Adding Additional Stop/Turn Lights

[Monkey Run]

The caveat to adding more is, of course, you need to ensure that they always work, otherwise you are setting yourself up for a traffic violation.

Bob, I'm glad I had swallowed my sip if wine before I read your line about the blinking and playing Christmas music

[ladagobago]

Originally Posted by Monkey Run

The caveat to adding more is, of course, you need to ensure that they always work, otherwise you are setting yourself up for a traffic violation.

Bob, I'm glad I had swallowed my sip if wine before I read your line about the blinking and playing Christmas music

Possibly too much wine. If you really read what I reported then one would have notice it had nothing to do with NJ as it was from the FR (Federal Register) affecting ALL states under the NTSB and the statements was about extra lights that would not interfere with safety. Hence the dancing light do interfere. so I will post that sections again but you have to switch to coffee.

The use of additional equipment or accessories in a manner that decreases the safety of operation of a commercial motor vehicle in interstate commerce is prohibited. Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to prohibit the use of additional equipment and accessories, not inconsistent with or prohibited by this subchapter, provided such equipment and accessories do not decrease the safety of operation of the motor vehicles on which they are used.

[BFlinn181]

ladagobago, I took a few sentences of your post that didn't mention it's source and pasted it into Google. Up popped a link to the NJ legislature, your home state. That's why I attributed it to NJ.

Fact is, many things are different between private RV and commercial interstate trucks. Adding lights above the bumper on the back of an RV that's often 800 sq ft of area will only make it safer and more visible, not less. By the way, this morning I noticed our trash collector's truck has strobe red and amber lights on the bumpers and at the very top on the back. I didn't have a chance to ask how many tickets they've gotten for their obvious lighting violations.

[Monkey Run]

Originally Posted by ladagobago

Possibly too much wine. If you really read what I reported then one would have notice it had nothing to do with NJ as it was from the FR (Federal Register) affecting ALL states under the NTSB and the statements was about extra lights that would not interfere with safety. Hence the dancing light do interfere. so I will post that sections again but you have to switch to coffee.

The use of additional equipment or accessories in a manner that decreases the safety of operation of a commercial motor vehicle in interstate commerce is prohibited. Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to prohibit the use of additional equipment and accessories, not inconsistent with or prohibited by this subchapter, provided such equipment and accessories do not decrease the safety of operation of the motor vehicles on which they are used.

With all due respect, I did not reply to your post or mention NJ, so perhaps tis not I who should switch to coffee!

[ladagobago]

OK I will agree that one section was from case law here in NJ and other from areas of commercial FMCSA regulations. But in any case there is nothing to stop one from adding more lights that are to improved visibility to the person behind.
Most of the NJ transit buses today have automatic deceleration systems with amber lights up high to warn of slowing, and multiple red brake light to warn of stopping, even as you cited trash trucks have very high lights and school buses have flashing lights on top but these are regulated allowances.

All we have to worry about is that the required (key wording) lights are functioning properly and any other lights we add do not detract from the intended message to those in the rear.

Even in boating where lights are mandatory by universal design. Adding lights is allowed but the main navigation lights must always be visible and operational.

I think many are making much more of this than what is fact or reality. One thing is for sure - if someone rear ends my MH they will have no excuse for the lack of good stop lights. I will take a picture and post it tomorrow.

[ladagobago]

today I saw a Fed Ex Truck with stop lights at the required level as well as stop lights about 1 foot from the top of the back of the truck.
Here is a picture of my stop lights. When I am pulling the trailer folks behind me can easily see both the RV lights just below the rear cap and trailer stop lights.

click the picture to the left and notice how slow the factory lights are compared tot he LED.
You can also see the forward Chicken light off the front bumper.
Since I installed the chicken lights I get a lot of courteous drivers letting me in to other lanes.

[Monkey Run]

That slow LED would bug me.

