Because it is very wrong and should have zig-zags.

There is, but it is very worn as are the speed hump arrows which the stop lines seem to be merged into.

Go back a bit (and a bit off topic I'm afraid) and you see these 'shared ped/cycle route' signs, one on each side of the road. The right hand one could be to do with the cycle lane in the side turning, but could both of them indicate that you can cycle on the footway?

David

A shared cycle route allows cycling on the footway - you have to redesignate under the Highways Act but it's hardly unusual.

I've thought of this many times before. Even just a black arrow on a white 300mm disk to fit a standard box sign unit, perhaps mounted above the red aspect for clarity - something which they do in Spain.

Stop line is attached to the ramp triangles on either side.

It appears that Transport Scotland is a fan of using the 606 arrows on signals as demonstrated by these signals on the A90 in Dundee.

It's even better from the opposite direction. Conflicting arrows on these signal heads and if you look to the left, no right turn signs on the other heads. I thought that was a London special.


EDIT: They've also gone nuts with the arrows on the these signals nearby which includes this pedestrian crossing. Why are there arrows on those heads??

Siemens clearly had a sale on Dia606 box signs!

Both junctions were paid for by Morrisons.
It's not now the worst trunk junction in Dundee. That accolade goes to the upgraded Greendykes / Broughty Ferry junction where right-turners have to go through a red signal, thanks to the poor positioning of the nearside and offside secondaries!

I went around this roundabout for the first time in a while today. I have never understood what the point of the extra stop line and set of lights is for.

To stop you from being taken by surprise by a red light round the corner and getting T-boned by traffic from the left. Visibility at that end of the longabout is poor, partly because of the countours - at the other end, it's not such a problem. Bear in mind that the whole thing is a retrofit to the A4040 dual carriageway when the A47 Fort/Heartlands Parkway was added a few years ago, and the motorway pillars prevent much more being done in improving the geometry.

It looks like it due to the visibility of the second set of lights as they are round a bend after a straight where people may speed up.
But it is a stupid way of dealing with the problem, improving the visibility would be a better idea - removing the vegetation for a start - and adding warning signs.

But why 2 sets of lights atnd 2 stop lines ?

If the forward stop line wasn't there it would reduce queuing space and increase the distance through the junction and therefore inter-green times.
But it's a daft way to deal with a problem that could be better resolved with a chainsaw and maybe a mast arm signal.

Complete with a botched direction sign too - the one facing traffic from the side road should have flag signs. That's an advance direction sign.

The regulations say that 606 arrows mean "all vehicular traffic must proceed in the direction indicated by the arrow" (note "all vehicular traffic", not "vehicular traffic in the lane corresponding to the direction of travel indicated by the arrow").

Under TSRGD Regulation 10, it's an offence under the RTA to disobey a 606 arrow. So, to pass two conflicting 606 arrows (as in the above cases) in any direction is an automatic offence... isn't it?

If signals do need to be marked so as to make clear which direction of travel they apply to, red/amber arrow aspects would surely make more sense.

Just found this junction in Manchester whilst looking at the new Metrolink line. More of a botch of lining and arrows than anything!

Sect 36 of the RTA make it clear that it only applies to signs that are lawfully placed, which is not the case for a sign that is not being used in compliance with TSRGD, so one could argue that no offence was comitted.

Can someone remind me what the rules are with regard to primary signals (and where they must be placed) and secondaries) - how many primaries are required as a minimum and where should it/they be placed in relation to the stop line etc etc etc

From memory, I'm pretty sure the default is that only one primary and one secondary are the standard minimum. On dual carriageways or where there's a traffic island, there should be two primaries' one on each side of the stop line. Additional secondaries can be added where and when deemed necessary to local situations.

OK, that ties in with my own thoughts. Are there any rules about how far beyond the stop line a secondary must be as a minimum? I'm asking as I found a junction with just 2 signal heads per arm, one is on the left side of the road and in line with the stop line, and it has a second head on the right hand side of the road, just maybe a foot beyond the stop line, which makes it tricky to see either signal head when you're actually at the stop line