Legality of Fire Truck lighting

[davepl1968]

If you've ever been behind a modern fire truck, you've no doubt noticed that they have a -wickedly- bright CMHSL (ie: third brake light). Now you might be tempted to assume that because it's a fire truck it follows a special set of rules. And it does - sometimes.

According to the last time I read our state's (WA) motor vehicle act, which might vary state by state, emergency vehicles are only granted dispensation from laws the rest of us have to obey while responding to an emergency and the emergency equipment is operating. By that I assume lights and sirens, but that's just an assumption.

So, given that the CMHSL is the same at all times (emergency lights operating or not), I presume they must be DOT legal.

If you've seen the ones I'm thinking about, they have the initial strobe (likely 20Hz for 3 seconds) and then once on are very hard to even look at. Not that I want one that bright, but would it be legal? My logic is "if Fire Trucks can do it when not responding to an emergency then I can too", but maybe that doesn't hold up. So before I start asking questions about a subject that could be taboo, I wanted to find out if, and why, it is taboo (if it is).

Thanks!
Dave

 

[dc38]

I believe a thread like this has surfaced before...i also believe that the conclusion was that said strobing before solid brake lights are not generally DOT approved for non service use.

And dont mind mcnair55, hes the friendly resident welshman from across the pond lol.

There is a moderator or someother here by e name of -Virgil-...he presents his knowledge quite expertly in many things automotive lighting related. Perhaps he could chime in

 

[StarHalo]

I've never seen the kind of light you're talking about on a Cali fire truck, but maybe I'm just expecting the lights on an emergency vehicle to be brighter than usual; I'll have to look more closely next time.

Some states are more lax than others when it comes to "creative" lighting, but generally speaking, merely creative lights will only be cited after you're pulled over for something else, whereas lights that in any way resemble emergency lighting will get you pulled over on their own. I don't see that the police are too concerned with taillight brightness, the Dodge Intrepid and Mclaren MP4 being two good examples, aside from the unique output of the "wired it myself" configurations. They'd much rather pull over the kid with blue taillights..

 

[Norm]

:welcome:

Disruptive unhelpful posts have been deleted.

 

[-Virgil-]

On top of the general "hands off" tendency with regard to emergency vehicle lighting, at the Federal level there's lattitude given to state-owned vehicles; see here for an old NHTSA interpretation letter. It's not exactly the same situation, though, because those trucks actually get built with noncompliant equipment (extra-bright/strobe-then-steady stop lights, ultra-bright CHMSL, sequential yellow arrow turn signals, etc etc). Then again, fire trucks come with all kinds of lights regular vehicles aren't allowed to have -- flashing/strobing, red/blue, etc.

My logic is "if Fire Trucks can do it when not responding to an emergency then I can too", but maybe that doesn't hold up.

Yeah, no. It doesn't.

 

[-Virgil-]

I don't see that the police are too concerned with taillight brightness, the Dodge Intrepid and Mclaren MP4 being two good examples

I can't imagine what you find unusual about the taillight performance of either the first or the second generation Intrepid. Please elaborate?

 

[davepl1968]

Rather than worrying about Fire Trucks specifically, what about HID strobes in general, whether used in the CMHSL or 4-way hazard flashers? You see them on city work trucks, and those aren't "special" under the law I can't imagine. Yet a strict reading of the NHTSA generously provided above would seem to allow you to do whatever the heck you want in any "State or political subdivision thereof".

Or I suppose I could bend it another way and ask "If I stuck a HID strobe CMHSL on a 1970 GMC, what law could I be breaking?".

I don't want to unreasonably annoy or irritate people behind me. But my one and only accident, my fault or otherwise, was in 1984 and I want to keep it that way (people that have a lot of accidents that are "other people's fault" may appreciate a better CMHSL as well).

Emergency vehicles aside, does anyone know the standard for CMHSL brightness? J584 was the standard for headlights in that old letter, there must be a similar one.

Thanks,
Dave

 

[StarHalo]

I can't imagine what you find unusual about the taillight performance of either the first or the second generation Intrepid. Please elaborate?

They're brighter than usual and lean slightly pink; can't recall which gen though, Intrepids are actually rather rare out here.

 

[-Virgil-]

They're brighter than usual and lean slightly pink; can't recall which gen though, Intrepids are actually rather rare out here.

You're thinking of the '93-'95 Intrepid. Technically and legally there was nothing wrong with the intensity or the color; both were well within the legal limits. Some owners didn't like the "light red" or "pink" appearance, and so a service bulletin was issued calling for amber bulbs to be installed in place of the colorless ones. For '96, the red plastic in the lens was given a deeper red tint.

 

[GrizzlyAdams]

According to the last time I read our state's (WA) motor vehicle act, which might vary state by state, emergency vehicles are only granted dispensation from laws the rest of us have to obey while responding to an emergency and the emergency equipment is operating. By that I assume lights and sirens, but that's just an assumption.

