When did flashing indicators become *mandatory* in the UK?

[NY]

I can find references to flashing indicators first becoming *legal* in
the mid 1950s. I can find all sorts of rules about the range of flashing
speeds, and the need for either a flashing light on the dashboard or an
audible warning.

But I can't find out when indicators became mandatory - in addition to
or instead of trafficators.

I remember very early cars having flashing side/tail lights (ie
white/red) and this ruling being changed to flashing amber in the mid
sixties - some early pre-Aeroflow Cortina Mark 1s have the oval side
lights which also flashed, as opposed to the rectangular lights with
separate white and amber on the post-Aeroflow.

My mum's Morris Minor, registered in 1959 or 1960, had trafficators. It
also had after-market amber indicators, though I'm not sure whether they
were fitted by the previous owner or by mum/dad when they bought the car
in 1966. The trafficators still worked alongside the flashing ones,
though they gradually fell into disrepair, and eventually dad
disconnected them and jammed them closed.

[Colin Bignell]

They became mandatory, but only for new cars, in 1965. It is still
perfectly legal to have an older car without them. They became part of
the MOT in 1977.

--
Colin Bignell

[NY]

On 05/12/2023 14:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 05/12/2023 13:56, NY wrote:
>> I can find references to flashing indicators first becoming *legal* in
>> the mid 1950s. I can find all sorts of rules about the range of
>> flashing speeds, and the need for either a flashing light on the
>> dashboard or an audible warning.
>>
>> But I can't find out when indicators became mandatory - in addition to
>> or instead of trafficators.

> They became mandatory, but only for new cars, in 1965. It is still
> perfectly legal to have an older car without them. They became part of
> the MOT in 1977.

Ah. Thanks. I'm surprised it took as long as 12 years between them being
mandatory and the MOT test checking that they worked and flashed between
the correct limits.

I imagine people with pre-1965 will mostly have had indicators fitted to
avoid being hit by today's drivers who expect flashing indicators and
who would not even see a dim, steady amber light sticking out from the B
pillar of a car, as opposed to brighter flashing lights at the front and
back. I imagine that was the reason that the previous owner, or else my
parents, had indicators fitted on the Morris Minor, just a year after
they were mandatory on new cars.

I wish we had better rules on the *placement* of indicators, so they
were a certain minimum distance from the headlights and from the brake
lights, so they were clearly visible when a car has its headlights on or
is braking. VW Golfs a few years ago were terrible for invisible
indicators when the car was braking. Either the indicators were a ring
around the brake light or vice versa - I forget which. And few modern
cars have indicators which can be seen easily when the headlights are
on: on modern cars the clearest indication is that the DRL on that side
goes out.

[Colin Bignell]

On 05/12/2023 20:19, NY wrote:
> On 05/12/2023 14:49, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 05/12/2023 13:56, NY wrote:
>>> I can find references to flashing indicators first becoming *legal*
>>> in the mid 1950s. I can find all sorts of rules about the range of
>>> flashing speeds, and the need for either a flashing light on the
>>> dashboard or an audible warning.
>>>
>>> But I can't find out when indicators became mandatory - in addition
>>> to or instead of trafficators.
>
>> They became mandatory, but only for new cars, in 1965. It is still
>> perfectly legal to have an older car without them. They became part of
>> the MOT in 1977.
>
>
> Ah. Thanks. I'm surprised it took as long as 12 years between them being
> mandatory and the MOT test checking that they worked and flashed between
> the correct limits.

The early MOTs were simply about making sure that cars were not
dangerous: That they did not have badly rusted structural parts, had no
play in the steering, had tread on the tyres and had brakes that worked.
Those checks alone took a lot of cars off the road.

> I imagine people with pre-1965 will mostly have had indicators fitted to
> avoid being hit by today's drivers who expect flashing indicators and
> who would not even see a dim, steady amber light sticking out from the B
> pillar of a car, as opposed to brighter flashing lights at the front and
> back. I imagine that was the reason that the previous owner, or else my
> parents, had indicators fitted on the Morris Minor, just a year after
> they were mandatory on new cars.

I would expect that anybody running a pre-1965 car today would be a
classic car enthusiast would would want the car to be as close to its
original condition as possible.

> I wish we had better rules on the *placement* of indicators, so they
> were a certain minimum distance from the headlights and from the brake
> lights, so they were clearly visible when a car has its headlights on or
> is braking. VW Golfs a few years ago were terrible for invisible
> indicators when the car was braking. Either the indicators were a ring
> around the brake light or vice versa - I forget which. And few modern
> cars have indicators which can be seen easily when the headlights are
> on: on modern cars the clearest indication is that the DRL on that side
> goes out.

--
Colin Bignell

[NY]

"Colin Bignell" <c...@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote in message
news:Gt6cnb1gfMXIFOz4...@giganews.com...

> On 05/12/2023 20:19, NY wrote:
>> I imagine people with pre-1965 will mostly have had indicators fitted to
>> avoid being hit by today's drivers who expect flashing indicators and who
>> would not even see a dim, steady amber light sticking out from the B
>> pillar of a car, as opposed to brighter flashing lights at the front and
>> back. I imagine that was the reason that the previous owner, or else my
>> parents, had indicators fitted on the Morris Minor, just a year after
>> they were mandatory on new cars.
>
> I would expect that anybody running a pre-1965 car today would be a
> classic car enthusiast would would want the car to be as close to its
> original condition as possible.

I would distinguish between the car when it is used in a display and the car
when it is being driven on the road amongst modern-day traffic. It's one of
those difficult cases: should cars (no matter what age) be regarded as
unroadworthy if they don't have headlights and rear lights that conform to
current brightness levels, and have flashing indicators? In other words,
should they or shouldn't they be allowed grandfather rights?

I followed an old Jaguar (might have been a Mark II) which had *very* dim
brake and indicator lights which were barely visible even if you looked very
closely - and that was on an overcast day, not in bright sun. At first I
thought the car wasn't braking and the driver was forgetting to indicate, so
I looked closely and I could see an imperceptible glow. To my way of
thinking, that went beyond any discretionary exemptions for classic cars,
and was actually dangerous. I wonder whether it was actually faulty (poor
connections) and would have been illegal even by the standards of the day
when it was made. That is why I'm opposed to classic cars being exempt from
MOTs - there should be a classic-car MOT which applies lower standards, but
still has *some* minimum level for modern-day safety. Maybe a requirement to
use hand signals as well as brake/indicators if those are exceptionally dim
by modern standards: a hand signal would have been *far* more visible than
the puny lights.

[Andy Burns]

Colin Bignell wrote:

> I would expect that anybody running a pre-1965 car today would be a
> classic car enthusiast would would want the car to be as close to its
> original condition as possible.

Certainly people running ancient land rovers seem to delight in sticking
with the original tail-lights that can be outshone by a firefly ...