Fog lights, a different question

[mad jock]

In light of (sic!) the previous posts about fog lights, I'm curious to know why rear fog lamps have yet to be mandatory for motor cycles. I can rememeber my biking days when I got caught out in the fog, and being pretty concerned that I would get punted off the road by a car or truck.
Has there been any change to the legislation, and if not, why not? Motorcyclists are far more vulnerable in a rear end collision than cars.

[Flat in Fifth]

Mad Jock!

I read the title and my heart sank.

I can't tell you the logic why m/cycles are not required to have them except speculation as below.

The specific legislation is in RVLR 1989 sched 1 table 1.

Vehicles not required to have a rear fog are

1) A vehicle having a maximum speed not exceeding 25 mph;
2) A vehicle first used before 1st April 1986 being an agricultural vehicle or a works truck;
3) A vehicle first used before 1st April 1980;
4)A vehicle having an overall width which does not exceed 1300 mm

In the case of 1) that seems odd and somewhat illogical to me but there it is.
M/cycles would I suggest come under 4) although what about combinations?

Thinking about it I suppose it would be difficult to get enough distance between fog and brake lights on a solo m/c. Any advance??

FiF

[Streetcop]

Only motorcycles with panniers or top boxes seem capable of having fog lights fitted safely...

Street

[ledfoot]

I think we should ban all fog lights.

They are always mis-used, and cause unnecessary stress to those drivers that have to travel behind or in front of such a vehicle using the dammed things.

[tvrgit]

I agree that it's very unusual to need rear fog lights.

If you are driving along on your own, or at the rear of a group, then fine.

As soon as somebody catches up from behind, you can switch them off! It's probably safer than leaving them on, is it not?

It's notroften that you are dtiving in fog with nobody behind you.

(cue the usual "on the roads around here you can drive for days and never see a soul" exceptions...)

[Streetcop]

I agree.......having said that, I can count on one hand the number of times visibility has dropped below 100m in the last few years and I do 40,000+ per year..

Street

[Pigeon]

tvrgit said:

As soon as somebody catches up from behind, you can switch them off! It's probably safer than leaving them on, is it not?

Debatable... you really don't want someone tailgating you in fog.

[tvrgit]

who said anything about tailgating?

Are you suggesting everybody should keep half a mile apart so that they can only just see the fog lights of the car in front, yet not be blinded by them?

How much chance is there of that happening?

In the real world, little convoys tend to form on foggy roads. Only the back one needs fog lights, to warn anybody catching up. The rest are only blinding each other with no real "safety" advantage. Because they are muppets.

[Pigeon]

Well, muppets are the problem. Because they are muppets, they tend to be too close to the car in front in these little convoys... no rear fogs almost guarantees this, as they'll sit close enough to get a clear view of the tail lights. If the car in front has rear fogs on, they will probably sit further back. I'm not suggesting half-mile separations. If the vis is bad enough to require fog lights at all, it won't need anything like half a mile to attenuate them to a comfortable level.