Defect Notice for Roof Rack Lights

[The Cone of Silence]

OK, so this subject has been done to death but I thought I'd share my recent experience.

Three years ago I put four HID spotlights up on Monty's roofrack. Monty is a 2008 Defender 110 Wagon. The lights are 2 wide and 2 spots, to be precise; they're absolutely brilliant for driving in the bush at night and when Daniel (Mulgo) installed them he put them on a separate circuit, linked to the high beam.
That is to say, they can only work when the high beam is on, but even then they require a separate switch to activate them.


http://www.aulro.com/afvb/attachment.php?attachmentid=115427&stc=1&d=1476847075

Last weekend I was pulled over by a Sergeant Breaden of the Northern somethingorother Highway chaps in Richmond, an hour North-West of Sydney. He gave me a ticking off for not having visible reflectors on the rear of the vehicle (oops, fair enough, they are hidden by the Rijidij bar I put on) and for having 'driving lights on the roof rack'.

A defect notice was summarily issued and for some reason he ticked the 'Full inspection required' box on the form. Thank you Sergeant. He gave me only 7 days to rectify it and get the paperwork done by the RMS or my rego would be cancelled. I remarked that I'd be lucky to get anyone where I live (Central Coast) who could do a full inspection within a week, so busy are the mechanics around here, but he cared not a jot.

After numerous phone calls, a couple of hours on hold, promised callbacks that weren't kept and conversations with remarkably unqualified staff at the RMS, I managed to speak with a chap in the Vehicle and Registrations Team who was something of an expert, to find out what the definition is of 'Driving lights' vs 'Work lights', as I was advised by a friend in the 4x4 business to call them that instead.

This chap at the RMS advised me that if I want to classify the lights as 'Work lights' and not 'Driving lights' in order to keep them on the roof rack, 'the switch to turn them on needs to be somewhere that the driver cannot reach in the normal driving position'; this ensures they cannot come on while driving.

Fair enough, I'll move the switch to the glove box and I'll re-install the lights up top. Too easy.

What occurred to me though, was that this particular officer didn't ask me anything about my lights, he pulled me over, took my licence, went to his car (which had roof lights itself of course) and came back with a form all filled out.
I've spoken with a few people who have been pulled over and had defect notices not just in the same area, but from the same person! He's got something against 4x4s apparently, or has clearly never had to drive in the bush at night.

I don't want to sound too whingey, but I think he could have handled it better. A whole lot better, in fact. A simple conversation would have probably been sufficient to get me to rectify the issue and a bit of trust is all that was required.

Anyway, it's a warning to all travelling in Windsor/ Richmond NSW that if you have a light bar or lights that are not right at the front of the vehicle, you may well get a defect notice and very little time in which to fix it.

[Mick_Marsh]

Ah, Windsor. Sounds familiar.
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/technical-chatter/234027-spot-flood-light-bar-up-under-roof-rack-nsw-roof-light-legality-12.html#post2498116


I see a pattern developing.

[Phil B]

My son had the same issue with the same officer while he was driving my S3
I removed the lights
He obviously has an issue with them!!!!

[Tombie]

Thanks for the report..

Helps in such situations to keep a calm head as you did... sadly there are some individuals (in all fields) who disagree with certain items and will pursue with rigour.

[101RRS]

Well lodge a complaint - including the RMS response on the other case mentioned, a copy of the ADRs and NSW rules on the issue.

I have taken NSW police on a couple of issues over the years where I knew they were wrong and won out every time - there is a process and if you are right it normally works.

[Tombie]

What you could have been done for:

More than 6 lights....

However - ADR 13/00 allows your roof lights.
And the common claim of "not being at the front" is sorted under:

Section 6.22.4.2
"at the front"
"This requirement is deemed to be satisfied if the light emitted does not cause discomfort to the driver either directly, or indirectly through the rear-view mirrors and/or other reflecting surfaces of the vehicle."

If your vehicle complies - I would suggest a report be lodged.

[The Cone of Silence]

I think the key here is to get some written confirmation from the RMS that as long as they're on a different circuit AND can't be operated by the driver in the normal driving position, they are permitted to be on the roof rack.


I shall pursue this and make sure that next time the same belligerent individual tries to defect me again, I can show him the confirmation and prove to him by showing him the switch.


Such a waste of time though. I know he's a traffic cop, but for goodness' sake, get out there and do something about the lunatics driving at 140kph in unregistered vehicles and drunk drivers, don't waste time with stuff like this.

[Tombie]

There are occasions where it may be appropriate to have interactions recorded.
Choose wisely, however many years ago I had cause to do so with a similar individual of stunningly similar mind set.. it resolved the issue which was little more than 'bullying '

[The Cone of Silence]

UPDATE


I spoke with a nice chap called James from the RMS who said 'It's a grey area and we get a lot of calls about it at the moment - the Police are a law unto themselves and defect who they want because who's going to spend the money on a QC to take them to court'


He recommended to me that I move the switch to a place where I can't reach it from the normal driving position and ensure the lights are on a different circuit. BUT, that's just an RMS recommendation and they can't put anything in writing and the Police will, when push comes to shove, do what they want.

Inspirational stuff there from people who are supposed to be representing the public and be held to account.

So, there we go, I'll do the switch relocation and next time old mate with the attitude problem defects me I'll at least be able to argue the case for having 'work lights' on the roof and then it's up to him. If his attitude issue prevails I'll file an official report against him.

[mudmouse]

If you, or anyone else, thinks there's an attitude problem them take him on in writing. It's a simple process but won't fix the problem.

Either the things are legal or they ain't. I'm rebuilding my Disco and it will have lights on the rack, so if the RMS is telling you they need to be operated by a switch inaccessible from the driver seat, then okie doke. RMS man can't give recommendations and not back them up.

The police can only do what the law/ADR's allow, otherwise you have a civil claim and can start choosing the colour of your new yacht.

[Toxic_Avenger]

Get a double pole, double throw switch hidden somewhere and have 2 switches that do the same thing, and can be switched between one in reach, and out of reach.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/10/312.jpg

The law is an ass. I always try to stay on the right side of the law where I can, but there is so many grey areas out there that it makes it difficult for the law enforcers to know what's right and wrong, and secondly for the citizen to locate that line in the legal sand.
I could fill the thread with cliche and anecdotes, but my advice, like others, is to know your position, and challenge it if you think it's in error. It may not be a battle of QC's and multi million dollar lawsuits, but maybe just as simple as a letter stating your case to the SDRO. I think a judge would be more than annoyed having to hear a case about a stray light on a vehicle's roof when there are much more serious offences awaiting trial.

[Tombie]

A set of black out covers for when on highway aren't a bad thing either.

[Sitec]

I was about to suggest the same thing. On highway, covers on.. Off highway, covers off. Pretty sure its illegal to have roof lights here in SA unless covers are on. When the body goes on the truck, there'll be 4 big ones atop the cab, with a K5LA concealed between them!!!! :D

[The Cone of Silence]

I think I might consider both measures:



Covers for when I'm on road
A toggle switch in the glove box, leaving the existing switch where it is. Thus, to activate the lights, the toggle switch needs to be 'on' and then normal operation via the existing switch can occurs.

[CraigE]

I would put covers on them as said, that should cover you in NSW as would show not for on road use. The problem the laws are different in different states. WA it is a big no, no, but most police over here wont enforce it as it is a stupid law. I think in SA you can have roof light.
The biggest problem is some police issuing defect notices have absolutely no mechanical or technical knowledge of either the defect or ADRs relating to fitting of accessories and modifications. The way it is set up is they dont have to and the way a defect is issued is under the officers opinion it needs an inspection, which removes any actual knowledge. Dont get me wrong often they are correct, but sometimes not.
I am fairly sure they must have 2 minor items to defect a vehicle or a significant safety fault. Likely why he also pinged you for a reflector as well as he likely knew he couldnt defect you on the lights alone. I would also be looking at the requirement for reflectors as some cars have them while a lot dont.

[The Cone of Silence]

It's ok, I got 2 reflectors from Supercheap and stuck them on the bar at the back. $9.

[mudmouse]

Gotta have red reflectors on the rear of any vehicle, which includes trailers and bicycles. They're incorporated in the tail lights on most cars whilst those that don't have them (usually) on/in the bumper bar. A lot of motorcycle riders remove the rear spray guard, which has the reflector on it.

Yup, so many 'defects' and for some unknown reason enforcement is directed to the low hanging fruit. It's supposed to be safety related, which is a pretty long piece of string. In NSW a defect will send you a rego inspection station and if you go the 'right' place for rego, they don't even start the car - just jot down the km's and a few funny electronic noises in the office later and there's a brake analysis report and a you're about $30 lighter in the pocket. So that's the fat of it, a load of bureaucrat endorsed BS each year that does SFA for road safety. I've seen a few cars under 5yrs old (no rego inspection required) with smooth tyres.

:twisted:

[Tombie]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/10/172.jpg

Visible on corners

[101RRS]

What happened to the OEM reflectors on the Defender.

[Avion8]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/10/172.jpg

Visible on corners

Your going to get defected Tombie for having a very tatty mudflap. Can't have molten stuff dripping of the back of a Defender now can we Sir.

[Tombie]

What happened to the OEM reflectors on the Defender.



Just above across member are as delivered.

This was my 2001 Tombraider...

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/10/166.jpg

[Tombie]

Your going to get defected Tombie for having a very tatty mudflap. Can't have molten stuff dripping of the back of a Defender now can we Sir.



Was sorted after this pic when the exhaust was adjusted..

[Tombie]

Interestingly, never got chatted for this set up...
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/10/165.jpg

So glad I've got what I have now - no need for so many lights anymore.

[jonesfam]

This thread had me intrigued.
So I thought I would look up what the law actually was?

First off, if you live in NSW (which, thankfully, I don't) best of luck finding what the laws are on the internet without reading through hundreds of pages & then being totally confused. But, as best I could understand it roof mounted spot lights in NSW (Mexico) are illegal full stop.
Maybe I have interpreted this wrong but that's the way it reads to me.

Now, in QLD (Gods Country or Heaven) it is all quite simple & there is a very good summary from main roads.
Basically in QLD you can have up to 6 spotlights, a light bar counts as 1, they can be on the roof but must be at least half the car length back, not cause glare to the driver, be switched through the main beam + a separate switch & most interesting of all not be in the drivers line of sight!

That last bit means that all those millions of 4WDs with a light bar on the top rail of their Bull Bars are illegal, never seen anyone getting stopped for it though. But if you want to look like a "Legend" it's probably OK.

The only other thing is they must be symmetrically mounted about the center line of the car.
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
This proves that QLD is better than NSW or even Mexico!

Jonesfam

[isuzurover]

..,
Basically in QLD you can have up to 6 spotlights, a light bar counts as 1...

Jonesfam

You might want to check on that. Last i checked the qld rules it said lights must be mounted in pairs and a light bar counted as one pair. You also needed to put something in the middle of a light bar to make it look like 2 lights instead of one :D

[Saitch]

You might want to check on that. Last i checked the qld rules it said lights must be mounted in pairs and a light bar counted as one pair. You also needed to put something in the middle of a light bar to make it look like 2 lights instead of one :D
That was true but, with the popularity of light bars, the rules were altered.
As to being on top of the front bar, that is illegal but, as mentioned, there are heaps of 4WD Action University graduates, some with Honours I reckon, driving with them mounted there.
Steve

[CraigE]

That was true but, with the popularity of light bars, the rules were altered.
As to being on top of the front bar, that is illegal but, as mentioned, there are heaps of 4WD Action University graduates, some with Honours I reckon, driving with them mounted there.
Steve

Not sure about that Steve, most of the stuff I have read states must be below bonnet line, nothing about not being mounted on the top of the bull bar. Both the Defender and the D2 we have you could easily get a light bar either below or in line with the bonnet fairly easy on the bar. I suppose it may be open to some interpretation though and wont help when you get a canary. Having said that I have had a pair of Narva Spread Beams on top of the Defender bullbar for nigh on 12 years now and never been chatted once. Though I have to say they do not impede vision at all, but would if mounted in a similar way on the D2.

