I remember reading this here before on a LAFD Vehicle but this new video shows how horrible the flash pattern is... or is it just me ?
LAFD Battalion Responding *note lightbar
- Thread starter e2kmaster
- Start date
ff168577
Member
rond
Member
I agree that it has a horrible flash pattern. Nothing about it from the front draws any attention. It almost appeared like it was mostly steady burn to the front.
I would struggle to really justify calling it a flash pattern, looks like it does very little in the way of flash!
lafd55
Member
Same lightbars that Chicago FD ambulances have, looks like same pattern too. Definitely a FAIL with the patterns, lol.
This came from the period where PSE did not incorporate the synchronization feature into their lightbars. I believe the only exception during that era was the serial-controlled version of the LED X 2100, which originated with the test products for the CHP. Other than that, it was a missing and much-desired option.
In a related note, I'm extremely disappointed that PSE discontinued the XF2300. This was a unique lightbar and (in my opinion) a better alternative to the Code 360 for superior off-axis warning. With today's PriZm II linear technology and the inclusion of a central controller module, I believe the XF2300 would be a huge success. It's a shame that PSE did not keep this in production.
If I were a PSE executive, I would retire the Code 360 and bring back the XF2300 with the updated technology noted above.
EDIT:
I just noted that PSE is now offering DuoBeam II, typically used for rear supplementary warning. This is available with TriCore modules (single-level only), PriZm II (single-level only), and Torus modules (single- or dual-level). Perhaps the XF2300 can be offered with dual-level Torus modules, so as not to directly compete with the RX 2700 Series. It would be presented as a higher-end alternative to the 21TR. Food for thought.
In a related note, I'm extremely disappointed that PSE discontinued the XF2300. This was a unique lightbar and (in my opinion) a better alternative to the Code 360 for superior off-axis warning. With today's PriZm II linear technology and the inclusion of a central controller module, I believe the XF2300 would be a huge success. It's a shame that PSE did not keep this in production.
If I were a PSE executive, I would retire the Code 360 and bring back the XF2300 with the updated technology noted above.
EDIT:
I just noted that PSE is now offering DuoBeam II, typically used for rear supplementary warning. This is available with TriCore modules (single-level only), PriZm II (single-level only), and Torus modules (single- or dual-level). Perhaps the XF2300 can be offered with dual-level Torus modules, so as not to directly compete with the RX 2700 Series. It would be presented as a higher-end alternative to the 21TR. Food for thought.
Last edited by a moderator:
That appears to be a code 3 2700 bar. It might be a that it was programmed wrong. You are able to program them or some one changed the flash pattern or never set it up.
As far as I know the California laws allow fire and ems to run only red. Law enforcement is allowed to use red and blue together or all red. No clear is allowed. All emergency vehicles must display flashing amber to the rear.
Zapp Brannigan
Lifetime VIP Donor
philyumpshus
Member
stansdds said:
You're right about the red part in Fire/EMS. Fire/EMS/Police can use clear, both as HLFs and as standalone warning. The amber to the rear is an agency thing- it's not required but it's very commonplace.
RolnCode3
Member
If you look closely, it's some type of dual-level bar (like a Freedom). The problem seems to be that the top LED will turn off, but the bottom LED will already be on. Then the bottom turns off, but the top is already back on (or something along those lines). So while each individual head is flashing, overall, there's not much change drawing the eye. It's probably very bright, just not real "flashy". Least, that's what it looked like to me.
pdk9
Member
It's not just you. Really bad. The only thing that worked for me was the slow flash on the lights mounted on the tailgate.
Reno911
Member
killCARB027 said:
and now all Cal Fire LEOs/fire investigators will have marked red and blue light bars. use to be they would have all red with a blue led mounted in the grill and bar. and one to the rear. they were also on a separate switch.. so they could run all reds if just going to a fire call. and would activate the blue if they were doing a traffic stop or any other LE stuff.. but not anymore.. as for clear lights , yes all ems, fire and law enforcement can run clear. but they are supposed to be set up to where when u put the veh in park or activate the parking brake the clears shut off.. i know that's how it is on all our rigs..