[ladagobago]

It is not the LED that is slow it is the Incandescent. It takes time for the filament resistance to get hot enough to glow. LED's are diodes and switch very fast. I plan to replace the factory incandescent with an LED festoon. I them may have to change the flasher module.

[WDW]

Your chicken lights -- is that a stud or pedestal mounted turn light? I was thinking about installing one because the front turn seems inadequate and there is nothing on the side to assist stupid drivers who come up your side.

However, I've seen double sided amber and amber & red. Does it matter which combo do long as the amber is facing forward?

Personally I would go with double ambers.

Would you add a second side marker that blinks too? I know over on the Jayco / Entrega discussion there has been a lot of talk about adding mid ship light.


Taking in the sights ...where my Trolley takes me.

2016 Coachmen Mirada 35BH

[Monkey Run]

WDW,

My plan is to place the LED stop lights up at 72" per the Federal guidelines. Additionally, as you mentioned, two side mount on the front cap tied into the turn lamps. I have searched the codes and not found any regulation for red/amber placement for side turn lights, but I will be sticking with all amber as those are quite often used for rear turn lamps also.

[ladagobago]

Originally Posted by WDW

Your chicken lights -- is that a stud or pedestal mounted turn light? I was thinking about installing one because the front turn seems inadequate and there is nothing on the side to assist stupid drivers who come up your side.

However, I've seen double sided amber and amber & red. Does it matter which combo do long as the amber is facing forward?

Personally I would go with double ambers.

Would you add a second side marker that blinks too? I know over on the Jayco / Entrega discussion there has been a lot of talk about adding mid ship light.

These are stud mounted and very rugged. Even have wack a few traffic cones over the years. Got them from NAPA. The front face is amber and rear red. About $38 each. I also have a cheap amber on side but these fail to be seen in the day time. I really don't understand why the minimum standards are so inadequate when there are solutions to improve. Guess it stems from dollars and the commercial interest have big money lobbyist.

I think to many folks in this discussion do not understand the difference between Federal Minimum standards and additional devices. Much like the Horns. you only need a horn (beep beep) but why do we have AIR HORNs. (blast blast) thinks safety might be an answer.

How about back in 1970 when NY change the law for all us motorcyclist to run with our lights on in day time. REASON stated by Governor Rockefeller to me at a public hearing, "Well buses have their headlights on to be seen better and it is a safety issue because people don't expect to see a bus driving down the road and it make them more visible". Today, most cars are equipped with running lights in the daytime.. THINGS CHANGE and people make changes.

My work truck is a Chevy van and the lights are up high. I can't tell you how many people do not see my turn or stop signal and give me the Final Finger of Fate when I make a lane change after adequately providing a turn indicator. The Ford work vans have the lights down low. I am adding lower LED to allow folks who are texted to see my lights in their peripheral vision.

I am satisfied my improved lighting is safer and appropriately installed

[ladagobago]

The regulations for height etc are for designers, manufacturing or repair shops and do not apply to individuals.
I took the opportunity to investigate the subject by calling Washington. I wish others would do the same. It is very enlightening. The light as installed on my vehicle are well within compliance of the OVSC of the NHTSA as I contacted Mike Cole. We had a very nice but long discussion on the facts. He, Like myself feel the regulation on lights based on 1998 standards falls short of modern lighting systems or test. He stated that my description of location and type of lighting is within the guidelines provide I did it myself.

One thing he did mention is that flashing lights are non-conforming.

See other areas of the department in this chart:

[RoadHogg]

Remember these?

I always thought these had to be the most unsafe tail/brake lights ever. I wonder if they even measure up to today's 17" min height requirement.

[ladagobago]

I my Gosh ! I just re-read my last entry and the picture of the car reminded me of the error. The lighting rules still in effect today are actually based on 1968 standards and not 1998. Finger error . sorry. These rules were set in place back then for lights which may have been in separate sections. Like across the entire rear of the car.