The Rain Light & MSA Rant Thread - Page 8

terence · 22 Nov 2007, 13:32 (Ref:2073505)

Has the £40k for death risen?

**Tim Falce** · 22 Nov 2007, 14:02 (Ref:2073537)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rod Birley

I pointed out the case for road going cars which also used for racing. Would these LED lights be "road legal" as far as an MOT inspector is concerned.

Errrrrrrrr, hmmmmmm,ummmmmm, should be OK for an MOT

Reasons for failure;

6. A mandatory rear fog lamp
a. is missing, does not emit a steady red light or emits a light other than red
b. incomplete, not in good working order or not visible from a reasonable distance
c. is insecure, obscured or not facing to
the rear
d. flickers when tapped lightly by hand e. tell-tale does not work
f. adversely affected by the operation of
any other lamp.
7. A rear fog lamp switch
a. missing
b. faulty
c. insecure
d. not able to be operated from the normal driving position

greenamex2 · 22 Nov 2007, 14:08 (Ref:2073541)

Quote:

Originally Posted by falcemob

Errrrrrrrr, hmmmmmm.

Only if they are E marked and been through an exhaustive EC test.

Probably not then.

JimW · 22 Nov 2007, 14:09 (Ref:2073542)

Quote:

Originally Posted by terence bower

Has the £40k for death risen?

I don't think your figure of £40k was for death but rather for disablement? The figure for death was £10k.

From 2008 appendix:

Quote:

18.

The benefits payable are up to the following
amounts:
£25,000 Death (£7,500 under 16 year olds)
£10,000 Loss of two limbs or the sight of two eyes or loss of one limb and the sight of one eye
£50,000 Permanent total disablement
£100,000 Incapacitation benefit meaning bedridden and requiring fulltime care for more than 5 years
£ 5,000 Loss of one limb or the sight of one eye
£32,500 Loss of speech
£ 50 per day hospitalization benefit capped at £500 any one loss
£ 100 Convalescence benefit
£ 200 for broken arm, leg and £50 for all other broken bones capped at £500 any one accident

So the figures look like useful increases from 2007?

(NB The above is an extract; for full details look at the original document.)

Regards

Jim

MGDavid · 22 Nov 2007, 17:20 (Ref:2073649)

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrutineer

Which rule change is that then?? Havent we decided that there has been no change?.....
p

Scrute - the rule change is quoted in post 1 of this thread, see page 45 of MotorSports Now, in the section headed 'Rule Changes'...

**Tim Falce** · 22 Nov 2007, 18:00 (Ref:2073677)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MGDavid

Scrute - the rule change is quoted in post 1 of this thread, see page 45 of MotorSports Now, in the section headed 'Rule Changes'...

David, please keep up. See this post

midgetman · 22 Nov 2007, 18:14 (Ref:2073686)

OK, here's the message from my mole at the MSA:

The requirement is solely for circuit racing and as such appears in section ‘G’ (#131) of the 2008 Blue Book, as opposed to section ‘C[c] Safety’ which is where I suspect you have seen the lack of a requirement (?).

The date of implementation of this requirement, currently 1.1.2008, is currently under review. Any clarification as a result will be publicised via a bulletin.

So now you know. It does appear the MSA knows its @r5e from its elbow, but it doesn't write its rules in an easily-readable form.

scrutineer · 22 Nov 2007, 20:18 (Ref:2073737)

Quote:

Originally Posted by midgetman

So now you know. It does appear the MSA knows its @r5e from its elbow, but it doesn't write its rules in an easily-readable form.

I think it is is easy enough to read, they have put it in the technical regs for car racing. Seems a logical place to me.

**Tim Falce** · 22 Nov 2007, 20:37 (Ref:2073754)

I wold have thought it would have been better in the Safety section, after all the roll cage and fire extinguisher regs are there arent they.
But hey, why make things simple.

scrutineer · 22 Nov 2007, 20:57 (Ref:2073774)

Point taken, have just been having a read through it, and maybe there should be a thread started pointing out all the regs that are always forgoton or overlooked lol

Victor Meldrew · 22 Nov 2007, 21:09 (Ref:2073780)

Hmm, really not sure about this. Just wonder if the MSA has really thought this one through. Shudder to think what carrying additional lighting will do for our carbon footprint?

terence · 22 Nov 2007, 21:31 (Ref:2073793)

As for the MSA knowing its A--- from its Elbow,how come this was brought into effect at the beginning of this year? Is the MSA now being run by women,changing thier minds at will.?

midgetman · 22 Nov 2007, 21:34 (Ref:2073797)

Scrutineer, how about the MSA wrote in the safety section:

Car racing - FIA light required
Rallying - Road legal light required

or whatever the facts are.

THAT'S logical, not putting one rule in one place and a variant of it in another that has to be cross-referred.

Rod Birley · 22 Nov 2007, 21:56 (Ref:2073811)

On LED lights which I sell there is a warning: "Do not shine LED light for prolonged period at eyes".

**dtype38** · 22 Nov 2007, 22:09 (Ref:2073822)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rod Birley

On LED lights which I sell there is a warning: "Do not shine LED light for prolonged period at eyes".

Quite right... stop staring at it and overtake the bloody thing!

MGDavid · 23 Nov 2007, 00:52 (Ref:2073909)

Quote:

Originally Posted by falcemob

David, please keep up. See this post

you were saying?....

midgetman · 23 Nov 2007, 09:09 (Ref:2074026)

>>>>>>>>how come this was brought into effect at the beginning of this year

Terence, it wasn't brought into effect at the beginning of this year. You saw it proposed in MSN and the rest of us missed it but it's not being brought into effect until 2008, or maybe not, depends, can't make our minds up. Good to know effective decision making is alive and well.

Yes scrutineer I'm probably being hard for comic effect, but why publish something one day, then as soon as someone asks questions say "Oh, it's under review".

Now we've found a cheaper option, I really, really don't care which rain light we use - especially if I can make a few bob - but please could someone make their ruddy minds up!

Still, could be worse, the Blue Book could be on CD and entrusted to TNT

JimW · 23 Nov 2007, 11:05 (Ref:2074075)

Quote:

Originally Posted by midgetman

. . .
Yes scrutineer I'm probably being hard for comic effect, but why publish something one day, then as soon as someone asks questions say "Oh, it's under review".

. . .

Or you could be grateful that the governing body is big enough to respond to pressure/recognise the possibility of error and review their decisions?

Regards

Jim

Edited:Just tidying the quote marks up

terence · 23 Nov 2007, 15:46 (Ref:2074237)

Quote:

Originally Posted by midgetman

>>>>>>>>how come this was brought into effect at the beginning of this year

Terence, it wasn't brought into effect at the beginning of this year. You saw it proposed in MSN and the rest of us missed it but it's not being brought into effect until 2008, or maybe not, depends, can't make our minds up. Good to know effective decision making is alive and well.

Yes scrutineer I'm probably being hard for comic effect, but why publish something one day, then as soon as someone asks questions say "Oh, it's under review".

Now we've found a cheaper option, I really, really don't care which rain light we use - especially if I can make a few bob - but please could someone make their ruddy minds up!

Still, could be worse, the Blue Book could be on CD and entrusted to TNT

No it was not in MSN,GPR and Lifeline were advertising saying that they were required for this past season.So it's not just being conned by MSA,they are all at it!!!Which I suppose is right for this poxxy country anyway!.

midgetman · 23 Nov 2007, 21:42 (Ref:2074424)

>>>>>>>>>>Lifeline were advertising saying that they were required for this past season

Ah, the fog thins a little. Something's falling into place now.

graeme · 28 Nov 2007, 11:50 (Ref:2077204)

Just heard from BARC that the reg has been dropped for 2008.

johnw · 28 Nov 2007, 12:21 (Ref:2077225)

Well done again Rod

Al Weyman · 28 Nov 2007, 13:41 (Ref:2077259)

Quote:

Just heard from BARC that the reg has been dropped for 2008.

Commonsense prevails!

scrutineer · 28 Nov 2007, 20:11 (Ref:2077524)

Well thats one less thing for us to worry about. Which means there have been no changes from last year so those penny pinchers must be out to get us all lol.
Although ill be happier when I see it in print from the MSA (not that I dont trust what has been said but at the moment there is nothing on paper for you all to wave at us when we try and throw you out

)

Austinspace75 · 5 Dec 2007, 09:28 (Ref:2081913)

Looking through the brand new 2008 Blue Book DVD/CD... under Section G, #131. An FIA homologated rear warning light must be
fitted. It must be located within 10cm of the centre line
of the vehicle and be clearly visible from the rear. Vehicles fitted with full width bodywork may
alternatively use two lights equally located about the
vehicle centre line.

Can't see any notes telling me this isn't applicable yet or that its under review. Any ideas?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The 4x4 Rant Thread - Pulled From the £1.30 M25 Toll Thread	Al Weyman	Road Car Forum	113	26 Oct 2006 15:39
Red Warning Light - "Rain Lamp"	BugEyed	Racing Technology	8	16 Mar 2006 19:05
Rain Light (merged)	dddlc	Australasian Touring Cars.	104	16 Sep 2003 06:39