RolnCode3
Member
cdffireboy said:
VC 25259 specifies max two flashing white lights above the roofline and two below (not including the headlights), but I have never seen anything about them being required to shut off when in park. Any reference?
killCARB027 said:
California EMS can use amber and clear (in addition to required red). Union Pacific railroad repair trucks can/do use blue. There are plenty of bona fide LEO, Fire and EMS rigs running non Title 13 compliant schemes.
RolnCode3 said:
ill dig around and find that info. it was a big deal a few yrs ago with CHP pitching a bitch on a couple of our rigs that dint have the ability to shut off the clears..
RolnCode3
Member
chrismartin1701
Member
from what im seeing is some of you guys fail to realize that the light laws in California demand for at least 1 steady burn light to the front. it has been like that for decades. why that is i dont know. i dont know what or why something like that possessed someone in the upper chain to do that shit as it is not effective at all and is by no means any good way to get noticed. the only way i see that truck with that pattern getting noticed is with the dual sirens. but whatever. its their laws. granted what we have here is just an uber-tastic fail on the whole steady burn concept. but i dont think its a programming error or wiring issue. it may be like that because they may have to have it like that.
lafd55
Member
I'm sure there are small departments that are not usually in the mainstream of discussion that do not truly follow the Cal Light Laws, probably like how some police/fire departments in New York run red AND blue.
RolnCode3
Member
lafd55 said:
I guess it really comes down to what is meant by "not following the law". If you're talking about every single provision in T13, then there are a lot of agencies that would be in trouble. I've seen split flash Quadraflares on ambulances in Sacramento. But they all have a solid burning red light and no blue. Same thing with some of the flash speeds (>120 FPM) on some leds on police cars. So there's some technical violations, but the spirit of the majority of the rules are being followed.
Agencies are large and small. The only agency I can think of that I've never seen possible technical violations is CHP itself.
chrismartin1701
Member
lafd55 said:
to the rear yes. front, i dont think so. i have yet to see any agency that runs both red and blue to the front in NY. except for my fire chiefs POV that has SnM E4 heads in B/R in the front which is technically illegal for him to do. but he doesnt care. he seams to believe that he wont get into any trouble because of his light setup.
I remember reading somewhere long ago the Cali steady burn thing had to do with epileptic people. Something about having a steady burning light for them to focus on in the event of a seizure? Granted, this could be complete BS, just passing along what I had heard.
chrismartin1701
Member
GTRider245 said:
im gonna go out on a limb and say that is complete BS. if that was the case then why were they doing that in the mid 50's? i doubt epilepsy was on any ones mind then.
Found this with a little Googling. Could also be BS though.
"The reasoning behind the steady burning red light law in Califonia comes from the concept of a "Reference" light--that is, a light that is steady and doesn't waver, so that the vehicle can be identified and tracked constantly as it approaches. This law was encacted sometime back in the 30s or 40s. This was because in heavy traffic, especially at night, the old fashioned slow-rotating beacons or "Mars" lights flashed at a slow rate, and drivers at a distance could be distracted or confused as to which vehicle was the actual emergency vehicle between flashes. California never bothered to repeal this particualr statute, even though todays rapid flash and full-width light bars negate the need for it. "
"The reasoning behind the steady burning red light law in Califonia comes from the concept of a "Reference" light--that is, a light that is steady and doesn't waver, so that the vehicle can be identified and tracked constantly as it approaches. This law was encacted sometime back in the 30s or 40s. This was because in heavy traffic, especially at night, the old fashioned slow-rotating beacons or "Mars" lights flashed at a slow rate, and drivers at a distance could be distracted or confused as to which vehicle was the actual emergency vehicle between flashes. California never bothered to repeal this particualr statute, even though todays rapid flash and full-width light bars negate the need for it. "
chrismartin1701
Member
lafd55
Member
Yonker's Police Department runs R/B to front and I know I have seen some LI FDs run R/B. It's probably a rarity but I'm sure there are also unmarked cars that run R/B to the front somewhere in NY state.chrismartin1701 said:
chrismartin1701
Member
lafd55 said:
well i can understand if its on a LEO car but on a firefighters POV? it might be a gray area, but it just seems like someone should get in trouble for doing that.
lafd55
Member
No, I'm talking about Apparatus I have seen are R/B... This thread isn't about POVs...chrismartin1701 said: