Botched Roadsigns

[Conekicker]

Not botched, just left to fall to pieces. It's actually in a worse state than the Streetview image. How the DBFO that looks after it can possibly claim that it's passed it's last few inspections is beyond me:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.84293 ... 6656?hl=en

Although this one from York is certainly botched. Ahead, left and right being the correct stacking order:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.98640 ... 6656?hl=en

All the 'x' heights should be the same as well, not that it matters too much, the tree has grown since the image was taken and obscures even more of the sign.

And just before it:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.98590 ... 6656?hl=en

[crazyknightsfan]

Not botched, just left to fall to pieces. It's actually in a worse state than the Streetview image. How the DBFO that looks after it can possibly claim that it's passed it's last few inspections is beyond me:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.84293 ... 6656?hl=en

No distance for London is also...odd?

[Conekicker]

Not botched, just left to fall to pieces. It's actually in a worse state than the Streetview image. How the DBFO that looks after it can possibly claim that it's passed it's last few inspections is beyond me:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.84293 ... 6656?hl=en

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

[Bryn666]

Not botched, just left to fall to pieces. It's actually in a worse state than the Streetview image. How the DBFO that looks after it can possibly claim that it's passed it's last few inspections is beyond me:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.84293 ... 6656?hl=en

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

They still haven't managed to update the gantries at either end to acknowledge the A1(M) is a thing. Replacing a failed RCS is unlikely!

Incidentally, several M60 signs have the same problem - both of these roads were signed around 1998-99, was there a duff batch of sign face material at that point?

[Chris5156]

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

"London" without a distance appears on all the RCS on the M1 between A1(M) and M62.

Omitting "The SOUTH" presumably happened because, at the A1/M1 split, "London" is signposted down the M1 and "The SOUTH" belongs to the A1. I still have no idea how that decision was made or what it's meant to convey. But then all the signs there are a bit odd, including the brackets around "M1" that replaced the original brackets surrounding "A1".

We're getting a bit off topic but I don't see any reason why the split couldn't be:
The SOUTH, Doncaster, Newark, A1(M), Hull (M62)
The SOUTH, Leeds, Sheffield, M1, Manchester (M62)
...and then "The SOUTH" could happily go on the M1's RCS as normal.

[Bryn666]

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

"London" without a distance appears on all the RCS on the M1 between A1(M) and M62.

Omitting "The SOUTH" presumably happened because, at the A1/M1 split, "London" is signposted down the M1 and "The SOUTH" belongs to the A1. I still have no idea how that decision was made or what it's meant to convey. But then all the signs there are a bit odd, including the brackets around "M1" that replaced the original brackets surrounding "A1".

We're getting a bit off topic but I don't see any reason why the split couldn't be:
The SOUTH, Doncaster, Newark, A1(M), Hull (M62)
The SOUTH, Leeds, Sheffield, M1, Manchester (M62)
...and then "The SOUTH" could happily go on the M1's RCS as normal.

Too sensible. Try again.

[Conekicker]

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

"London" without a distance appears on all the RCS on the M1 between A1(M) and M62.

Omitting "The SOUTH" presumably happened because, at the A1/M1 split, "London" is signposted down the M1 and "The SOUTH" belongs to the A1. I still have no idea how that decision was made or what it's meant to convey. But then all the signs there are a bit odd, including the brackets around "M1" that replaced the original brackets surrounding "A1".

We're getting a bit off topic but I don't see any reason why the split couldn't be:
The SOUTH, Doncaster, Newark, A1(M), Hull (M62)
The SOUTH, Leeds, Sheffield, M1, Manchester (M62)
...and then "The SOUTH" could happily go on the M1's RCS as normal.

Clearly whoever designed those signs (long since retired AIUI) got it wrong. It'll be the devil's own job to correct the mistakes, given the generally low level of knowledge amongst alleged sign designers out there these days.

[Bfivethousand]

The NORTH EAST and The NORTH WEST are permitted regional destinations travelling in the opposite direction. The same principle heading south here would've been the ideal response. I'm a little surprised DfT didn't approve The SOUTH EAST (and, for that matter, EAST ANGLIA) when updating the Regs and manuals.

