Zebra Crossings - Beacons

[No ideas for a name]

Simple question: Do the orange globes at a zebra crossing
a) have to flash, and
b) be syncronised?

I can't find any info in the TSM (Section 16 of chapter 6).
BS 8442:2015 may have the test requirements - which might cover it - but I can't find a copy without buying/registering.

Thanks

[Mammasaid]

No idea, however Somerset CC has the regs here;

https://docs.somerset.gov.uk/wl/?id=siKa9TQkwAItN1...

[No ideas for a name]

Thanks... just reading that but it looks to cover the lighting of the crossing so that you can see peds waiting, rather than the globes themselves.
Still hunting for a definition.

Thanks

[Mammasaid]

I think BS 873 covers it, but I've not got access to the doc.

[Puddenchucker]

There's some info here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/sche...

[No ideas for a name]

Thanks for the link.

My main question relates to a local crossing that is flashing away with non of the globes syncronised... until this week only had one illuminated - wondering if a) it is/was still a zebra crossing, b) if it is defective.

Legislation said:

4. A crossing shall not be taken to have ceased to be indicated in accordance with this Part of this Schedule by reason only of—

(a)the imperfection, disfigurement or discolouration of any globe or post, or

(b)the failure of illumination of any of the globes.

and

Legislation said:

1.—(1) Subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Schedule the traffic signs which are to be placed at or near a Zebra crossing for the purpose of indicating it shall consist of globes each of which is—

(a)coloured yellow or fluorescent yellow;

(b)not less than 275 nor more than 335 mm in diameter;

(c)illuminated by a flashing light or, where the Secretary of State so authorises in writing in relation to a particular crossing a constant steady light; and

(d)mounted on a post or bracket so that the lowest part of a globe is not less than 2.1 metres nor more than 3.1 metres above the surface of the ground immediately beneath it.

So, nothing about frequency nor being syncronised.

[Pica-Pica]

Report it on your local council website, if you are unhappy/unclear. I’m sure they (or Highways) have the facility for this.

[No ideas for a name]

Pica-Pica said:

Report it on your local council website, if you are unhappy/unclear. I’m sure they (or Highways) have the facility for this.

When in dialogue with the Council Highways people, I am never sure if it is Laurel or Hardy that I have got through to.
I would like to know the position in advance so that I can deal with it as necessary.

[Sebring440]

No ideas for a name said:

I would like to know the position in advance so that I can deal with it as necessary.

Deal with it as necessary? What's it got to do with you?

Do you think that it's a safety issue, that people will not recognise the obvious pedestrian crossing as an obvious pedestrian crossing?

[semisane]

No ideas for a name said:

Thanks for the link.

My main question relates to a local crossing that is flashing away with non of the globes syncronised... until this week only had one illuminated - wondering if a) it is/was still a zebra crossing, b) if it is defective.

Legislation said:

4. A crossing shall not be taken to have ceased to be indicated in accordance with this Part of this Schedule by reason only of—

(a)the imperfection, disfigurement or discolouration of any globe or post, or

(b)the failure of illumination of any of the globes.

and

Legislation said:

1.—(1) Subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Schedule the traffic signs which are to be placed at or near a Zebra crossing for the purpose of indicating it shall consist of globes each of which is—

(a)coloured yellow or fluorescent yellow;

(b)not less than 275 nor more than 335 mm in diameter;

(c)illuminated by a flashing light or, where the Secretary of State so authorises in writing in relation to a particular crossing a constant steady light; and

(d)mounted on a post or bracket so that the lowest part of a globe is not less than 2.1 metres nor more than 3.1 metres above the surface of the ground immediately beneath it.

So, nothing about frequency nor being syncronised.

In my simple world :-

Yes still a zebra crossing - many (most ?) crossing don't have the round beacons (so assume they are not compulsory ?)- the lack of a beacon doesn't mean you can drive over pedestrians !
Yes defective, in as much as if they are present they should illuminate (their purpose) - I would say out of sequence would make them even more visible.

