Botched Traffic Signals

Discussion about street lighting, road signs, traffic signals - and all other street furniture - goes here.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7500
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Big L »

How about these which appear to have an unused set of pedestrian crossing indicators. Several sets of these around the roundabout.

Did someone order the wrong ones, or did they have some excess stock sitting around at the depot?
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by L.J.D »

Big L wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 16:52 How about these which appear to have an unused set of pedestrian crossing indicators. Several sets of these around the roundabout.

Did someone order the wrong ones, or did they have some excess stock sitting around at the depot?
I think boinguk who used to be a member on here once said that they sometimes use blank aspects to store extra electricals. My guess is that they are been used to store what would usually go in the top of the pole cap because if you look at the ones without the ped box on they have the actual caps on the top where as the ones with the boxes have no cap. Maybe it's just easier to maintain lower down so they've put them down there.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

Chris Bertram wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 16:34
Chris5156 wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 16:21
ReissOmari wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 13:50 Anybody got any clue as to why these traffic signal hoods look like this? https://goo.gl/maps/rjmntPQJnqqUVrND9
I don’t know for sure, but as they are rotated to the side I’d guess it’s so that approaching trains can’t see the lights and mistake them for railway signals.
That seems like a bit of a stretch - railway signals would be at a much lower level, but I suppose we can't rule out someone being over-cautious.
This one is the same. When the signals were renewed, these heads actually had half-tubes, with the open side facing towards the road. They were clearly visible from the station platform until the full tubes were fitted.
L.J.D wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 06:38
Big L wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 16:52 How about these which appear to have an unused set of pedestrian crossing indicators. Several sets of these around the roundabout.

Did someone order the wrong ones, or did they have some excess stock sitting around at the depot?
I think boinguk who used to be a member on here once said that they sometimes use blank aspects to store extra electricals. My guess is that they are been used to store what would usually go in the top of the pole cap because if you look at the ones without the ped box on they have the actual caps on the top where as the ones with the boxes have no cap. Maybe it's just easier to maintain lower down so they've put them down there.
That's usually to mount equipment (such as transformers and detector connectors) that would traditionally be housed in a signal head, but where there is no signal head available, such as a pedestrian crossing with nearside indicators.

Not ruling that out at all, but the roundabout examples are unusual. The poles are all wide-based, so it wouldn't be uncommon for the terminations to be in the base rather than the pole cap. It's also worth noting that at the other arms of the roundabout, there just seems to be one of these dummy heads per approach, and one approach has none at all. If you roll back on GSV, they appear to be fitted to the various poles at different dates, too.
Simon
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by L.J.D »

Not so much a botch but the other night I was out and there's a newish puffin and pegasus crossing on the Glasshoughton southern relief road and the vehicle heads were on green but they were flashing quite fast and then they cut off completely. The pedestrian nearside lights were all still on whilst vehicle lights were off then they came back on and did a pedestrian demand. Very odd indeed. It kept doing it over and over with the lights flickering.
Rambo
Member
Posts: 1055
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 19:56
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Rambo »

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4630111 ... 384!8i8192
theres straight ahead and straight ahead? was there once a right turn filter here?
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jervi »

Rambo wrote: Tue Dec 08, 2020 22:33 https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4630111 ... 384!8i8192
theres straight ahead and straight ahead? was there once a right turn filter here?
Those are okay. The only movement allowed is ahead, left and right turns are banned.
Rambo
Member
Posts: 1055
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 19:56
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Rambo »

Not necessarily botched, but i find this one unusual at Bispham, Blackpool with four lights on one head vertically. https://www.google.com/maps/@53.8496466 ... 312!8i6656
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris Bertram »

Rambo wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 14:31 Not necessarily botched, but i find this one unusual at Bispham, Blackpool with four lights on one head vertically. https://www.google.com/maps/@53.8496466 ... 312!8i6656
Really? I'm finding that four-in-line is very common on newer installations, regardless of whether the fourth lamp is a green arrow or a box sign, and this applies even when there are not obvious reasons such as side clearance. I have to say that I find the traditional L-shape more pleasing on the eye, but maybe there is guidance out there these days that prefers the in-line signal arrangement.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
Gareth
Member
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 19:16
Location: Liverpool
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Gareth »