[Tombie]

WA is simple
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/366.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/780.jpg

[Wraithe]

Always funny how powers that be interpret the law and abide by it... Police have excessively bright lights, forward and back, when they pull up... So much so, that its blinding, yet they would crucify a driver for having up high.. And do nothing to those driving a car on high beam during the day...

All too much...

One model of truck comes out with spotties mounted in panel above windscreen(cant remember which make or model), but they work well, i followed one, even tho his dog was wagging its tail for 200 k's I could get a good view up ahead of them...

I wonder how factory installed would go with NSW...

[Tombie]

Factory eg. Jeep are approved.
Just like wheels wider than 8" on a LR D4 or RRS are approved.. (a wheel wider than 8" isn't allowed to be aftermarket fitted to a vehicle that didn't come with wider factory)

[Wraithe]

Factory eg. Jeep are approved.
Just like wheels wider than 8" on a LR D4 or RRS are approved.. (a wheel wider than 8" isn't allowed to be aftermarket fitted to a vehicle that didn't come with wider factory)

So if you order a vehicle with all accessories fitted at the factory and delivered, as such, then that is legal?

[Tombie]

So if you order a vehicle with all accessories fitted at the factory and delivered, as such, then that is legal?



Yes. If it has been complianced in Australia with them on..

[mrs]

Apparently the NSW RMS are working on tidying up the laws for LED lights in general as the technology has moved a bit to quick for them. Eg the law always said that you had to have driving lights in a pair, so what is a light bar - a single light or the number of LEDS. Also I think that the max number of lights in NSW is 6 so for example my LED driving lights have 18 LEDS each. Plus if one individual LED doesn't work that technical could be defected (this is also a dilema with LED tail lights and DRLS). There is apparently a working party involving interested parties including aftermarket accessories companies (eg ARB), 4wd association, police, RMS ETC.

Sent from my SM-G930F using AULRO mobile app

[Tombie]

The tech has certainly moved but the performance has stalled.

Now with the recent AMA study concluded there may be more impacts to LED lighting standards to come.

[DiscoMick]

Isnt mounting a light bar on the top of a bullbar a safety issue for pedestrian impacts, like fishing rod holders?

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

[Wraithe]

I dont know about legally, DiscoMick, but knwoing of someone getting killed by an empty rod holder, at very low speed.. To me, if empty, turn them around or remove...

A police officer in the grt sthn, 20 years ago would politely ask you to remove or turn.. If you said no tools, he would do it for you... If you argued or got agressive, he would book you... Understandable, it was his best friend that died, and the vehicle was possibly doing 15 k at most...

[roverrescue]

Tombie
You got a linky to this AMA study
I'm guessing it is an eye strain / fatigue /CRI thing

S

[isuzurover]

Tombie
You got a linky to this AMA study
I'm guessing it is an eye strain / fatigue /CRI thing

S

Yes. it is also wrt street lighting not headlights American Medical Association warns of health and safety problems from 'white' LED streetlights (http://theconversation.com/american-medical-association-warns-of-health-and-safety-problems-from-white-led-streetlights-61191)

[Tombie]

Yes. it is also wrt street lighting not headlights American Medical Association warns of health and safety problems from 'white' LED streetlights (http://theconversation.com/american-medical-association-warns-of-health-and-safety-problems-from-white-led-streetlights-61191)



It's being taken further at the moment regarding eye damage.. especially in long haul drivers.

[Wraithe]

It's being taken further at the moment regarding eye damage.. especially in long haul drivers.

ha ha ha ha ha, had this discussion a couple of years ago...

HID didnt effect you and in fact when driving all night, didnt make you as tired, especially in the eyes...
My old boss had LED's and noticed it being an issue, so added a couple of HID spotties to his truck as well.. He reconned vast improvement...

So it wasn't just us or B&*$$hit...

:D:D:D:D

[isuzurover]

It's being taken further at the moment regarding eye damage.. especially in long haul drivers.

Got a link? I can't find anything. We have known for a long time that shift work is bad for your health - this includes truck drivers who drive at night. The highest risk factors are for breast cancer I recall.

The science still isn't settled on how much of an effect the blue light would have - e.g. see this recent paper using a rat model. Most drivers would only be exposed to low levels - due to reflection of oncoming traffic. If you have high Lux levels in your cab then your lights are set up incorrectly.


Environ Health Perspect; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1307294
White Light?Emitting Diodes (LEDs) at Domestic Lighting Levels and Retinal Injury in a Rat Model

Yu-Man Shang,1 Gen-Shuh Wang,1 David Sliney,2 Chang-Hao Yang,3,4 and Li-Ling Lee5

Background: Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) deliver higher levels of blue light to the retina than do conventional domestic light sources. Chronic exposure to high-intensity light (2,000?10,000 lux) has previously been found to result in light-induced retinal injury, but chronic exposure to relatively low-intensity (750 lux) light has not been previously assessed with LEDs in a rodent model.

Objective: We examined LED-induced retinal neuronal cell damage in the Sprague-Dawley rat using functional, histological, and biochemical measurements.

Methods: We used blue LEDs (460 nm) and full-spectrum white LEDs, coupled with matching compact fluorescent lights, for exposures. Pathological examinations included electroretinogram, hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). We also measured free radical production in the retina to determine the oxidative stress level.

Results: H&E staining and TEM revealed apoptosis and necrosis of photoreceptors, which indicated blue-light induced photochemical injury of the retina. Free radical production in the retina was increased in LED-exposed groups. IHC staining demonstrated that oxidative stress was associated with retinal injury. Although we found serious retinal light injury in LED groups, the compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) groups showed moderate to mild injury.

Conclusion: Our results raise questions about adverse effects on the retina from chronic exposure to LED light compared with other light sources that have less blue light. Thus, we suggest a precautionary approach with regard to the use of blue-rich ?white? LEDs for general lighting.

[Tombie]

I will get the link later when I get home.

[CraigE]

Isnt mounting a light bar on the top of a bullbar a safety issue for pedestrian impacts, like fishing rod holders?

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

Ofcourse it is a safety issue, but maybe not illegal for all accessories. As said fishing rod holders must be removed or turned when not in use. Honestly though I dont think having fishing rods in them make them much safer for the pedestrian.
Most bullbars come with aerial mounts and it is not illegal to fit them or have bracket bolt on types fitted. Put a big Codan HF aerial on without any probs and that would certainly hurt a pedestrian. It is also not illegal to fit lights above the bar, it depends on the height of the bar in relation to the bonnet line. There are many half bars, light bars, winch bars that have accessories fitted with no bar above them.
Look at the front of any Country Police car, Fire appliance or ambulance, plenty of hazards hanging of their bull bars and then some.

[Mick_Marsh]

Look at the front of any Country Police car, Fire appliance or ambulance, plenty of hazards hanging of their bull bars and then some.
Ah, but you will find hidden away in the legislation there is a rule that would say emergency services vehicles will be able to have such accessories.

[CraigE]

Yep and the police are still confused over here what is legal and what is not.
The pics you show are correct for WA and was the press release, but there is a more detailed notice somewhere, the one on the bar sits above the bonnet line, but is not prescriptive if in line with the bonnet is legal or on top of a bar full stop. Plenty of trucks, 4x4s and cars running around her with them on the top bar. As said I have had mine on for well over 10 years and never been questioned about them when pulled up.
So it is not that clear over here.
Somewhere in there it does mention bonnet line and view of driver.
Yet a wind deflector on the bonnet is fine and a pedestrian hitting that and braking it will cut them up.
What about nudge bars that have lights on top or number plate bars? I think that is where the bonnet line comes from.
What about all the 4x4 with Mack bulldogs fitted?
Generally most coppers over here dont want to enforce it or get involved.
Has been illegal for roll bar or roof lights in WA for years but have never seen it enforced.
Personally I dont think a light bar on top of a bull bar is any worse than the bar itself.
Then all forward facing work lights are prohibited. Lots of vehicles with forward facing work lights including the police, so go figure.
Clear as mud really.

WA is simple
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/366.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/780.jpg

[CraigE]

Ah, but you will find hidden away in the legislation there is a rule that would say emergency services vehicles will be able to have such accessories.

:p Yeah there is but wasnt going to mention that. So many exemptions. :o

[BMKal]

Years ago I was chatted by a couple of coppers in Kalgoorlie for having forward facing spot lights on the roof of a work Prado. It had a roof bar towards the rear of the vehicle, which had the usual minesite repeat indicators / tail / brake lights, the obligatory orange flashing beacon in the centre, and two small hella driving lights facing forward - which were correctly wired with regard to high beam and independent switching.

As the coppers were telling me that I could be defected for these lights, a (well known locally) dark green Falcon ute with a row of four or five large Hella driving lights (Rallye 4,000 or similar) mounted across its roll bar above the roof line drove past. I advised the two coppers (politely) that if they were to defect my vehicle, I would be raising with the appropriate authorities that this green Falcon ute seemed to be immune to Police attention.

The green Falcon belonged to and was driven by their sergeant ............... I was sent on my way with no action taken. ;)

[jonesfam]

The QLD summary I read DIDN"T say you could not mount lights on top of a Bull Bar.
It said driving/spotlights are not to be in the drivers line of sight.

Admittedly it would be pretty difficult to mount them on a Bull Bar without the driver being able to see them.

Many years ago while living in Karumba I had a Datsun (that tells you how long ago) 720 4WD dual cab. I had mounted 2 monstrous spotties on top of the Bull Bar. At a party one day (there was a lot of parties in Karumba) the local Police Sargent, who I knew well, said "Those lights are illegal mounted up there you know?"
I asked him if he wanted me to move them.
"Narr, only a Dickhead would book you but if you do get booked I've told you to move them."

Drove all over QLD in that thing, never did get booked, not even for the chook wire light protectors.

Just an aside, that 2.2 diesel was so slow I really didn't need the lights anyway.

Jonesfam

[Tombie]

Line of sight refers to the testing procedure for drivers LOS vision. Not if you can see them from the seat...

However, changing the above bar profile on the front of the vehicle is considered an issue as for pedestrian impacts.. just like protruding fairleads, Rod holders, recovery hooks etc.

[jonesfam]

LOS vision?

[V8Ian]

LOS vision?

Line of sight.

[CraigE]

Years ago I was chatted by a couple of coppers in Kalgoorlie for having forward facing spot lights on the roof of a work Prado. It had a roof bar towards the rear of the vehicle, which had the usual minesite repeat indicators / tail / brake lights, the obligatory orange flashing beacon in the centre, and two small hella driving lights facing forward - which were correctly wired with regard to high beam and independent switching.

As the coppers were telling me that I could be defected for these lights, a (well known locally) dark green Falcon ute with a row of four or five large Hella driving lights (Rallye 4,000 or similar) mounted across its roll bar above the roof line drove past. I advised the two coppers (politely) that if they were to defect my vehicle, I would be raising with the appropriate authorities that this green Falcon ute seemed to be immune to Police attention.

The green Falcon belonged to and was driven by their sergeant ............... I was sent on my way with no action taken. ;)

MMM I know the vehicle.:angel:
Most coppers down here reckon they have much better things to do than worry about where spotties are mounted. But having said that always a risk you could be pinged.
The spots on the rear bar were really common, ours usually angled out so you could do pipe checks.

[101RRS]

If roof mounted lights are not legal in WA how do owners of these Jeeps get on - OEM roof mounted lights.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/764.jpg (http://s42.photobucket.com/user/gazzz21/media/Forum%20Posts%20Album/20673139_zpslumkjhwd.jpg.html)

[isuzurover]

If roof mounted lights are not legal in WA how do owners of these Jeeps get on - OEM roof mounted lights.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2016/11/764.jpg (http://s42.photobucket.com/user/gazzz21/media/Forum%20Posts%20Album/20673139_zpslumkjhwd.jpg.html)

OEM can get exemption. Just as wheel spacers are illegal but some cars have them factory fitted

[The Cone of Silence]

I installed an isolator switch in the glove box as I can't reach this while I'm driving...well, not safely anyway.