In my opinion, since fire trucks don't just patrol around looking for smoke, when they are on the road- they are responding to some sort of emergency.

 

[inetdog]

In my opinion, since fire trucks don't just patrol around looking for smoke, when they are on the road- they are responding to some sort of emergency.

Like grocery shopping, maybe?
When the crew is off on an errand or an inspection they have to take their engine along.

 

[Beamhead]

Like grocery shopping, maybe?
When the crew is off on an errand or an inspection they have to take their engine along.

They park right in front of our Costco while they shop.

 

[Franco]

Or I suppose I could bend it another way and ask "If I stuck a HID strobe CMHSL on a 1970 GMC, what law could I be breaking?".

I don't want to unreasonably annoy or irritate people behind me. But my one and only accident, my fault or otherwise, was in 1984 and I want to keep it that way (people that have a lot of accidents that are "other people's fault" may appreciate a better CMHSL as well).

Here's one way to think about it; while that HID strobe light may (or may not, these things aren't always intuitive) increase your vehicle's conspicuity, could you imagine if all vehicles were equipped with intense flashing lights? That would be terrible. There might also be trouble quickly identifying actual emergency vehicles too. Maybe it's best not too.

 

[-Virgil-]

Rather than worrying about Fire Trucks specifically, what about HID strobes in general, whether used in the CMHSL or 4-way hazard flashers? You see them on city work trucks, and those aren't "special" under the law I can't imagine.

Tow trucks have them, too, for the same reason: these vehicles are often stopped in/near traffic and they often move (relative to traffic) in non-standard ways, so they are equipped with what the UN regulations call "special warning lamps" for that reason.

Yet a strict reading of the NHTSA generously provided above would seem to allow you to do whatever the heck you want in any "State or political subdivision thereof".

No, you are totally misreading that NHTSA material. It says that states and political subdivisions may, within reason, set requirements for vehicles they (the state or political subdivision) own even if those requirements differ from the Federal standards. It does NOT say that anyone who happens to be in a state or political subdivision can do whatever they want.

Or I suppose I could bend it another way and ask "If I stuck a HID strobe CMHSL on a 1970 GMC, what law could I be breaking?".

Several laws on the books of your state.

(people that have a lot of accidents that are "other people's fault" may appreciate a better CMHSL as well).

Careful -- don't bite on the common misconception that flashing, blinking, "pulsing", or brighter CHMSLs are necessarily better.

Emergency vehicles aside, does anyone know the standard for CMHSL brightness?

Not to exceed 160 candela.

 

[-Virgil-]

They park right in front of our Costco while they shop.

Yes, because if a call comes in for them, they need to hop in the truck NOW, not waste time running across the parking lot.

 

[revelations0350]

Yes, because if a call comes in for them, they need to hop in the truck NOW, not waste time running across the parking lot.

Amen! As a fire engineer I find it funny when the public questions or doesn't understand we spend 24 hours at work, thus need to shop for our meals, all together in the fire truck so if calls come in we are all together and ready to respond quickly, yet safely! As i am the driver of the fire engine I wish I had more insight and knowledge into this thread regarding the lighting regulations but what I can say is that emergency vehicles are equipped to sets of standards that are governed by national and state standards. I don't believe manufacturers would produce apparatus that do not fall within legal guidelines, which would put them in jeopardy if something bad were to happen due to negligent lighting and not following national and state requirements.


Sent from my iPhone using Candlepowerforums

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Yes, because if a call comes in for them, they need to hop in the truck NOW, not waste time running across the parking lot.

Amen! As a fire engineer I find it funny when the public questions or doesn't understand we spend 24 hours at work, thus need to shop for our meals, all together in the fire truck so if calls come in we are all together and ready to respond quickly, yet safely!

Now, if someone would go tell Best Buy to stop parking the Geek Squad "New Beetle" in the fire zone, that'd be greeaaaaat (I seem to tell them at various Best Buys maybe 3x a year).

 

[revelations0350]

Now, if someone would go tell Best Buy to stop parking the Geek Squad "New Beetle" in the fire zone, that'd be greeaaaaat (I seem to tell them at various Best Buys maybe 3x a year).

Hahah I haven't seen that one yet! Have to look out for that!


Sent from my iPhone using Candlepowerforums

 

[sadtimes]

They park right in front of our Costco while they shop.

Yes, That is why they call it a Fire Lane.. Its for the Fire Truck. Even in the absence of an emergency.

As to the original question... Here (South Carolina) you will notice that fire apparatus (legal name) do not have tags (plates) on them, this is because they are not considered a "vehicle" (or means of conveyance) so they are not "registered" and no taxes are paid on them, because they are stationary equipment at heart they do not have to be "registered".. they are exempt from all laws governing motorized conveyances (vehicles) in SC, unless of course you drive one while you are impaired, then you can catch a DUI. =-)

And to further this, if you stole one (which has happened...by a mentally ill naked guy, lol), you would be charged with Grand Larceny, not Grand Larceny Of A Motor Vehicle, because it is not a vehicle.