Encouraging head on collision?
Moderator: Site Management Team
Encouraging head on collision?
I noticed this east of New Alresford where the B3047 passes under the Watercress Line. I assume they don't want traffic to drive on the opposite side of the road. But what are the parallel short dashed lines meant to indicate?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.08834 ... 384!8i8192
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.08834 ... 384!8i8192
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
I believe that's the path within which the specified height limit is correct. Vehicles close to that limit should follow the lines, and the bridge should probably be preceded by <!> Oncoming vehicles in middle of road. And as a Luton driver I should probably know that...ColinB wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 14:21 I noticed this east of New Alresford where the B3047 passes under the Watercress Line. I assume they don't want traffic to drive on the opposite side of the road. But what are the parallel short dashed lines meant to indicate?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.08834 ... 384!8i8192
- JammyDodge
- Member
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
They are a little further up the road from the bridge on either side
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
The bridge/road looks straight so why is the indicated path on a diagonal rather than in the middle
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
Johnny Mo
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
It’s not as straight as it looks. If you compare the bridge wall on the left to the kerb line there is a slight skew.
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
Yes just noticed that and was about to delete my post
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
Johnny Mo
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
I hope those guidance marks are not finished as there's no kicker arrow with HIGH VEHS, no lead out tapers... there's a diagram in TSM Ch 4 and 5 for this.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
I thought so too - here's how to do it better
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0885794 ... 312!8i6656
(I originally wrote "How to do it properly" but changed it as someone is bound to come along with a comment ).
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
That's actually pretty spot on as far as these things go. The real problem is making sure the path for high vehicles corresponds with the arch. You see some examples and just clench your teeth.WHBM wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 17:13I thought so too - here's how to do it better
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0885794 ... 312!8i6656
(I originally wrote "How to do it properly" but changed it as someone is bound to come along with a comment ).
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
Basically the bridge and the road are skewiff. Not unusual with railway bridges built when the road traffic was horse-drawn.
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
Hopefully drivers approaching will take note ...JammyDodge wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 15:20They are a little further up the road from the bridge on either side
- Bfivethousand
- Member
- Posts: 1387
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
- Location: Derbyshire
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
I assume once upon a time this was the A31 at which time it was far more critical to sign as high a headroom as it was possible to get away with.
It's now far more appropriate to sign a lower headroom with conventional guidelines parallel with the kerblines. There's a very convenient alternative route avoiding this bridge, therefore no reason not to knock three or four feet off the headroom if needs be.
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
followed immediately by Batman
-
- Member
- Posts: 616
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 15:46
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
I don't see a "very convenient alternative route" - there's an arch bridge over the other end of the B3047 too (even though there's no railway on it), and none of the other roads have a connection to the A31. The B3046 also has an arch bridge. Sun Lane actually goes over the railway, and you can get to it from the A31 down Whitehill Lane, but that's very narrow and doesn't really look suitable for HGVs.Bfivethousand wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:46 I assume once upon a time this was the A31 at which time it was far more critical to sign as high a headroom as it was possible to get away with.
It's now far more appropriate to sign a lower headroom with conventional guidelines parallel with the kerblines. There's a very convenient alternative route avoiding this bridge, therefore no reason not to knock three or four feet off the headroom if needs be.
- Bfivethousand
- Member
- Posts: 1387
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
- Location: Derbyshire
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
The bridge over the B3047 to the west of the town centre has no signed headroom restriction coming in from the A31 although in the other direction it's signed (poorly) with a clearance of 4.8m (metric only ) reflecting the elevation of the arch over the nearside kerb in that direction. No guidance markings either. Bar that, it appears clear that anything below 5.03m / 16ft 6in can get under that bridge albeit with a little care westbound.SteelCamel wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 22:28I don't see a "very convenient alternative route" - there's an arch bridge over the other end of the B3047 too (even though there's no railway on it), and none of the other roads have a connection to the A31. The B3046 also has an arch bridge. Sun Lane actually goes over the railway, and you can get to it from the A31 down Whitehill Lane, but that's very narrow and doesn't really look suitable for HGVs.Bfivethousand wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:46 I assume once upon a time this was the A31 at which time it was far more critical to sign as high a headroom as it was possible to get away with.
It's now far more appropriate to sign a lower headroom with conventional guidelines parallel with the kerblines. There's a very convenient alternative route avoiding this bridge, therefore no reason not to knock three or four feet off the headroom if needs be.
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
followed immediately by Batman
Re: Encouraging head on collision?
Something I pray every time I move into the middle, especially with the many weird bridge/road interfaces where they are preceded by blind bends.avtur wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:37Hopefully drivers approaching will take note ...JammyDodge wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 15:20They are a little further up the road from the bridge on either side