Will argue the case next time I'm pulled over on the basis that the RMS advised me this would be ok.

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/attachment.php?attachmentid=116342&stc=1&d=1478638815

[The Cone of Silence]

Well, it happened again.

The delightful Sergeant Breaden of Windsor Highway Patrol, pulled a ridiculous and frankly unsafe 180 degree move on Kurrajong Road in the wet to pull me over and provide me with another defect notice.

When I explained that three separate people from the RMS had advised me that they are classed as 'work lights' as I can't operate them from the driving position, he laughed, and said "The RMS? They don't know anything about cars. I'm the COPS mate!"

What a ridiculous little man. He was so childish and belligerent in his attitude, he even gave me a defect that they can be switched on without the full beam. When I told him I'd already explained that wasn't the case, nor was it last time he pulled me over, and offered to show him to prove it, he just didn't care. He insisted that I get a full vehicle inspection and when I asked him why he didn't simply request a part inspection to ensure I'd rectified the defect, he became rather agitated and told me "Because you've got a defective vehicle mate!" and it was at this point I realised I was wasting my time trying to convince him that I'm not a drug dealer/ rapist/ people smuggler and simply repeated 'Yes Sergeant, Thank you Sergeant' until off he went on his merry way to find issues with other road users.

I shall file a formal complaint about his attitude and behaviour today. I get that he thinks my vehicle is defective but it's his attitude that appalls me.

I guess I have to remove the lights for good and suffer with worse vision while out in the bush.


Questions
If I replace the four lights with a single light bar, where can it be positioned? I've seen them in all manner of positions so it in't clear to me.
If I'm not allowed a light bar, what are my options for increasing light when I'm driving in the bush in the dark?

[weeds]

Work lights?? 4 x lights facing forward I assume. What’s your line of work.

Do you actually need the lights??

[Phil B]

That particular person of authority just loves spot lights on roof racks and roof bars.
My son had the same issue with him on my S3.
I just took them off rather than argue.

[The Cone of Silence]

I don't often need them for work - occasionally I'll be in a paddock in the bush doing horsey stuff but it was more that the RMS suggested calling them work lights based on the controls for them...it seems the RMS are fed up of getting calls about over enthusiastic members of the NSW Constabulary defecting people when the rules are a 'Grey area'.

I do often use them when exploring and camping so I can justify the need for them in terms of safety, so I'm considering a single light bar up there instead to be compliant.

[Mick_Marsh]

That particular person of authority just loves spot lights on roof racks and roof bars.
My son had the same issue with him on my S3.
I just took them off rather than argue.
I think this is a new boy.
The previous fellow was "Smitty".

I reckon I downloaded something not long ago from RMS that said lights on the roof near the windscreen was ok. Can't remember where I saved it. It only stuck out because a few months back I heard Smitty had been transferred.

[donh54]

Next time, ask him how many Scania and MAN trucks he's defected!
I can't emphasise enough that you ALWAYS record any conversation with so-called "authourity figures"! And begin by asking for their name, number and station or branch they work from. If they ask why, explain it is so you know who to contact in case you're not being dealt with in a courteous and professional manner.

[trout1105]

Questions
If I replace the four lights with a single light bar, where can it be positioned? I've seen them in all manner of positions so it in't clear to me.
If I'm not allowed a light bar, what are my options for increasing light when I'm driving in the bush in the dark?

If you replace the 4x spotlights with a lightbar you will most likely still be up against Mr Plod anyway.
You can always do what most of us do and fit your driving lights to the front of your truck and although they don't look as macho or as trendy as the roof top lights they do work rather well and they are legal in every state and territory [thumbsupbig]

[Tombie]

In this case; Just record the interaction...
BUT.. do it from outside the vehicle if using your mobile.. other wise you’ll get fined for handling your phone in the drivers seat.

[Eevo]

ring up and have a chat to his 1 up manager. tell him/her that the RMS beleive a mistake has been made and the officer has incorrect knowledge and you would like it verified. provide RMS contact name and number.

[101RRS]

If you are certain you are roadworthy and there is nothing wrong - take the vehicle with the defect notice into an RMS area office and get tech standards down to review - will be cleared once and for all. However go through the NSW regs on this first to make sure you know you are correct.

If you are correct then lodge a complaint with the police area command, showing the evidence of the outcome and take it from there.

[DiscoMick]

Yeah, you need proof you are roadworthy before you could challenge the cop. They don't like being challenged.

For example I under stand that roof rack lights are illegal for the road because they are too high under the rules about the height of lights, because they might dazzle on-coming drivers.
Does disconnecting roof rack lights from the vehicle's lighting system make them work lights? I don't know.

[101RRS]

Roof lights are in fact legal BUT there are tight rules about their fitment and use.

[Classic88]

The previous owner of my RRC came up with a decent solution I think. I don't have a picture on me but he sliced out the middle of one of the horizontal bars in the grille and replaced it with a lightbar that's about half the total width of the grille. It's a neat, unobtrusive solution that gives no cause for complaint.

[Grumbles]

KJ Jeep Cherokees came from the factory with roof lights at the front and were sold here with them so they must have met ADRs. This might be worth some investigation to see how Jeep got around the 'no roof light' rule.

[Saulman1010]

Another option... years ago I met a similar over enthusiastic law enforcement individual and got back on the road with the same equipment, in this case by rotating the flood lights around to face rear. Thus no use forward in a highway. Perhaps the light bar could rotate 180deg for everyday and once off road reset forward?
Personally wouldn't bother following up on individual attitudes, you will only bring more pain / retribution. Those who are bad, or perhaps lets say unfair, rarely last long.

[Eevo]

hose who are bad, or perhaps lets say unfair, rarely last long.
or get promoted

[rangieman]

Nsw Highway Patrol bloody Nazi`s:bat:
Nsw living up to that long reputation of a police state[tonguewink]

[Tombie]

So because of the actions of one individual we’re going onto a Cop bashing tangent are we?

[trout1105]

So because of the actions of one individual we’re going onto a Cop bashing tangent are we?

Why Not with so many people ignoring the reg's and not having the ability to be able to take ownership of their own mistakes there is a Need for a scapegoat [bigwhistle]
Without the Copers on the roads the carnage would be far worse than it already is and they are only Human after all and mistakes will and do happen from time to time.
They do a mostly "Thankless" job and Bagging them really isn't helpful Guys and IF you do have a genuine grievance then take it to the police station and get it "Sorted", Whinging about and bagging Coppers especially by naming them here is pointless.

[Gordie]

In this state, not sure about NSW, a police officer only has to suspect that a motor vehicle does not meet ADR's in order to defect it. He doesn't have to prove it.

IF he has conducted himself in a less than professional manner....go to a police station and fill out a complaint form. You can't complain about him doing is job, ie suspecting a defect and defecting you for it....but if he has been rude, you can complain about that.

As for jumping out of a vehicle, and thrusting a recording device in an officers face, whilst demanding his name and number...yes you can do it...but I can tell you from experience, it is going to cost you a fine and a defect, when it could merely have been a friendly chat that you were pulled over for.

Police officers are human, yes there are some over zealous ones...but there are a lot who are reasonable. But if you get their backs up, even the reasonable ones will sting you.

[Mick_Marsh]

For example I under stand that roof rack lights are illegal for the road because they are too high under the rules about the height of lights, because they might dazzle on-coming drivers.
Do you have rules in legislation that back up that understanding?

Have a read of the "fog light" thread.

[Mick_Marsh]

KJ Jeep Cherokees came from the factory with roof lights at the front and were sold here with them so they must have met ADRs. This might be worth some investigation to see how Jeep got around the 'no roof light' rule.
Easy. There is no "no roof light" rule.
I can't find it.

[trout1105]

Easy. There is no "no roof light" rule.
I can't find it.

Here you go Mick;
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F20...f-844000bab145 (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2007C00608/52069310-a68d-4234-898f-844000bab145)


7.4.4.2. In Height: No higher than the passing beam (dipped beam) headlamp.

So unless your low beams are fitted to the roof fitting driving lights to the roof is a "No No"

[101RRS]

That is 2005/2007 - that is out of date - was changed about 18 months - 2 years ago.

[DiscoMick]

Do you have rules in legislation that back up that understanding?

Have a read of the "fog light" thread.

So I had a look around, knowing this issue is a minefield, and what I read just confirmed the issue is a simmering pot of confusion. So from what I can figure out:

ADR 13 appears to allow roof mounted lights, but they must be wired through the headlights so they turn off with low beam. Must also have their own off switch.

7.3 of ADR13 says additional driving lights have to be fitted 'at the front' of the vehicle and wired through the headlights so they only come on with high beam.

They must not dazzle on-coming drivers.

9.2 says NC category vehicle headlights must not be higher than 1372mm from the centre of the headlight to the ground, but does that apply to lightbars? I don't know.

Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 13/00 - Installation of Lighting and Light Signalling Devices on other than L-Group Vehicles) 2005 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2013C00238/Html/Text#)

Queensland says vehicles have to comply with ADR13. Not sure about other states.

This might be where the OP goes down because his 'work lights' were not 'at the front of the vehicle' and were not wired through the headlights.

I couldn't find any reference to work lights, but maybe it's there somewhere.

There is argument about whether ADR13 only applies to vehicle manufacturers or also covers aftermarket lights.

Every state seems to have its own interpretation of the rules. There is a simple language summary here:

Raising the Bar – Do You Know How & Where You're Allowed to Install Your LED Lightbar? | (https://ultra-vision.com.au/how-to-install-led-light-bar/)

Be interested to hear what others find.

Oh, I also discovered my own lightbar may be illegal because it's mounted on top of the bullbar and may be a pedestrian hazard. Great!

This article was a useful summary, I thought.

LED Light Bar Installation Laws – A Continued State of Confusion | (https://ultra-vision.com.au/led-light-bar-laws/)

Disclaimer: This isn't legal advice and I'm just a mug punter, so you're on your own and don't blame me if you go down in a screaming heap.

[trout1105]

Oh, I also discovered my own lightbar may be illegal because it's mounted on top of the bullbar and may be a pedestrian hazard. Great!

I also have a lightbar fitted on top of my bullbar, It doesn't impede my view of the road and is below the top of the bonnet (Pretty Much) and I would imagine that this would be of the least concern to some poor soul that was to be misfortunate enough to be hit by 2.5-3 tone of Disco [bigwhistle]

[101RRS]

This link for light bars (so should also apply to other lights) clears things up for all juridications EXCEPT for NSW which people are having trouble working out.

