the rear indicator is a ring around the side/brake light,
so it's almost invisible if the brake lights are on.


Bring back nice simple clusters, maybe even separate housings on the
rear/front body, and definitely don't put the front indicators anywhere near
the headlights! Lights are meant to be clearly visible in all conditions,
not to look pretty!

I agree with you. Madness only having one. But in some vehicles, which might have a lamp socket on each side, you can only fit one lamp. Otherwise the lamp failure detection goes bonkers.

It is especially silly that if you are going between LHD/RHD countries, you should get out and change the side that has the lamp fitted.

Tim+ wrote:

[priority road signs]

If they had stopped with different sized arrows I think the signs would be
a lot less confusing, but no, some bright spark decided to emphasise one
arrow with colour. Now my brain has to work out whether size or colour is
the more important attribute of the arrow denoting priority.

Definitely a poor sign IMO.

Even this vendor can't get it right!

https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1k---you-...ign-2903-p.asp
https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1l---give...ign-2920-p.asp


Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

Chris J Dixon wrote:
Tim+ wrote:

[priority road signs]

If they had stopped with different sized arrows I think the signs would be
a lot less confusing, but no, some bright spark decided to emphasise one
arrow with colour. Now my brain has to work out whether size or colour is
the more important attribute of the arrow denoting priority.

Definitely a poor sign IMO.

Even this vendor can't get it right!

https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1k---you-...ign-2903-p.asp
https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1l---give...ign-2920-p.asp

Um, kinda making my point. The vendor HAS got it right.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 30/03/2021 09:27, Tim+ wrote:
Chris J Dixon wrote:
Tim+ wrote:

[priority road signs]

If they had stopped with different sized arrows I think the signs would be
a lot less confusing, but no, some bright spark decided to emphasise one
arrow with colour. Now my brain has to work out whether size or colour is
the more important attribute of the arrow denoting priority.

Definitely a poor sign IMO.

Even this vendor can't get it right!

https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1k---you-...ign-2903-p.asp
https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1l---give...ign-2920-p.asp

Um, kinda making my point. The vendor HAS got it right.

No. The vendor has got it wrong. According to the Highway Code, The
"give priority" sign is correct - a round, red edged, white background
sign. However, the "you have priority sign" is an informational sign and
should be a blue rectangle.

Steve Walker wrote:
On 30/03/2021 09:27, Tim+ wrote:
Chris J Dixon wrote:
Tim+ wrote:

[priority road signs]

If they had stopped with different sized arrows I think the signs would be
a lot less confusing, but no, some bright spark decided to emphasise one
arrow with colour. Now my brain has to work out whether size or colour is
the more important attribute of the arrow denoting priority.

Definitely a poor sign IMO.

Even this vendor can't get it right!

https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1k---you-...ign-2903-p.asp
https://www.motsigns.co.uk/1l---give...ign-2920-p.asp

Um, kinda making my point. The vendor HAS got it right.

No. The vendor has got it wrong. According to the Highway Code, The
"give priority" sign is correct - a round, red edged, white background
sign. However, the "you have priority sign" is an informational sign and
should be a blue rectangle.



Gotcha. My mistake. My quibble is over the confusion caused by the use of
colour and size.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

In article ,
charles wrote:
Older cars (eg 1950s Ford Zephyrs, and very early pre-Aeroflow 1962 Ford
Cortinas) had flashing white indicators at the front, but I'm not sure
about the indicators at the back.

They should have had amber bulbs - my Cortina did from new.

The Cortina came after the regs had changed so new cars had to have amber
flashers. I reckon in the late 50s. The Z type MG Magnette changed from
trafficators to white and red flashers during its life. Use a combo relay
to use the brake lights as flashers. The fronts had twin filament bulbs.

--
*Why do psychics have to ask you for your name? *

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

In article ,
NY wrote:
My impression is that whenever I saw a car with white flashing lights,
it was an old one with white indicator glass. Maybe this is because the
amber coating had worn off the bulb (which it does very quickly) or the
bulb has been replaced with a standard white one when the original
amber one blew.

That should be difficult. Amber bulbs use a different pin offset to clear.

--
*Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?

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

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
NY wrote:
My impression is that whenever I saw a car with white flashing lights,
it was an old one with white indicator glass. Maybe this is because the
amber coating had worn off the bulb (which it does very quickly) or the
bulb has been replaced with a standard white one when the original
amber one blew.

That should be difficult. Amber bulbs use a different pin offset to clear.

not in the 1960s.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
NY wrote:
My impression is that whenever I saw a car with white flashing lights,
it was an old one with white indicator glass. Maybe this is because the
amber coating had worn off the bulb (which it does very quickly) or the
bulb has been replaced with a standard white one when the original
amber one blew.

That should be difficult. Amber bulbs use a different pin offset to
clear.

That puts paid to my use of a clear bulb (plus a bit of yellow sweet
wrapper) as a makeshift amber bulb if one of my indicator bulbs fails. I'll
have to buy a spare amber bulb to go with the spare clear bulb that I carry
in the car. I'd better go check my spare bulbs to see what I still have. I
know I have a spare headlamp bulb, dating from when my car ate headlamp
bulbs about one every six months - until I went for a well-known brand
instead of a car spares shop's own brand. Do I still have spare bulbs, I
wonder, for tail/brake light and foglight (theoretically also for
indicator - until your revelation!).