[Chris5156]

Too sensible. Try again.

Sorry

[Bryn666]

The NORTH EAST and The NORTH WEST are permitted regional destinations travelling in the opposite direction. The same principle heading south here would've been the ideal response. I'm a little surprised DfT didn't approve The SOUTH EAST (and, for that matter, EAST ANGLIA) when updating the Regs and manuals.

Again, too sensible you see...

[crazyknightsfan]

No distance for London is also...odd?

Mention of London that far north is wrong. It should be "The SOUTH". A common error on that DBFO.

"London" without a distance appears on all the RCS on the M1 between A1(M) and M62.

Omitting "The SOUTH" presumably happened because, at the A1/M1 split, "London" is signposted down the M1 and "The SOUTH" belongs to the A1. I still have no idea how that decision was made or what it's meant to convey. But then all the signs there are a bit odd, including the brackets around "M1" that replaced the original brackets surrounding "A1".

We're getting a bit off topic but I don't see any reason why the split couldn't be:
The SOUTH, Doncaster, Newark, A1(M), Hull (M62)
The SOUTH, Leeds, Sheffield, M1, Manchester (M62)
...and then "The SOUTH" could happily go on the M1's RCS as normal.

I like this.
London without a distance bothers me, as although it is trying to be a 'region' destination it doesn't seem to aid navigation in any way compared to simply listing London as the furthest destination on the RCS.

[the cheesecake man]

Is this sign approaching the M66 in the wrong font or just very old?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.67065 ... 312!8i6656

[Chris5156]

Is this sign approaching the M66 in the wrong font or just very old?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.67065 ... 312!8i6656

It's in Transport Medium, so the right font, but everything else about it is a bit suspect - all in caps, which is unusual; the spacing between the lettering and border is all wrong; and the background colour doesn't look like the right shade of blue.

[quarella]

A487 Machynlleth signposted ahead. A487 North marked as turn right.
https://goo.gl/maps/BfY734owwuW4YGHS8

[Bryn666]

Is this sign approaching the M66 in the wrong font or just very old?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.67065 ... 312!8i6656

It's in Transport Medium, so the right font, but everything else about it is a bit suspect - all in caps, which is unusual; the spacing between the lettering and border is all wrong; and the background colour doesn't look like the right shade of blue.

It's a late 1980s cock-up replacement of an older sign. There was an original to the M66 opening sign on the left that was replaced (https://goo.gl/maps/MGSZAKkQbf4biKFs7) but the one in the middle was ignored in true Area 10 "we can't do signs for toffee" style.

[ellandback]

Nope, you wouldn't touch the A6025 to get to Elland from here.

Even at The Cross junction where you could conceivably divert via Barkisland onto the B6114, which used to be the A6025 about 40 years ago, you are signposted to stay on the B6113.

[Viator]

[...] this one from York is certainly botched. Ahead, left and right being the correct stacking order:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.98640 ... 6656?hl=en

Should there even BE a stack sign on the approach to a roundabout?

[Conekicker]

[...] this one from York is certainly botched. Ahead, left and right being the correct stacking order:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.98640 ... 6656?hl=en

Should there even BE a stack sign on the approach to a roundabout?

There's no legal requirement for there to be a map type sign. IAN 145 says:

"Where two ADS are provided on a junction approach, they should be of the same type (e.g. map type) unless space constraints prevent this. At roundabouts the first sign, at least, should be of map type..."

Note the use of "should".

[vlad]

Although you expect to see bilingual signs in Wales, this sign (which I admit is on private land) doesn't have the languages you'd expect.

Given that it's a Swiss-based company I guess it's reminding German-speaking visitors which side of the road to drive on after leaving the car park....

[Conekicker]

Although you expect to see bilingual signs in Wales, this sign (which I admit is on private land) doesn't have the languages you'd expect.

Given that it's a Swiss-based company I guess it's reminding German-speaking visitors which side of the road to drive on after leaving the car park....

On private land that's perfectly fine - and very responsible and public spirited into the bargain, I like it.