Making sense of light bar laws in each state – The Lap Year

(http://thelapyear.com/2017/09/02/making-sense-of-light-bar-laws-in-each-state/) Making sense of light bar laws in each state September 2, 2017 (http://thelapyear.com/2017/09/02/making-sense-of-light-bar-laws-in-each-state/) admin (http://thelapyear.com/author/admin/) 4x4 (http://thelapyear.com/category/4x4/), lighting (http://thelapyear.com/category/lighting/)
Having owned a 4×4 for a while now I have seen the popularity of light bars increase dramatically. I have also seen the laws really struggle to keep up. A few years ago it was actually ridiculous, the law still stated that all lights had to be mounted in pairs… Enthusiasts were putting black tape down the centre of their bars to ensure they looked like two lights and remained legal. Thankfully the laws have been reassessed since. You’d think that would mean consistent Australia wide laws on light bars, but no, unfortunately there are still some slight variances. We’ve pulled together a summary below based on the information available to us online. It should be noted that this is our interpretation of the rules and it would be wise to check the documentation we’ve linked to in each state before deeming the position you mount your LED bar legal.
Australia Wide:


The light/s must only come on when the main-beam (high beam) headlights are used, and must automatically turn off when the main-beam headlights are turned off.
The driving lights must be fitted with an isolator switch to allow high beam to be switched on without the driving lights also being switched on.
Light bars can not be mounted on top of the bull bar.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/02/722.jpg
Vic (Positions 1 is OK but 2 and 3 are open to interpretation based on the first line of the LED light bar section)
WA (Positions 1, 2 and 3 are OK)
SA (Positions 1, 2 and 3 are OK)
NT (Positions 1, 2 and 3 are OK)
QLD (Positions 1, 2 are OK but 3 is not)
ACT (Position 1 OK but 2 and 3 are not)
References to documentation in each state: Vic
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/vehicle-safety/fog-and-driving-lights
WA
http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/licensing/LBU_VS_IB_132.pdf
SA
https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/driving-and-transport/vehicles/vehicle-standards-and-modifications/lighting-and-instrumentation
https://www.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/76070/MR1517-Driving-Lamps-and-Daytime-Running-Lamps.pdf
NT
https://nt.gov.au/driving/safety/additional-lighting
QLD
https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/-/media/Safety/Vehicle-standards-and-modifications/Vehicle-standards/Vehicle-standards-instructions/L153.pdf
ACT
https://www.accesscanberra.act.gov.au/app/answers/detail/a_id/2945/~/motor-vehicle-headlights-and-lamps (https://www.accesscanberra.act.gov.au/app/answers/detail/a_id/2945/%7E/motor-vehicle-headlights-and-lamps)
NSW/TAS
Unable to find anything concrete online


(http://thelapyear.com/2017/09/02/making-sense-of-light-bar-laws-in-each-state/)

[Mick_Marsh]

Here you go Mick;
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F20...f-844000bab145 (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2007C00608/52069310-a68d-4234-898f-844000bab145)


7.4.4.2. In Height: No higher than the passing beam (dipped beam) headlamp.

So unless your low beams are fitted to the roof fitting driving lights to the roof is a "No No"
7.4 is for "Cornering Lamps"
You need to re-read the ADR to refamiliarise yourself with it.

[Mick_Marsh]

Oh, I also discovered my own lightbar may be illegal because it's mounted on top of the bullbar and may be a pedestrian hazard. Great!

I also have a lightbar fitted on top of my bullbar, It doesn't impede my view of the road and is below the top of the bonnet (Pretty Much) and I would imagine that this would be of the least concern to some poor soul that was to be misfortunate enough to be hit by 2.5-3 tone of Disco [bigwhistle]
It's not about being hit by the vehicle, it's about pedestrians injuring themselves as they walk past your car.
If there are no exposed bits that a passing pedestrian can hook or injure themselves, and it complies with other rules, it will be ok.

[DiscoMick]

My lightbar, although on top of the bullbar, is not above the line of the bonnet and does not protrude forward of the bullbar. It is also smooth surfaced and slimline. Being below the line of the bonnet it does not obstruct my view. So I may be able to make an argument it does not increase the hazard to pedestrians - maybe... ?

Of course, blogs are only opinions, not legal rulings, so who knows?

L153.pdf (https://docs.google.com/gview?embedded=true&url=https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/-/media/Safety/Vehicle-standards-and-modifications/Vehicle-standards/Vehicle-standards-instructions/L153.pdf)

Frequently asked questions—vehicle standards and modifications (Department of Transport and Main Roads) (https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Vehicle-standards-and-modifications/Vehicle-modifications/Frequently-asked-questions-vehicle-standards-and-modifications.aspx#spotlights)

Vehicle standards instructions (Department of Transport and Main Roads) (https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/safety/vehicle-standards-and-modifications/vehicle-standards/vehicle-standards-instructions.aspx)

[Mick_Marsh]

My lightbar, although on top of the bullbar, is not above the line of the bonnet and does not protrude forward of the bullbar. It is also smooth surfaced and slimline. Being below the line of the bonnet it does not obstruct my view. So I may be able to make an argument it does not increase the hazard to pedestrians - maybe... ?
That would be my understanding.

[Tombie]

You both MISunderstand [emoji41]

[Eevo]

So because of the actions of one individual we’re going onto a Cop bashing tangent are we?

this is the experiences people are having with the police. police need to be accountable for their actions and mistakes.

[donh54]

In this state, not sure about NSW, a police officer only has to suspect that a motor vehicle does not meet ADR's in order to defect it. He doesn't have to prove it.

IF he has conducted himself in a less than professional manner....go to a police station and fill out a complaint form. You can't complain about him doing is job, ie suspecting a defect and defecting you for it....but if he has been rude, you can complain about that.

As for jumping out of a vehicle, and thrusting a recording device in an officers face, whilst demanding his name and number...yes you can do it...but I can tell you from experience, it is going to cost you a fine and a defect, when it could merely have been a friendly chat that you were pulled over for.

Police officers are human, yes there are some over zealous ones...but there are a lot who are reasonable. But if you get their backs up, even the reasonable ones will sting you.

Where did I say you "thrust a recording device in his face"?
Unless his actions warrant otherwise, I am always polite. Getting out of the vehicle, licence and logbook (if required) in hand, and recording device in the shirt pocket, and moving to a safe area (preferably in view of the dash cam). Stick your hand out, and introduce yourself, due the conditioned response in most people, you now have their name recorded. This also gives you the chance to judge their current mood/attitude.
If things appear to be escalating, or their attitude warrants it, I usually ask if they're recording it. Their response is always positive - it's a requirement for them nowadays. I then inform them that I am too, for the reasons stated earlier.
If they write you a ticket, read it before they leave. Make sure their name and other details are legible. I usually tell them to write it as a court summons, not a ticket, because I will be opposing it in court. (Unless it's a "fair cop" for something you are actually guilty of).
Most cops are fine, but the ones that aren't can cost you a months wages or more, just by being arseholes. That's where the recording is an insurance policy.
You do not need to inform someone you are recording them (provided you are a party to the conversation). How you use the recording is the bit the law is about. Use in a court of law is generally permissible.

[Gordie]

Where did I say you "thrust a recording device in his face"?
Unless his actions warrant otherwise, I am always polite. Getting out of the vehicle, licence and logbook (if required) in hand, and recording device in the shirt pocket, and moving to a safe area (preferably in view of the dash cam). Stick your hand out, and introduce yourself, due the conditioned response in most people, you now have their name recorded. This also gives you the chance to judge their current mood/attitude.
If things appear to be escalating, or their attitude warrants it, I usually ask if they're recording it. Their response is always positive - it's a requirement for them nowadays. I then inform them that I am too, for the reasons stated earlier.
If they write you a ticket, read it before they leave. Make sure their name and other details are legible. I usually tell them to write it as a court summons, not a ticket, because I will be opposing it in court. (Unless it's a "fair cop" for something you are actually guilty of).
Most cops are fine, but the ones that aren't can cost you a months wages or more, just by being arseholes. That's where the recording is an insurance policy.
You do not need to inform someone you are recording them (provided you are a party to the conversation). How you use the recording is the bit the law is about. Use in a court of law is generally permissible.Good advice Don....that's the way to play it.

Nice people sometimes talk themselves out of a fine...
Obnoxious people always talk themselves into a fine.

[Redback]

From New South Wales Government (http://www.nsw.gov.au/)NSW legislation (https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/)

NSW Legislation (https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/regulation/2017/451/sch2/inDoc1/part7)


88 External cabin lights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 88; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 101)


(1) A motor vehicle fitted with front clearance lights may also have additional forward-facing lights on or above the roof of its cabin.

(2) The additional forward-facing lights must be spaced evenly between the front clearance lights, with their centres at least 120 millimetres apart.

(3) When on, an additional forward-facing light must:
(a) show a yellow or white light, and

(b) not use over 7 watts power.

[weeds]

Overall I think it’s just keeping up with the Jones with all the things we bolt into our cars....the advertising is working.

We have had our current defender for 18 months, I still have fitted lights sitting in my garage (light bar and a set of FYRLYT 5000). I will fit one or the other, wifes want light bar and I want FYRLYT’s but for us I cannot see the need for anything over and above one fitting.

I do a fair amount of country roads in my work hi-lux (will be heading to mikes tonight) and all it has is a set of FYRLYT 5000’s. These have been more than enough.

[Scouse]

I wonder how this would go with today's police? 'Factory' roof lights:
136820

[Tombie]

I wonder how this would go with today's police? 'Factory' roof lights:
136820

Went fine [emoji41] I had one remember.

[Tombie]

this is the experiences people are having with the police. police need to be accountable for their actions and mistakes.

Perhaps you need to self reflect and ask:
“Am I passing the ****wit test?”

I’ve been pulled over 5-10 times in the last 5 years and never driven away with a fine or defect.

The officers that are ball busters are few and far between.

For the majority, it’s how you set up the conversation that sets the tone for you interaction...

[Tombie]

I wonder how this would go with today's police? 'Factory' roof lights:
136820

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/02/723.jpg

[101RRS]

From New South Wales Government (http://www.nsw.gov.au/)NSW legislation (https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/)

NSW Legislation (https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/regulation/2017/451/sch2/inDoc1/part7)


88 External cabin lights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 88; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 101)


(1) A motor vehicle fitted with front clearance lights may also have additional forward-facing lights on or above the roof of its cabin.

(2) The additional forward-facing lights must be spaced evenly between the front clearance lights, with their centres at least 120 millimetres apart.

(3) When on, an additional forward-facing light must:
(a) show a yellow or white light, and

(b) not use over 7 watts power.




That is referring to clearance lights not light bars or driving lights.

[trout1105]

Perhaps you need to self reflect and ask:
“Am I passing the ****wit test?”

I’ve been pulled over 5-10 times in the last 5 years and never driven away with a fine or defect.

The officers that are ball busters are few and far between.

For the majority, it’s how you set up the conversation that sets the tone for you interaction...

I couldn't have said it better Mate [thumbsupbig]

[Eevo]

Perhaps you need to self reflect and ask:
“Am I passing the ****wit test?”

I’ve been pulled over 5-10 times in the last 5 years and never driven away with a fine or defect.

The officers that are ball busters are few and far between.

For the majority, it’s how you set up the conversation that sets the tone for you interaction...

i prefer the, "am i following the law" test


the majority of officers are fine.

over the years, every time an officer handed me a fine, i took it to court and the police were found to be incorrect. some officers just dont know the law.

[Mick_Marsh]

That is referring to clearance lights not light bars or driving lights.
And they must be red.


84 Performance of tail lights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 84; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 97)


(1) When on, a tail light of a vehicle must:

(a) show a red light visible 200 metres from the rear of the vehicle, and


(b) not use over 7 watts power.

(2) A tail light fitted to a street rod vehicle may incorporate a blue lens not over 20 millimetres in diameter.

Yes. Being facetious.

Please read the rules.

It is interesting that it mentions all manner of lights but driving lights.
Could a driving light be considered a head light under these rules?
Full Text:

Division 3 Headlights


73 Headlights to be fitted to vehicles(cf ALVSR 2015 r 73; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 86)


(1) A motor vehicle must be fitted with:

(a) 1 low-beam headlight if it is a moped, motor bike, or motor trike with 1 front wheel, or


(b) a pair of low-beam headlights if it has 4 or more wheels or is a motor trike, except a moped, with 2 front wheels.

(2) If a motor vehicle built after 1934 can travel at over 60 kilometres an hour:

(a) each low-beam headlight mentioned in subrule (1) must be able to work in the high-beam position, or


(b) the vehicle must be fitted with:

(i) 1 headlight that can work in the high-beam position if the vehicle is required to have 1 low-beam headlight, or


(ii) a pair of headlights that can work in the high-beam position.

(3) A motor bike may be equipped with a headlight modulation system that:

(a) varies the brightness of its high-beam headlight or low-beam headlight, but not both, at a rate of at least 200 and at most 280 flashes a minute, and


(b) is designed to operate only in daylight.

(4) Additional headlights may be fitted to a motor bike or motor trike, or a motor vehicle with 4 or more wheels that was built before 1970.

(5) Additional pairs of headlights may be fitted to a motor vehicle with 4 or more wheels that was built after 1969.

