March/April 2002
The latest dark visor developments
The last issue of Lobby highlighted the delay in DTLR publicising the outcome of the study on tinted visors. At present a minimum of 50% light transmission is permitted and the Government engaged ICE Ergonomics Ltd to report on the effects of lower levels of light transmission. I also reported that the BMF had made representations at the Advisory Group on Motorcycling meeting and, in conjunction with Bennetts motorcycle insurance specialists, had raised a petition asking for the findings of ICE’s study to be made public.
The petition cards were available on the BMF’s and Bennetts’ stands at the International Motorcycle Show and there was healthy interest in the petition. At the Belfast show shortly afterwards, the BMF’s Region 10 volunteers collected more signatures in a long weekend than was collected at the NEC. In choosing to concentrate on a petition for PTW access to Belfast’s bus lanes and the visor petition, they soon ran out of cards and had to replace them with petition forms. We arranged to present 2,800 signatures to DTLR before Christmas. So, on 20 December, Chairman Sharon Nash (below) presented the petition cards and forms to DTLR at its offices in Great Minster House.
Our agitating for the publication of ICE’s findings must have worked. The same week, DTLR released the report with a covering letter asking for our views on what levels of tint should be legalised. A full consultation will follow in March.
I have some concerns about the ICE remit as much of it concerned the effect of dark visors when used in low light conditions. Most members of the British Standards Institute’s committee on motorcycle eye-protectors had made it clear that no visor with any degree of tint should be used at night. ICE concluded that there were more adverse effects on vision from scratched visors than from tinted. They also concluded that light transmission of less than 34% was no more effective in reducing sun glare than greater light transmission. ICE suggested that the use of secondary visors (like those found in Schuberth helmets) or sunglasses worn under visors were an effective way of preventing glare. While secondary visors (which are not classified as eye protection) can be operated from outside the helmet, we have pointed out that sunglasses cannot be removed when there is a sudden change in light conditions, like entering a tunnel. Interviews with a relatively small number of riders suggested that after dusk they would wear both legal tinted visors with 50% light transmission or illegal visors with less light transmission. This led to the conclusion that it would not be possible to enforce the embargo on tinted visors after lighting up time. However, if we had adequate levels of road policing instead of the increasing reliance on cameras, then laws relating to the use of dark visors could be enforced properly.
DTLR has offered three options:
•allow visors with a minimum light transmission of 18%
•allow visors with a minimum light transmission of 34%
•continue with the current minimum level of light transmission of 50%.
The first option was proposed by most members of the BSI Committee, including myself, and used the advice of an expert on sunglasses as well as eye protection specialists. Many riders will continue to wear visors with 18% light transmission and it is surely better to include them in BS 4110 so that quality can be assured. A light transmission of 34% does not seem to be much less than the currently allowed 50% minimum and the enforcement issue remains for visors with any degree of tint. The BMF will be supporting the use of a minimum light transmission of 18% for daytime use only.
Published with the March/April 2002 issue of Motorcycle Rider
For further information, telephone 01442 396355 or write to:
The British Motorcyclists Federation, 14 -16 Briton Street, Leicester, LE3 0AA.
Telephone: 0116 284 5380 Fax: 0116 284 5381
BMF Riderspace: www.bmf.co.uk E-mail: campaigns@bmf.co.uk
