I'm am currently trying to find when order codes were put into use by General Electric and Westinghouse.

For General Electric, I have found this Q1 1960 F25T12 in @Marcel1968's gallery https://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=2&pid=244401

And also in his gallery, this 20W lamp made in the Q3 of 1959 https://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=3&pid=214078

----

For Westinghouse, I have found in @Foxtronix's gallery, this 1957 Sylvania F20T12/B https://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pos=1&pid=45099

However, I have not been able to find a picture of a 1956 Westinghouse fluorescent tube yet...

----

If anyone could help me find a picture of those lamps, I would really appreciate it!

Just found out today too, pretty sad to think.

As of last night, I found out that Lumec will be discontinuing the Helios at the end of this year. This will officially mark the end of the Cobrahead era, since only decorative fixtures made by Sentry Electric will possibly still be made.

No, don't put anything conductive in there. It can spread to parts where you really don't want it to be.

Yeah, I was just going by the bottom, the bridge above this used the same lumec lights too.

Thanks guys!

There is a simpler answer. Every lamp and optical radiation source placed on the market in Europe and much of the rest of the world that follows the IEC standardisation system must be tested for compliance with IEC 62471 : Photobiological Safety of Light Sources, and for general lighting products to IEC TR 62788. 

It’s not only the spectrum of a lamp that can be dangerous - some pure UVC and UVB sources are perfectly safe to look at for considerable periods of time.  The quantity of radiation is far more important.  If you stare at an ordinary tungsten filament for long enough or from short enough range it can cause severe retinal burn hazard or infrared/UV skin damage.

Every light source is therefore evaluated at two criteria.  General lighting lamps and fixtures have their absolute spectral irradiance measured at a distance that corresponds to an illuminance of 500 lux, a typical high-end value in real applications.  They, as well as all other light sources are also evaluated at a distance of 200mm which is a typical short focal distance for the human eye and the closest a customer might reasonably be expected to look at an operating lamp.

The measurement is made both spectrally via a diffuser that simulates skin hazard, as well as via a small telescope whose optics simulate the human eye and project an image of the brightest part of the light surface into a monochromator.  For both conditions evaluation is made for infrared burn hazard, retinal thermal burn, blue light small source eye burn, blue light skin hazard, UVA eye hazard, actinic skin hazard, actinic eye hazard.  For each of those criteria the spectrum and source brightness is weighted according to standardised spectral hazard functions and classified into high risk, moderate risk, low risk or exempt.  Low risk and exempt lamps require no marking.  Moderate risk should bear a warning similar as you see here.  High risk products are banned in all general lighting applications and can only be placed on the market with suitable warnings on the product and packaging.  In such cases it is compulsory to state in the manufacturer’s literature the minimum distance for safe viewing.

Everything is of course time-based : prolonged exposure is more severe.  For the basic risk group assessment that is made on fixed considerations, but manufacturers also provide (usually only when requested) the MPET value : maximum permitted exposure time per 8-hour period.  That value is of course dependent on the distance and light distribution, it changes as a function of which reflectors / lenses / diffusers might be used.

Conclusion for almost all cases is that if there is no warning on the lamp / fixture it is entirely safe under reasonable use conditions considered by the 62471 and 62778.  If there is any kind of marking, take precautions and contact the manufacturer for specific details.

  A OVW will look more like a 3rd generation OV25 with FCO optic.  And painted grey.  The OVW is Exclusive to Texas DOT

That's an HBM. The HBM has already been discontinued.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any places which still install Cree, heaps of places which used to but can't think of any current installers. Do you know of any?

Pierce County Public Works (PCPW) started installing XSPs in 2015 to replace their M-400As and RLCs, and they still install new ones as of now. TPU just did a massive install of XSPMDs that replaced most of their M-250R2s. ODOT (Oregon DOT) is installing Traveyos alongside ERL2s and RFLs. Cree is still very common, at least here in the PNW.

Now on the topic of LEDways, the only places I've seen that used large amounts of them are the cities of Los Angeles and Ontario. LA installed them when they were still Ruud/BetaLED but now they install Leotek GCMs. The city of Ontario installed large amounts in some of their residential areas when they were still Ruud/BetaLED as well but now they use the AEL ATBX and ATBM.

Don't forget the city of Vista. Back in 2011, the city replaced all their SRPs/SRXs with LEDways.

The city of Seattle also installed them way back when they were still Ruud/BetaLED, but now they install Leotek GC1s.