(6) Despite rule 25B and any requirement of the third edition ADR, an emergency services vehicle may be fitted with headlights or additional headlights that are capable of flashing if:

(a) the headlights flash only when on low beam, and


(b) the headlights are wired to operate in conjunction with any flashing or rotating lights fitted to the vehicle as permitted by rule 114 (4).

(7) In this rule, an emergency services vehicle means any of the following:

(a) a police vehicle,


(b) an ambulance,


(c) a firefighting vehicle,


(d) a Red Cross vehicle used for conveyance of blood for urgent transfusions,


(e) a mines rescue or other rescue vehicle,


(f) another vehicle that is an emergency vehicle within the meaning of the Road Rules 2014.


74 How headlights are to be fitted(cf ALVSR 2015 r 74; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 87)


(1) The centres of low-beam headlights fitted as a pair on a motor vehicle with 4 or more wheels must be at least 600 millimetres apart.

(2) However, subrule (1) does not apply to a motor vehicle built before 1970 if the centres of its low-beam headlights:

(a) were under 600 millimetres apart when the vehicle was built, and


(b) are not nearer than they were when the vehicle was built.

(3) Each low-beam headlight of a pair on a motor trike (except a moped) with 2 front wheels must not be over 400 millimetres from the nearer side of the vehicle.

(4) The centre of a low-beam headlight fitted to a motor vehicle built after June 1953 must be:

(a) at least 500 millimetres above ground level, and


(b) not over 1.4 metres above ground level.


75 How single headlights are to be fitted(cf ALVSR 2015 r 75; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 88)


(1) A motor bike or trike with a single headlight fitted must have the light fitted in the centre.

(2) Subrule (1) applies to a motor bike with an attached sidecar as if the sidecar were not attached.


76 NSW rule: how additional headlights are to be fitted(cf 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 89)

If 2 or more additional headlights are fitted to a motor vehicle with 4 or more wheels, the additional headlights must as far as possible be fitted in pairs.


77 Performance of headlights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 77; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 90)


(1) When on, a headlight, or additional headlight, fitted to a vehicle must:

(a) show only white light, and


(b) project its main beam of light ahead of the vehicle.

(2) Headlights must be fitted to a vehicle so their light does not reflect off the vehicle into the driver’s eyes.


78 Effective range of headlights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 78; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 91)


(1) This rule applies to a headlight that is on at night.

(2) A low-beam headlight must illuminate the road ahead of the vehicle for at least 25 metres.

(3) A high-beam headlight must illuminate the road ahead of the vehicle for at least 50 metres.

(4) However, a low-beam headlight fitted to a motor vehicle built before 1931, or a moped, need only illuminate the road ahead of the vehicle for 12 metres.


79 Changing headlights from high-beam to low-beam position(cf ALVSR 2015 r 79; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 92)


(1) A motor vehicle built after 1934 that can travel at over 60 kilometres an hour must be fitted with:

(a) a dipping device enabling the driver in the normal driving position:

(i) to change the headlights from the high-beam position to the low-beam position, or


(ii) simultaneously to switch off a high-beam headlight and switch on a low-beam headlight, and


(b) for a vehicle built after June 1953—a device to indicate to the driver that the headlights are in the high-beam position.

(2) A headlight fitted to a vehicle not fitted with a dipping device mentioned in subrule (1) (a) must operate in the low-beam position.

(3) When a headlight fitted to a vehicle is switched to the low-beam position, any other headlight on the vehicle must operate only in the low-beam position or be off.

(4) In this rule:
alternative headlight means a light which is lighted in the place of a headlight by a dipping device.

dipping device means a device by which the driver of a motor vehicle, while retaining his or her normal driving position:

(a) can cause the main beam of light projected by each of the headlights of a motor vehicle which has 2 headlights or by the headlight of a motor vehicle which has one headlight to be dipped, or


(b) can extinguish each of the headlights of a motor vehicle which has 2 headlights or the headlight of a motor vehicle which has one headlight, and simultaneously light 2 alternative headlights or one alternative headlight (as the case may be), or


(c) can extinguish each set of headlights where a motor vehicle has 4 headlights, in sets of 2, and simultaneously light one light in each set.

[DiscoMick]

Federal law triumphs state law so I still think if it came to a legal battle it would go back to ADR13 7.3.4 which says 'driving lights', which include lightbars, must be 'at the front of the vehicle', which is not on the roof.

[Homestar]

Federal law triumphs state law so I still think if it came to a legal battle it would go back to ADR13 7.3.4 which says 'driving lights', which include lightbars, must be 'at the front of the vehicle', which is not on the roof.

The roof is at the front of my 101, so I can run them legally right? [wink11]

[trout1105]

Seriously Guys I can't see a desperate need to have a set of driving lights fitted to the roof IF you already have a decent set of driving/spot lights fitted to the front of the truck as in the OP's case.
IF the front lights are not doing the job add a lightbar or upgrade the existing spot/driving lights.
IF having them fitted to the roof is going to cause you conflict and angst with the local constabulary, Is it REALY worth the hassles fighting this through the courts?
You have to also remember that in the case of small town IF you **** the local Copper off He/She WILL Eventually get you for something [bigwhistle]

[Redback]

That is referring to clearance lights not light bars or driving lights.

It may be Garry, but for NSW it's the only info I can find, and could be part of this rule;

77 Performance of headlights(cf ALVSR 2015 r 77; 2007 reg Sch 2 cl 90)



(1) When on, a headlight, or additional headlight, fitted to a vehicle must:
(a) show only white light, and

(b) project its main beam of light ahead of the vehicle.

(2) Headlights must be fitted to a vehicle so their light does not reflect off the vehicle into the driver’s eyes.


BTW if you have roof lights and you go into another with the rule no roof top lights, you will be deemed illegal in that State.

[Mick_Marsh]

Federal law triumphs state law so I still think if it came to a legal battle it would go back to ADR13 7.3.4 which says 'driving lights', which include lightbars, must be 'at the front of the vehicle', which is not on the roof.
There was a clarification document (I think Garry may have linked to it) that defined the front of the vehicle as being the front half.
Think about it. We are mounting these lights on the roof in front of the front seats. That's front, right?

[Mick_Marsh]

BTW if you have roof lights and you go into another with the rule no roof top lights, you will be deemed illegal in that State.
I thought we had put that myth to bed in another thread.
Get a NSW registration - Registration - Roads - Roads and Maritime Services (http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/registration/get-nsw-registration/index.html)

Interstate vehicles

Any vehicle (including a caravan or trailer), which is driven on NSW roads must be registered in NSW. An exemption to this requirement applies when the vehicle is:

temporarily in NSW, and
currently registered in another state (‘the home state’), and
displaying all the number plates and registration labels required by the home state.
They can't defect a vehicle that does not comply with state registration rules when it doesn't need to be registered in that state.
The vehicle is considered to be exempt from registration in that state because it is currently registered in another state.
As has been stated before, do they expect me to get a "blue slip" each time I visit NSW? No, because my Victorian registered vehicles are exempt from NSW registration whilst I drive them in NSW.

[p38arover]

I was talking to a mechanic at KLR Automotive today. He got defected in Richmond, NSW (same as OP) for having a LR army "workshop tray" on the back of his Defender crewcab, i.e., one of these:

136841

The inspector at the RMS said the copper didn't know what he was talking about and the Defender was perfectly legal.

[Mick_Marsh]

I was talking to a mechanic at KLR Automotive today. He got defected in Richmond, NSW (same as OP) for having a LR army "workshop tray" on the back of his Defender crewcab, i.e., one of these:

136841

The inspector at the RMS said the copper didn't know what he was talking about and the Defender was perfectly legal.
I assume there is a fine with the defect.
If the defect is determined to be not valid by RMS, is the fine still valid and to be paid? What happens to the victim when two persons in authority disagree?

[DiscoMick]

I thought we had put that myth to bed in another thread.
Get a NSW registration - Registration - Roads - Roads and Maritime Services (http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/registration/get-nsw-registration/index.html)

They can't defect a vehicle that does not comply with state registration rules when it doesn't need to be registered in that state.
The vehicle is considered to be exempt from registration in that state because it is currently registered in another state.
As has been stated before, do they expect me to get a "blue slip" each time I visit NSW? No, because my Victorian registered vehicles are exempt from NSW registration whilst I drive them in NSW.I understood that clause was about recognising interstate registration, not defects, and an interstate registered vehicle could still be defected in another state. A vehicle can be registered, but still have a defect.
For example, Queensland doesn't have annual registration inspections, so a registered vehicle can be driving around with only one headlight (see them all the time). Cross the border to Tweed Heads and it could still be defected for the faulty headlight, even if it is registered in Qld.
Ridiculous I know, but that's our dumb system.

[Mick_Marsh]

I understood that clause was about recognising interstate registration, not defects, and an interstate registered vehicle could still be defected in another state. A vehicle can be registered, but still have a defect.
For example, Queensland doesn't have annual registration inspections, so a registered vehicle can be driving around with only one headlight (see them all the time). Cross the border to Tweed Heads and it could still be defected for the faulty headlight, even if it is registered in Qld.
Ridiculous I know, but that's our dumb system.
So, it is legal to drive in Queensland with a faulty headlight (or some other defect) and not be defected. That is what you are implying.

In Vic., the vehicle is only roadworthied at change of ownership. From then, it is the responsibility of the owner to keep the vehicle in a roadworthy state. If you drive around with a faulty light, the police can stop you and defect (yellow canary) the vehicle. Victoria also doesn't have "annual registration inspections" or roadworthies.

In Victoria, if a vehicle meets the conditions of registration in it's state, it can drive on Victorian roads. The same can be said for NSW. If that was not the case, I would need a current "blue slip" every time I crossed the border into NSW. Homestar would need to have current certification for the gas system in his caravan whenever he took it into NSW.

[Tins]

Getting out of the vehicle, licence and logbook (if required) in hand,

I agree with every word of your post, Don, but nowadays in certain places Police will see that bit as threatening behaviour.

[Tins]

Perhaps you need to self reflect and ask:
“Am I passing the ****wit test?”



Obviously, a truck driver will fail that test, as he is a truck driver. Sigh, I wish that I had had your experiences, Tombie.

[Tins]

I understood that clause was about recognising interstate registration, not defects, and an interstate registered vehicle could still be defected in another state. A vehicle can be registered, but still have a defect.
For example, Queensland doesn't have annual registration inspections, so a registered vehicle can be driving around with only one headlight (see them all the time). Cross the border to Tweed Heads and it could still be defected for the faulty headlight, even if it is registered in Qld.
Ridiculous I know, but that's our dumb system.

Faulty lights, bald tyres etc. are illegal in every state, last time I checked. This is not the same thing as fitment issues.

An example of Mick's point, talk to a NSW Highway Patrol or RMS officer about Load Restraint curtains.

[Eevo]

I assume there is a fine with the defect.
If the defect is determined to be not valid by RMS, is the fine still valid and to be paid? What happens to the victim when two persons in authority disagree?


in SA, there is no fine with a defect, but a booking payment must be made for an inspection to happen. about $200. so even if the inspection says everything is good, your still need to pay.

[Gordie]

in SA, there is no fine with a defect, but a booking payment must be made for an inspection to happen. about $200. so even if the inspection says everything is good, your still need to pay.You are right, there generally isn't a fine with a defect here, but there is an expiation code for contravening vehicle standards...which is not often given out with defects...but if you upset the copper enough...you may find that you get that fine.
And there is an option for minor defects to be cleared at a police station, which is a lot less than that fee for the inspection station.

[DiscoMick]

Faulty lights, bald tyres etc. are illegal in every state, last time I checked. This is not the same thing as fitment issues.

An example of Mick's point, talk to a NSW Highway Patrol or RMS officer about Load Restraint curtains.

That's true, but the headlight example was just meant to be a simple example of how an interstate registered vehicle can still be defected.
In the case of lightbars, it appears a bar that is legal in one state might be said to be illegal in another, even if the vehicle is registered, simply by where it is placed.

[DiscoMick]

So, it is legal to drive in Queensland with a faulty headlight (or some other defect) and not be defected. That is what you are implying.

In Vic., the vehicle is only roadworthied at change of ownership. From then, it is the responsibility of the owner to keep the vehicle in a roadworthy state. If you drive around with a faulty light, the police can stop you and defect (yellow canary) the vehicle. Victoria also doesn't have "annual registration inspections" or roadworthies.

In Victoria, if a vehicle meets the conditions of registration in it's state, it can drive on Victorian roads. The same can be said for NSW. If that was not the case, I would need a current "blue slip" every time I crossed the border into NSW. Homestar would need to have current certification for the gas system in his caravan whenever he took it into NSW.

No, a registered vehicle can still have a defect, such as a faulty headlight, and could be defected in Queensland. I wish more one-eyed vehicles were defected, frankly. They are a plague around the suburbs because the streetlights mean people don't realise their light is out.

[DiscoMick]

I was just trying to make the point, very badly, that even if a vehicle is registered in one state, it can still be defected in another state.

I also found this, if it hasn't already been posted.

4X4 News: LED Light Bar Laws in Western Australia - Pat Callinan's 4X4 Adventures (https://mr4x4.com.au/4x4-news-led-light-bar-laws-in-western-australia/)

[DiscoMick]

This Queensland Police statement is a bit confusing.

file://gcc-fs-01/StaffHomes$/mseco8128/Downloads/L153.pdf

Particularly this paragraph:

The placement of driving lamps and associatedbrackets must not increase the risk of injury topedestrians. Driving lamps must not be fitted tothe top of a bull bar above the forward bonnetline, or protruding forward of the bumper bar orbull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone.

I think there are two ways to interpret this paragraph:

1. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars full stop

2. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars if they are "above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone".

My lightbar is below the bonnet line. My lightbar is behind the top hoop of the bull bar. I doubt if it would change the profile of the impact zone because a pedestrian would probably first hit the bull bar, not the lightbar. Does that mean lightbar which is not above the bonnet line or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bullbar is OK mounted on top of a bullbar hoop?

Who knows?

Queensland Police have interpreted it as option 1, a flat ban on lightbars above the top hoop of the bullbar.
Spotlights and bullbars don't mix - Far North (https://mypolice.qld.gov.au/farnorth/2016/02/03/spotlights-bullbars-dont-mix/)

Honestly, I think because of the wording it would take a court case to determine.

[trout1105]

My lightbar is fitted on the two top Arial mounts on my ARB bullbar, I find it a bit odd that the lightbar is Not legal fitted there But if I had 2 thumping big ariels fitted to these mounts they would be legal.
I would think that the ariels would inflict more damage than the lightbar But if a Copper decides that the lightbar shouldn't be there I would simply remove it on the spot just to keep the peace.

[DiscoMick]

This Queensland Police statement is a bit confusing.

file://gcc-fs-01/StaffHomes$/mseco8128/Downloads/L153.pdf

Particularly this paragraph:

The placement of driving lamps and associated brackets must not increase the risk of injury to pedestrians. Driving lamps must not be fitted to the top of a bull bar above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone.


I think there are two ways to interpret this paragraph:

1. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars full stop

2. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars if they are "above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone".

My lightbar is below the bonnet line. My lightbar is behind the top hoop of the bull bar. I doubt if it would change the profile of the impact zone because a pedestrian would probably first hit the bull bar, not the lightbar. Does that mean a lightbar which is not above the bonnet line or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bullbar is OK mounted on top of a bullbar hoop?

Who knows?

Queensland Police have interpreted it as option 1, a flat ban on lightbars above the top hoop of the bullbar.
Spotlights and bullbars don't mix - Far North (https://mypolice.qld.gov.au/farnorth/2016/02/03/spotlights-bullbars-dont-mix/)

Honestly, I think because of the wording it could take a court case to determine.

[p38arover]

I would think that the ariels would inflict more damage than the lightbar

They certainly could!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/02/745.jpg

[Geedublya]

They certainly could!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/02/745.jpg

A Square Four would be better, more mass!

[vnx205]

A Square Four would be better, more mass!

Happy now? :)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/02/746.jpg

[Geedublya]

A lovely example.

[Ancient Mariner]

A Square Four would be better, more mass!
Much more massier 390 Ford Galaxy


AM

[101RRS]

Sorry - what have bikes got to do with Defect Notices for Roof Rack Lights? Can bikes have roof racks and lights on them?

[Toxic_Avenger]

Anything's possible... with a welder and some imagination [biggrin]

Still... it'd be like winning the special olympics...

[Tins]

I wish more one-eyed vehicles were defected, frankly. They are a plague around the suburbs because the streetlights mean people don't realise their light is out.

Damned sight worse on the highway, when they fool you into thinking it's a car far away, when it's actually quite close.

[Tins]

Sorry - what have bikes got to do with Defect Notices for Roof Rack Lights? Can bikes have roof racks and lights on them?

It's called watch your spelling. Ron was quick on the uptake there.

[DiscoMick]

Sorry - what have bikes got to do with Defect Notices for Roof Rack Lights? Can bikes have roof racks and lights on them?Motorcycles are covered by lighting laws.

[The Cone of Silence]

I assume there is a fine with the defect.
If the defect is determined to be not valid by RMS, is the fine still valid and to be paid? What happens to the victim when two persons in authority disagree?

No fine Mick, just a defect notice.

The delightful Sergeant Breaden insists though, that a full vehicle inspection is required, perhaps because he didn't receive enough attention at as a child...so the cost is for the full inspection, taking time out of one's day etc. He only gives you a week to get it done too, which is a little unreasonable I think, given how busy most mechanics and inspection facilities are.

[Gordie]

He only gives you a week to get it done too, which is a little unreasonable I think, given how busy most mechanics and inspection facilities are.Not sure how things work in your state, but here, if you have the defect rectified and you have made an appointment for the inspection, you are allowed to continue driving. That covers the inevitable delay in inspection appointments. Might be worth looking into.

[Bigbjorn]

This Queensland Police statement is a bit confusing.

file://gcc-fs-01/StaffHomes$/mseco8128/Downloads/L153.pdf

Particularly this paragraph:

The placement of driving lamps and associated brackets must not increase the risk of injury to pedestrians. Driving lamps must not be fitted to the top of a bull bar above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone.


I think there are two ways to interpret this paragraph:

1. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars full stop

2. Lightbars can't be fitted to the top of bullbars if they are "above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone".

My lightbar is below the bonnet line. My lightbar is behind the top hoop of the bull bar. I doubt if it would change the profile of the impact zone because a pedestrian would probably first hit the bull bar, not the lightbar. Does that mean a lightbar which is not above the bonnet line or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bullbar is OK mounted on top of a bullbar hoop?

Who knows?

Queensland Police have interpreted it as option 1, a flat ban on lightbars above the top hoop of the bullbar.
Spotlights and bullbars don't mix - Far North (https://mypolice.qld.gov.au/farnorth/2016/02/03/spotlights-bullbars-dont-mix/)

Honestly, I think because of the wording it could take a court case to determine.

Have a look on Qld. Dept. of Transport and Main Roads web site or get a copy of their publications "Modifications - All about modifications to motor vehicles". It says "Driving lights/brackets must not protrude forward from the front face of any bumper or above the top of any bull bar." Items such as fishing rod holders must not intrude on the driver's line of sight and must be removed or retracted behind the profile of the bull bar when not in use. Must be only on the left side and carry no more than four rods. Don't fit anything that can be seen from the position of the driver's eyes.

I don't know what the rules are for roof top lights. They were definitely not approved of up until a few years ago. I personally dislike them having been dazzled by them too many times in my trucking days. They are just at the right height to be squarely in the eyes of a truck driver. That is why I liked to have a Unity spotlight on my trucks. You can swivel one to aim directly into the eyes of the oncoming mongrel who won't dip their lights. Also turn them around to shine on the mongrel behind who won't dip his lights. Check them out on Welcome to UnityUSA.com (http://www.unityusa.com)

[p38arover]

No fine Mick, just a defect notice.

The delightful Sergeant Breaden insists though, that a full vehicle inspection is required, perhaps because he didn't receive enough attention at as a child...so the cost is for the full inspection, taking time out of one's day etc. He only gives you a week to get it done too, which is a little unreasonable I think, given how busy most mechanics and inspection facilities are.

Give KLR Automotive a call. They are at South Windsor and know Land Rovers.

[The Cone of Silence]

Not sure how things work in your state, but here, if you have the defect rectified and you have made an appointment for the inspection, you are allowed to continue driving. That covers the inevitable delay in inspection appointments. Might be worth looking into.


I did just that Gordie; just got back from the RMS whose charming representative informed me that I had to take the blue notice back to the mechanic as he forgot to sign it. UGH. I informed them that this one example of why it's unfair that the Police give such a short time to drive while getting the defect fixed, especially for something so utterly trivial. She agreed....but the RMS and the Police don't see eye-to-eye it would appear. Way to go NSW Government! Great teamwork there.

Anyway, I was told that after the week expires, if I drive my car having not handed in the slip to the RMS yet, I would be driving 'virtually' unregistered and can do so for a month upon which time my registration will be cancelled.
'Virtually unregistered?'
'Yes'
'What does "virtually" mean?'
'It means that if you drive past a Police car, you'll be pulled over and you'll have to explain to them that you've had your defect fixed but you haven't yet submitted the form'

Thus, they give you 7 days to fix the problem but 4 weeks thereafter to take a piece of paper to the RMS. I'm going to get pulled over a LOT given the number of coppers there are roaming around Richmond and Windsor once they've had their fill of donuts.

'So I have to make another appointment, sit here for another 45 minutes waiting to be seen by someone just to hand in a piece of paper?'
'Yes'
'And you don't offer this service online, given that it's 2018, not 1998?
'No'
'Oh. Ok, see you in a few days then!'

They were lovely about it and sympathised but the process is a bit dated and the Police remain belligerent and without reasonable wiggle room in their application of authority. Whatever happened to a good old-fashioned telling off and a promise to fix something that was trusted, eh?

Times have changed since I were a lad.

[101RRS]

However while it is hard to pin down the NSW rules - from the information listed in the thread it would seem that roof top lights are illegal in NSW - even if work lights - I guess that is open to interpretation.

The rules should be clear cut and not ambiguous but unfortunately they are not - I would be asking RMS to produce the references for any advice they have given as there is obviously a difference of opinions in the bureaucracy. I have learnt through bitter experience not to take verbal advice from the people and always get the rules written down on paper.

Best to remove the lights.

Still not sure how these were legally registered from new in all states - I wonder what your cop would do if you had one.

136906

[Bigbjorn]

My lightbar is fitted on the two top Arial mounts on my ARB bullbar, I find it a bit odd that the lightbar is Not legal fitted there But if I had 2 thumping big ariels fitted to these mounts they would be legal.
I would think that the ariels would inflict more damage than the lightbar But if a Copper decides that the lightbar shouldn't be there I would simply remove it on the spot just to keep the peace.

I don't know the rules in WA pertaining to front bar mounted antennae but in Qld. only one is permitted. It must be mounted as far as possible to the left side of the vehicle and only permitted if it is not possible to mount it elsewhere. See Qld. TMR Road Rules, and their Modifications booklet.

Every now and then Qld. Police and Transport Inspectors have a blitz on 4WD's at Rainbow Beach and the island ferries. Lots of people have their holiday plans upset when told not to drive the unroadworthy vehicle and to recover it by towing. They usually look closely at illegal lifts, oversize tyres, track modifications but lights and antennae, bull bars also come under scrutiny. "No mod plate for those alterations, Sir. Here's your fine, and a request to have it examined at the Dept's. facilities within two weeks. You will need to call a tow truck as an illegally modified vehicle is considered to be unregistered."

[Mick_Marsh]

from the information listed in the thread it would seem that roof top lights are illegal in NSW
I disagree. I think the policeman has it wrong.


