OT (very). Reversing beepers

[Another Dave]

A farm across the road has started doing a bit of warehousing. Two or three artics unload and load into a secure barn. No problem with this.

What IS bothering me are the reversing "beepers" on the forklift trucks. They seem very loud - I can still hear them if I walk 1/2 mile down the lane. This is a quiet rural area, the loudest noise is the sparrows. To serve as a warning something much quieter would, I feel, be sufficient.

I'm on pretty good terms with the people responsible and they say it annoys them too but the insurance company insists that they have these beepers. I'm prepared to talk to the insurance company but to do any research I need to know:

What is the proper term for these beepers so that I can Google?

Anybody point me in the right direction?

Another Dave

[Jules Richardson]

Maybe they can slap some duct tape or whatever over them so that they can still be heard, but aren't as loud? :-)

[Dave Liquorice]

I suspect that having the beeper is an insurance requirement but ...

Does the insurance company also mandate how loud they have to be or the sound they make? Blocking a few of the holes to reduce the level maybe all that is required. Also piezo based beeps of a kHz or so are a very penetrating noise. Mechanical buzzers are much more acceptable but possibly not so reliable or maybe pulsed noise on a mylar speaker.

[fred]

In article , Another Dave writes

For road use these are regulated by The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 and I think the correct term is "Reversing Alarm" which is a specific type of "Audible Warning Instrument".

Although your neighbour appears to be using these off road those regs could give you a guide as to where the insurance company is getting its basic info from. Bad news is that they aren't available online as they are pre 1988 but you could get a paper copy from the Stationery Office. See an explanation and links here:

for "Reversing Alarm" and "Noise Nuisance" together gives quite a few hits for local gov sites and environmental health departments. A few of those make suggestions of changing to white noise ("broadband") reversing alarms as a way of reducing noise nuisance (In use, these are far less intrusive than either beepers or speaking ones).

HSE say that they're not compulsory but doesn't say not to use them either:

far away from you is the yard and are you in a house or business premises?

I wonder if planning permission is required for change off use of the barn to commercial (non-agricultural) warehousing?

[Cash]

Another Dave,

Just a point of interest here but it may help.

Some years ago, I used to drive a company van with reversing bleepers, but when the van's side and headlights were turned on, the bleeper was automatically cut out - thus preventing noise at night.

if there are lights on the forklifts, it may be an idea to see if that system is fitted and if it is well....

Cash

[geoff]

In message , Another Dave writes

Could part of the problem that there's a strong reflection off a hard surface which is causing it to be louder than would be expected?

Don't know if e.g. a tarp on the wall might deaden the reflection

... just a thought

[The Medway Handyman]

I reckon its an Effin Softy issue to cover everyones arris.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Too true. I live out in te sticks, and somehow the roar of a massey ferguson is fine, but little lectronic beeps when they go backwards..seems out of place.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Its right where ears are most sensitive sadly. And where there is very little spectral content for them to contend with. Only birdsong, and they aren't exactly loud.

Which is probably why these beepers, designed for use in high noise industrial environments, are so bloody annoying.

Just another 'let's make the countryside as like a town or industrial estate as we can' one-size-fits-all legislation.

[Another Dave]

Brilliant! I don't know if it will solve my problem but good thinking :-)

Another Dave

[Another Dave]

I'm the OP.

Many thanks to all of you. It's given me a start and the sympathy is welcome too!

Strangely, "beeper" seems to be as scientific a term as any other in my on-line searches - I needn't have been so apologetic :-)

Another Dave

[Chris J Dixon]

There used to be a railway ballast depot near where I worked, and the loaders all had reversing alarms fitted. The nearby residents were clearly unimpressed, and eventually the alarms were silenced, and replaced with flashing warning lights.

Chris

[fred]

A word of caution. The insurance company are likely to view any act that deliberately disables or reduces the effectiveness of the reversing alarm to be a breach of their conditions. Turning it off via the lights would be seen as no better than disabling it by cutting the wires. Similarly, there will be a spec somewhere that defines how loud these devices should be so any attempt to reduce the sound output could cause problems too.

I'm not meaning to piss on your chips over this, just suggesting extreme caution. It could all go great until someone gets squished and then all hell will break loose.

[Andy Champ]

You now have my sympathy. They're laying a temporary road in the woods near my house for new water pipe works. The machines were just about audible indoors this morning - except for some bleeper...

He's ed off now :)

Andy

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember fred saying something like:

No problem. Immediately after the squishing, the manager switches the beepers back on. Simples.

[The Natural Philosopher]

The fact of the matter is that these beepers were designed for use in high ambient noise industrial environments. They are total overkill for rural locations BUT Elfin safety is a one size fits all thing as is insurance largely.

[Hugo Nebula]

As others have pointed out, environmental health noise pollution guidelines may have a bearing. A quick google also shows an example of a Planning condition that delivery vehicles must switch off their reversing sounders on the approach to a supermarket. If these are relevant, then an insurance company cannot make it a condition of their cover that the insured commit an illegal act.

[fred]

In article , The Natural Philosopher writes

The links I posted earlier from HSE showed a bit more common sense:

"Reversing alarms are not mandatory because we would not want drivers to become over-reliant on them at the expense of not checking for rear hazards."

I agree that the insurance angle sounds like an arse covering exercise.