As for the legislation, not quite sure why anyone would be bothered.... A zebra crossing is a zebra crossing is a zebra crossing, with or without lights -sequenced or not ?

[No ideas for a name]

Sebring440 said:

Deal with it as necessary? What's it got to do with you?

Do you think that it's a safety issue, that people will not recognise the obvious pedestrian crossing as an obvious pedestrian crossing?

Deal with it as necessary might not have been the best wording. "Report it" would have covered it.
But, we could all just leave things that are defective or unsafe - "nothing to do with me".

It is a recent crossing paid for by a developer as I understand it. Maintenance shouldn't just pass the the Council with associated costs if it hasn't been installed correctly.
It had been left in an unfinished state, and yes I do believe it is confusing and a safety issue.

It has recently been 'improved' as the lights are now working.
The flash rate/phase and brightness does appear to distract from other more important observations.

If the phasing is within spec, I won't waste highway's time with it.

[semisane]

No ideas for a name said:

The flash rate/phase and brightness does appear to distract from other more important observations.

Such as ?

Genuine question

[littleredrooster]

Back in the 50s and 60s when I were a lad, they never, ever used to be synchronised. That's a relatively modern thing.

[No ideas for a name]

semisane said:

Such as ?

Genuine question

Junctions and driveways. It is a dead straight road and all you focus on late at night is the oddly flashing lights in the distance.
It probably isn't that much of a problem - maybe only because it is clean and new.

Zebras seem very rare these days, I really couldn't remember if they were supposed to by syncronised or not.
The crossing has been in place for a while with just one light stuck on and the others off - now it is finished/repaired it does stand out. (Yes, I realise the beacons are supposed to stand out).

Having read the legislation it just surprises me there is apparently no mention of flash rate or syncronisation.
I could just see the situation where someone gets knocked over and the driver gets off on some stupid technicality that is 'wasn't a Zebra so the ped shouldn't step out'.

[Pica-Pica]

No ideas for a name said:

semisane said:

Such as ?

Genuine question

Junctions and driveways. It is a dead straight road and all you focus on late at night is the oddly flashing lights in the distance.
It probably isn't that much of a problem - maybe only because it is clean and new.

Zebras seem very rare these days, I really couldn't remember if they were supposed to by syncronised or not.
The crossing has been in place for a while with just one light stuck on and the others off - now it is finished/repaired it does stand out. (Yes, I realise the beacons are supposed to stand out).

Having read the legislation it just surprises me there is apparently no mention of flash rate or syncronisation.
I could just see the situation where someone gets knocked over and the driver gets off on some stupid technicality that is 'wasn't a Zebra so the ped shouldn't step out'.

We don’t have a jaywalking law here.

[4rephill]

No ideas for a name said:

Junctions and driveways. It is a dead straight road and all you focus on late at night is the oddly flashing lights in the distance.
It probably isn't that much of a problem - maybe only because it is clean and new.

Zebras seem very rare these days, I really couldn't remember if they were supposed to by syncronised or not.
The crossing has been in place for a while with just one light stuck on and the others off - now it is finished/repaired it does stand out. (Yes, I realise the beacons are supposed to stand out).

Having read the legislation it just surprises me there is apparently no mention of flash rate or syncronisation.
I could just see the situation where someone gets knocked over and the driver gets off on some stupid technicality that is 'wasn't a Zebra so the ped shouldn't step out'.

Surely this has got to be a wind up?

You're saying that you're not capable of driving down a straight section of road, and paying attention to junctions and driveways due to some flashing beacons in the distance?

Do you also become hypnotically distracted by the multitude of indicators flashing daily on vehicles?

How about amber warning beacons on vehicles?

In all honesty, if these flashing beacons are distracting you to any degree, and creating a danger to other road users, I'd say the issue is not with the beacons, but with you, and you really shouldn't be driving on the public highway!


I've been driving for @ 35 years (and ridden bicycles on the public roads before that for many years), and I can't remember a single instance when flashing beacons at pedestrian crossings have caused me to be distracted, or any other kind of issue.