I would be asking RMS to produce the references for any advice they have given as there is obviously a difference of opinions in the bureaucracy. I have learnt through bitter experience not to take verbal advice from the people and always get the rules written down on paper.
Absolutely


Still not sure how these were legally registered from new in all states - I wonder what your cop would do if you had one.

136906
Because they are within the rules set out by the ADRs.

[cuppabillytea]

I agree Mick. ADRs say lights must be an even number and not shine on the vehicle itself. If I recall correctly.

[Eevo]

I agree Mick. ADRs say lights must be an even number and not shine on the vehicle itself. If I recall correctly.

a single light bar is an odd number though

[trout1105]

You will need to call a tow truck as an illegally modified vehicle is considered to be unregistered."

In the case of a lift or some other modification that would require major work to put the vehicle back to "Spec" I can imagine a tow truck would be needed But in the case of an errant Arial or lightbar/spotlight that could be removed in a couple of minutes the copper would be a complete arsehole to defect you if you were fully prepared to remove the offending bit of kit there and then.

[cuppabillytea]

a single light bar is an odd number though
Good point. Perhaps they pass if made up of an even number of individual lights?

[Bigbjorn]

In the case of a lift or some other modification that would require major work to put the vehicle back to "Spec" I can imagine a tow truck would be needed But in the case of an errant Arial or lightbar/spotlight that could be removed in a couple of minutes the copper would be a complete arsehole to defect you if you were fully prepared to remove the offending bit of kit there and then.

I was referring to major illegal modifications which is what they are really looking for when they have these roadside blitzes on 4WD's. Anything else they find is a bonus. After all is not the principal purpose of a police force to harass the citizens rather than seek out criminals. Power and control. Too many are complete professional practicing a-holes.

[Homestar]

I was referring to major illegal modifications which is what they are really looking for when they have these roadside blitzes on 4WD's. Anything else they find is a bonus. After all is not the principal purpose of a police force to harass the citizens rather than seek out criminals. Power and control. Too many are complete professional practicing a-holes.

I've found most people that find the Police 'Complete professional practicing a-holes' usually are themselves. Wouldn't dream of making that connection here mind you....

[Saitch]

Fair go, you blokes!! Settle down.

Anyway, back to the subject, if you look at Qld rules it states that, because of the introduction of light bars, a light bar is legal.

[DiscoMick]

a single light bar is an odd number thoughPretty sure one of the previous links in this thread said in 2015 the rules were changed to allow a single lightbar and not require pairs.

[Eevo]

Pretty sure one of the previous links in this thread said in 2015 the rules were changed to allow a single lightbar and not require pairs.


thanks mick.

[p38arover]

Pretty sure one of the previous links in this thread said in 2015 the rules were changed to allow a single lightbar and not require pairs.

I believe they were - or one could mask off the centre of the bar to make it look like two. [bigwhistle]

[The Cone of Silence]

However while it is hard to pin down the NSW rules - from the information listed in the thread it would seem that roof top lights are illegal in NSW - even if work lights - I guess that is open to interpretation.



136906

Roof top is fine @garrycol, it's the number that I was exceeding. The amendment to the rule in November suggests that they can be on the roof as long as they don't cause discomfort to the driver from reflection off the vehicle.

Also, they no longer have to be mounted in pairs - this si the 'catch-up' to the LED light bar popularity.

9.3. DRIVING LAMPS
9.3.1. Presence: Optional on motor vehicles. Prohibited on trailers.
9.3.2. Number:
9.3.2.1. Up to a maximum of four.
9.3.2.2. To be used in conjunction with headlamps.
9.3.3. Arrangement:
9.3.3.1. No special requirement.
9.3.4. Position:
9.3.4.1. In width: no individual specifications;
9.3.4.1.1. Be fitted symmetrically in relation to the median longitudinal plane of the vehicle.
9.3.4.2. In height: no individual specifications.
9.3.4.3. In length: At the front of the vehicle. This requirement shall be deemed to be satisfied if the light emitted does not cause discomfort to the driver either directly or indirectly through the devices for indirect vision and/or other reflecting surfaces of the vehicle.
9.3.5. Geometric visibility:
No individual specifications.
9.3.6. Orientation:
Towards the front.
9.3.7. Electrical connections:
The driving lamps must be able to be lighted only when the main-beam headlamps switch is in the “lamps on” position.
9.3.8. Tell tale: No requirement.
9.3.9. Other requirements.

Pasted from <Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 13/00 - Installation of Lighting and Light Signalling Devices on other than L-Group Vehicles) 2005 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017C01072)> IN FORCE - LATEST VERSION November 2017
Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 13/00 - Installation of Lighting and Light Signalling Devices on other than L-Group Vehicles) 2005 (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017C01072/Html/Text#)

[DiscoMick]

It's interesting there is nothing in section 9 to say they can't be on top of the bullbar.

[Bigbjorn]

It's interesting there is nothing in section 9 to say they can't be on top of the bullbar.

The ADR's don't say so but the state registration authorities do.

Single central mount driving lights (Cyclops lights) are now permitted again on new vehicles according to the latest tranch of the ADR's. They were originally permitted in the first tranch, then not in the second tranch. Note that you may not be able to have a Cyclops light on vehicles built in the period covered by the second tranch. You may get in an argument with Police and/or Transport Inspectors over this. I have an '86 County-Isuzu and I had a central single mount 11" Hella marine searchlight for a long range driving light. I took to carrying laminated copy of the relevant section of the ADR's because of the number of times I was pulled over. I also carried a copy of the Brisbane city Council parking regulations regarding buses using loading zones when engaged in carrying cargo. My LR is complianced as a motor omnibus.

[DiscoMick]

Yes, but as I pointed out earlier, Federal law overrules state law.

Also the Queensland wording is unclear because it refers to lightbars not being forward of the bullbar or higher than the bonnet.
Does that mean the lightbar is OK on top if it's behind the front of the bullbar and below the height of the bonnet? See my previous post.
It may all come down to a court case about the absence of a comma in the wording.

[Bigbjorn]

Yes, but as I pointed out earlier, Federal law overrules state law.

Also the Queensland wording is unclear because it refers to lightbars not being forward of the bullbar or higher than the bonnet.
Does that mean the lightbar is OK on top if it's behind the front of the bullbar and below the height of the bonnet? See my previous post.
It may all come down to a court case about the absence of a comma in the wording.

Check again. The Qld. TMR Modifications book says very clearly that lights may not be fitted to the top of any bullbar.

[Mick_Marsh]

Check again. The Qld. TMR Modifications book says very clearly that lights may not be fitted to the top of any bullbar.Which part are you reading?

From TMR:

Driving lamp/s must not be in the driver’s line of sight and must be installed in a way that the light produced does not cause the driver of the vehicle discomfort from glare either directly or by reflection.
So, if it is not in the drivers line of sight and does not cause the driver discomfort, it is ok.

The placement of driving lamps and associated brackets must not increase the risk of injury to pedestrians. Driving lamps must not be fitted to the top of a bull bar above the forward bonnet line, or protruding forward of the bumper bar or bull bar in a way which would adversely change the profile of the impact zone.
So, if the light bar is fitted below the forward bonnet line and behind the bull bar in a way that does not adversely change the profile of the impact zone, it is ok.

Therefore, your statement is incorrect.

[donh54]

I've been having a quiet giggle for years at the "look at me" brigade with their $1000's of dollars worth of spotties protruding from the front of the bullbar. Not only are they likely to lose them to a 'roo strike, but they could get booked as well [bigrolf]

[trout1105]

I've been having a quiet giggle for years at the "look at me" brigade with their $1000's of dollars worth of spotties protruding from the front of the bullbar. Not only are they likely to lose them to a 'roo strike, but they could get booked as well [bigrolf]

Yes the spotties are vulnerable when they are fitted to the bullbar But having them fitted greatly reduces the likelihood of an impact due to the better visibility they impart.
Any decent impact on the bullbar will cost you a new bar and a couple of hundred bucks to replace the spotties is small change compared to the cost of replacing the bullbar So the added costs of fitting spotlights/driving lights is pretty good value considering the extra "Insurance" these provide in preventing an animal strike in the first place [thumbsupbig]

[PhilipA]

When I worked for Baja Racks a few years ago they were developing a "stealth" rack with a hinge at the front and a small electric motor which rotated the spotties around about 90 degrees so they pointed downwards AFAIR.
I note from your picture that you have big round lights, but if you swapped them for rectangular lights and added a hinge to swing them out of the way for urban use , you would probably avoid a lot of drama.
Regards Philip A

[DiscoMick]

Which part are you reading?

From TMR:

So, if it is not in the drivers line of sight and does not cause the driver discomfort, it is ok.

So, if the light bar is fitted below the forward bonnet line and behind the bull bar in a way that does not adversely change the profile of the impact zone, it is ok.

Therefore, your statement is incorrect.I agree with you that it can be interpreted that a lightbar on top is okay if it's below the bonnet level and behind the front face of the bar, but I also recognize the police are stating it can't be on top of the bullbar, so I just don't know, and it may take a court case to get a ruling.
The federal ADR doesn't ban it.
In reality, lots of vehicles have spots, lightbars and fishing rod holders on top, so if that is illegal, it's being widely ignored. Magazines show this all the time, including in ads from lightbars retailers.
It's another example of inconsistency between state laws, I think.

[donh54]

Yes the spotties are vulnerable when they are fitted to the bullbar But having them fitted greatly reduces the likelihood of an impact due to the better visibility they impart.
Any decent impact on the bullbar will cost you a new bar and a couple of hundred bucks to replace the spotties is small change compared to the cost of replacing the bullbar So the added costs of fitting spotlights/driving lights is pretty good value considering the extra "Insurance" these provide in preventing an animal strike in the first place [thumbsupbig]

I have spotties on the bar, too. What I'm talking about are the ones that protrude a loooong way out from the bar. HID lights were particularly bad - I saw more than one set that was at least 200mm past the front of the bar! Crazy!

[DiscoMick]

Legally, it's all about what happens if a pedestrian hits the bar.
A fishing rod holder would slice the person open from navel to neck.
A spotlight was smash into the ribs, possibly fatally.
A flat lightbar would tip the person over onto the bonnet, unless the lightbar was behind the front of the bullbar.

[Eevo]

its about smooth surfaces and not ripping a person open. thats the idea behind the law

[DiscoClax]

its about smooth surfaces and not ripping a person open. thats the idea behind the law...and not impinging on vision zones. Several states specifically mandate that fitment cannot be on top of the bullbar, but most do not. However the ADR has clauses requiring vision zones that need to be maintained (seperate to 13/00). Most, if not all, lights fitted to the top of a bullbar would breach the over bonnet forward vision zones and therefore be illegal. Not all of the regs applying to lighting are in 13/00. There are others that are not specific to lighting that are covered elsewhere.

[Tombie]

...and not impinging on vision zones. Several states specifically mandate that fitment cannot be on top of the bullbar, but most do not. However the ADR has clauses requiring vision zones that need to be maintained (seperate to 31/00). Most, if not all, lights fitted to the top of a bullbar would breach the over bonnet forward vision zones and therefore be illegal. Not all of the regs applying to lighting are in 31/00. There are others that are not specific to lighting that are covered elsewhere.

And before anyone says “I can see just fine” [emoji6]

There is a standard for measuring this from the drivers seat. So whilst some people may be able to see just fine - the standard has a specified “eye height”.

[123rover50]

its about smooth surfaces and not ripping a person open. thats the idea behind the law

Roof rack lights will hardly rip a normal height person open[bighmmm]

[DiscoClax]

And before anyone says “I can see just fine” [emoji6]

There is a standard for measuring this from the drivers seat. So whilst some people may be able to see just fine - the standard has a specified “eye height”.The basics of it are there is a specified form (object) of specified dimensions at a specified distance in front of the vehicle that needs to be visible to a driver of specified height (eye position). So, as Tombie stated, it's not open to interpretation or justification. Like with almost any mod, if you make a change and can't prove the zone is unaffected then it's deemed illegal. Hence the hard line some coppers take. Get an engineer to verify it and carry the paperwork if it might be iffy and you don't want the hassle. Or take your chances...

VSI8 covers most mods and also protrusions for Victorians (edge radii, openings, etc) and (I think?) NCOP14 covers the whole country in the states where NCOP (National Code Of Practice) has been recognised and supersedes state rules. Eventually all states and territories *should* be following the NCOP, but that's up to the individual fiefdoms to accept that or not...

[DiscoMick]

I assume that's why it says that lightbars have to be below bonnet height, to avoid obstructing vision.

BTW in a pedestrian hit the person could certainly go over the windscreen and hit a roof-mounted lightbar.

[Eevo]

Roof rack lights will hardly rip a normal height person open[bighmmm]






BTW in a pedestrian hit the person could certainly go over the windscreen and hit a roof-mounted lightbar.


micks on the ball.

[Mick_Marsh]

BTW in a pedestrian hit the person could certainly go over the windscreen and hit a roof-mounted lightbar.
I'm tipping, should a pedestrian be hit by one of my Landrovers, that pedestrian would be going under, not over.

[trout1105]

I'm tipping, should a pedestrian be hit by one of my Landrovers, that pedestrian would be going under, not over.

I would think that anyone hit by 2.5-3 tone of landrover isn't going anywhere in a hurry [bigwhistle]

[DiscoMick]

Not sure about yours, but my ARB bullbar slopes back at the top, so if I hit a standing adult they would fold at the waist over the bullbar, land on the bonnet and might slide up the windscreen onto the roof.
A child might go under because of being shorter.

[Homestar]

Any pedestrian hit hard enough to fly up into a roof mounted light bar is going to have a REALY bad day regardless...

[Eevo]

Any pedestrian hit hard enough to fly up into a roof mounted light bar is going to have a REALY bad day regardless...
survability rates of people with untorn flesh is greater then people who got turn up.

[Homestar]

Too bad - they shouldn’t walk in front of me with their music blaring in their ears and be hit in the first place...

[Eevo]

Too bad - they shouldn’t walk in front of me with their music blaring in their ears and be hit in the first place...

dont make too many assumptions there.

[Homestar]

Why not? That’s what almost everyone here does! [emoji16]

You don’t want facts starting to cloud the conversation now do you? [emoji56]

[DiscoMick]

Apparently bullbars are a factor in 12% of pedestrian deaths. That would be a city thing, of course.
In the country animal strikes are the issue. I certainly don't fancy having a big roo flailing about on the bonnet.

Five-post bullbar ban pushed back another year | The Land (http://www.theland.com.au/story/4956513/five-post-bullbar-ban-pushed-back-another-year/)

[Mick_Marsh]

Apparently bullbars are a factor in 12% of pedestrian deaths. That would be a city thing, of course.
In the country animal strikes are the issue. I certainly don't fancy having a big roo flailing about on the bonnet.

Five-post bullbar ban pushed back another year | The Land (http://www.theland.com.au/story/4956513/five-post-bullbar-ban-pushed-back-another-year/)
Yep. Ban them.
Four, six and seven post bull bars are ok, though, because they are much safer.
Statistics show seven post bull bars are involved in less deaths than five post bull bars.

Also, those same statistics show pedestrians are involved in 100% of pedestrian deaths and bull bars are only involved in 12% of pedestrian deaths. That is very telling.

[Eevo]

the solution is simple.
ban pedestrians.

[trog]

the solution is simple.
ban pedestrians.

Good idea. Buy me a car then 🤣

[Tombie]

According to statistics You’ll also find a large number of those pedestrians are intoxicated...

[Toxic_Avenger]

You can take my car...
But you'll never take my
JACK DANIELS!!!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/03/60.jpg

[DieselDan]

You can take my car...
But you'll never take my
JACK DANIELS!!!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2018/03/60.jpg


NO NO NO NO NO!!!

Toxic, as the purveyor of the finest booze revooz, I was expecting more of you [tonguewink]

Jack Daniels is whiskEy.
If you're gonna use that pic, you surely need to use whisky....

As in:

You can take my car...
But you'll never take my CHIVAS REGAL!!

[Redback]

NO NO NO NO NO!!!

Toxic, as the purveyor of the finest booze revooz, I was expecting more of you [tonguewink]

Jack Daniels is whiskEy.
If you're gonna use that pic, you surely need to use whisky....

As in:

You can take my car...
But you'll never take my CHIVAS REGAL!!

NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Irish is Whiskey, Bourbon is swill made for Rednecks and bogans:spudnikhurler:

[cuppabillytea]

NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Irish is Whiskey, Bourbon is swill made for Rednecks and bogans:spudnikhurler:

Mel's not a bogan. He's what bogans aspire to be.[bigwhistle]

[p38arover]

Single central mount driving lights (Cyclops lights) are now permitted again on new vehicles according to the latest tranch of the ADR's. They were originally permitted in the first tranch, then not in the second tranch.

One assumes "Cyclops" Rovers are OK. [smilebigeye]

Should that be "tranche" - which generally refers to finance?

137202

[V8Ian]

One assumes "Cyclops" Rovers are OK. [smilebigeye]



137202
Manufactured between '49 and '52, I think they just scraped in before ADRs came into play. [wink11]

[Tote]

NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Irish is Whiskey, Bourbon is swill made for Rednecks and bogans:spudnikhurler:

And Jack Daniels is not bourbon[bigsmile1]

Regards,
Tote

[pop058]

Manufactured between '49 and '52, I think they just scraped in before ADRs came into play. [wink11]

48 [biggrin]

137311

[V8Ian]

Were P3s ever referred to as Cyclops?

[pop058]

Were P3s ever referred to as Cyclops?

P3s were made in 48 and 49. Our 48 has been in the family for 30 odd years. My Dad always called it a Cyclops but I have heard to the contrary from a few (knowledgeable) sources. Many years ago, I was trying register it at Wodonga transport and the inspector would not pass it until I removed the light despite me being able to prove it was factory fit. He even offered to lend me the tools to do the job.

[The Cone of Silence]

Update

I removed the two middle lights from the roof rack, leaving a total of four driving lights on the car - two in front of the grill and two up top. I saw the delightful Sergeant Breaden drive past me yesterday and he didn't pull me over, so everything must be cushty.

I'm going to take the remaining two off the roof rack though and replace them with a light bar which has a forward facing beam section in the middle but much wider spread at the sides. When driving in the thick bush at night which I've done more times than I care to count, I've found all the forward facing lights don't help at all when I'm trying to find a barely worn track off to the right or left...so the curved bar should help.

It's only a cheap one so I'll take it apart when I get it and silicone the bejeezus out of it and mount it on contact rubber to help with excessive vibrations. If it still breaks or leaks and destroys itself, I've not really lost anything.

Once I'm confident that Sergeant Breaden hasn't got anything to say about it, I'll either sell my HID spotties or find somethign amusing to so with them like put them on my Postie bike

[DiscoMick]

I've been amazed at how much light my cheap lightbar on the bullbar throws out to the roadsides. It makes a huge difference. So the lightbar doesn't need to be on the roof rack to be effective.

[Saitch]

A mate had a bar on his roof rack and after comparing his spread to mine, which is on the bar of the D1, moved his to the bar, the reason being that the flatter angle of the beam gave a lower and better side spread.
Mine is also designed for centre and side as we live rurally. Probably only use it once or twice a month.

[trout1105]

If you combine a couple of decent spotlights with a lightbar on the roobar there is No need for lights mounted on the roof [thumbsupbig]

[CraigE]

Manufactured between '49 and '52, I think they just scraped in before ADRs came into play. [wink11]
Ian,
The cyclops Rover was the first of the P4 variety 1949-1952.
We have 3 of the later variety non cyclops P4s (Unrestored at present)
The guys over here that have them have no issue getting them registered as factory.
Generally the police over here are not interested in lights and pulling people over, unless being used unreasonably
Cheers
Craig.

[CraigE]

P3s were made in 48 and 49. Our 48 has been in the family for 30 odd years. My Dad always called it a Cyclops but I have heard to the contrary from a few (knowledgeable) sources. Many years ago, I was trying register it at Wodonga transport and the inspector would not pass it until I removed the light despite me being able to prove it was factory fit. He even offered to lend me the tools to do the job.

Pop,
The Cyclops was 49-52 P4 variety.
The P3 was completely different shape and as far as I know never came out with a centre light from factory. Yes would love a P3. We have P4s.

[scarry]

Pop,
The Cyclops was 49-52 P4 variety.
The P3 was completely different shape and as far as I know never came out with a centre light from factory. Yes would love a P3. We have P4s.

Weren't they a rover 90 or 75?
Built mid to late 50's?

We had one when i was a kid,had a dial thing that disengaged the transmission on over run or something like that.

[pop058]

Weren't they a rover 90 or 75?
Built mid to late 50's?

We had one when i was a kid,had a dial thing that disengaged the transmission on over run or something like that.

My P3 is a 75 (6 cyl), also came out as a 60(4 cyl). The dial thing is a freewheel thing which allows (after initial take off) to change gears without using the clutch.

[pop058]

Pop,
The Cyclops was 49-52 P4 variety.
The P3 was completely different shape and as far as I know never came out with a centre light from factory. Yes would love a P3. We have P4s.

I have seen a few P3s first hand and(probably) more than a hundred pics of them and do not recall ever seeing one without the centre light. I have an original owners manual in the car so I will drag it out on the weekend and check.

[V8Ian]

The centre light was standard fitment on all P3s, but they weren't called Cyclops.
Craig, P3 60 was 1600cc four pot, 75 a 2 litre 6.

[scarry]

Getting way off topic here.....again[biggrin]

Have a look at this.Rover P4 - Classic Car Review | Honest John (https://classics.honestjohn.co.uk/reviews/rover/p4/)

Ours was a P4,75,that was daily driver,we had another two that were in pieces,i am sure one was a 90.

Some had a centre light,maybe an option?

[Redback]

And Jack Daniels is not bourbon[bigsmile1]

Regards,
Tote

Same stuff different state.:rulez:

[CraigE]

I have seen a few P3s first hand and(probably) more than a hundred pics of them and do not recall ever seeing one without the centre light. I have an original owners manual in the car so I will drag it out on the weekend and check.
I am Mistaken but I thought they were an accessory option on the P3s? Usually fitted to the front bar not part of the body. A lot of cars from the 30's 40's had options of a centre driving light. The p4s were standard and part of the body work as a Cyclops. In the club circles the P4 is refered to as the Cyclops.. The guy I bought a couple of P4s had a P2 and P3s. His restored ones did have bar mounted lights, the resto did not have one on buyt may have been just missing.

137409

137410

137411

[CraigE]

The centre light was standard fitment on all P3s, but they weren't called Cyclops.
Craig, P3 60 was 1600cc four pot, 75 a 2 litre 6.
Yeah the guy I got 2 P4s from had a P3 75 2 litre fully restored, but as said the P3 were not the ones referred to as the cyclops that was the first of the P4s. His did have a spot light on the front bar as did a lot of British cars from this era.
We have a P4 90 - 1957 2.6 litre
A P4 100 61 3 litre
A donor P4 61 had a 186 Holden in it
Plus 3 spare engines 1 x 3 litre and 2 2.6 litres.

[CraigE]

Weren't they a rover 90 or 75?
Built mid to late 50's?

We had one when i was a kid,had a dial thing that disengaged the transmission on over run or something like that.

P4s started 1949 with the cyclops.
Various versions evolved
60, 75, 80, 90, 95, 100, 105, 105R, 105S & 110 variants.
We have a complete 57 90, complete 61 100, and a 61 100 Donor car (disc brake front end for the 57).

The P4s were 49/64 - the cyclops being 49/52. Have the workshop manual for these.
The P3s were 48/49
The P2s were 37/48
The P1 were 33/38 (just missed out on one a while back).
Cheers
Craig