Interesting. I find in-line neater, personally.
Rambo
Member
Posts: 1055
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 19:56
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Rambo »

Chris Bertram wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 15:00
Rambo wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 14:31 Not necessarily botched, but i find this one unusual at Bispham, Blackpool with four lights on one head vertically. https://www.google.com/maps/@53.8496466 ... 312!8i6656
Really? I'm finding that four-in-line is very common on newer installations, regardless of whether the fourth lamp is a green arrow or a box sign, and this applies even when there are not obvious reasons such as side clearance. I have to say that I find the traditional L-shape more pleasing on the eye, but maybe there is guidance out there these days that prefers the in-line signal arrangement.
Personally i haven't seen many of these in line examples. But i agree i think the L shape gives the left/right turn more effect despite being chunkier.
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris Bertram »

Rambo wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 15:23
Chris Bertram wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 15:00
Rambo wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 14:31 Not necessarily botched, but i find this one unusual at Bispham, Blackpool with four lights on one head vertically. https://www.google.com/maps/@53.8496466 ... 312!8i6656
Really? I'm finding that four-in-line is very common on newer installations, regardless of whether the fourth lamp is a green arrow or a box sign, and this applies even when there are not obvious reasons such as side clearance. I have to say that I find the traditional L-shape more pleasing on the eye, but maybe there is guidance out there these days that prefers the in-line signal arrangement.
Personally i haven't seen many of these in line examples. But i agree i think the L shape gives the left/right turn more effect despite being chunkier.
What you might like is the Czech practice, which is sometimes to put filter arrows next to the *red* lamp, not the green. I think this works because the driver's eye will already be on that red lamp, and side-to-side head/eye movements are much more instinctive than up-and-down. This shot from Google Streetview shows such a signal, sadly at the wrong phase for the filter to be lit.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7500
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Big L »

Chris Bertram wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 16:27 What you might like is the Czech practice, which is sometimes to put filter arrows next to the *red* lamp, not the green. I think this works because the driver's eye will already be on that red lamp, and side-to-side head/eye movements are much more instinctive than up-and-down. This shot from Google Streetview shows such a signal, sadly at the wrong phase for the filter to be lit.
In Lithuania they put a green arrow on a metal sign next to the red light if you are allowed to turn right when the red light is on.
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris Bertram »

Big L wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 17:15
Chris Bertram wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 16:27 What you might like is the Czech practice, which is sometimes to put filter arrows next to the *red* lamp, not the green. I think this works because the driver's eye will already be on that red lamp, and side-to-side head/eye movements are much more instinctive than up-and-down. This shot from Google Streetview shows such a signal, sadly at the wrong phase for the filter to be lit.
In Lithuania they put a green arrow on a metal sign next to the red light if you are allowed to turn right when the red light is on.
Also the practice in the GDR, (green arrow on black in that case), and supposedly adopted in the united Germany, but I don't know how widespread it has become.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by jervi »

Big L wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 17:15
Chris Bertram wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 16:27 What you might like is the Czech practice, which is sometimes to put filter arrows next to the *red* lamp, not the green. I think this works because the driver's eye will already be on that red lamp, and side-to-side head/eye movements are much more instinctive than up-and-down. This shot from Google Streetview shows such a signal, sadly at the wrong phase for the filter to be lit.
In Lithuania they put a green arrow on a metal sign next to the red light if you are allowed to turn right when the red light is on.
I don't like that at all.
First of all I don't like ped crossings never get a dedicated green, and usually just go as an inline crossing and hope that turning vehicles give way to those who are crossing.
Second of all, if you are in the right lane wanting to go ahead, you may be blocking the person behind from turning right (since they can go but you cannot). This is especially worse for bicycles since they would either have to go into the left lane and then find themselves in between two vehicles going ahead, or alternatively someone could pass on their left and cut across in front of them.
User avatar
Gareth
Member
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 19:16
Location: Liverpool
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Gareth »

jervi wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 20:23 I don't like that at all.
First of all I don't like ped crossings never get a dedicated green, and usually just go as an inline crossing and hope that turning vehicles give way to those who are crossing.
Second of all, if you are in the right lane wanting to go ahead, you may be blocking the person behind from turning right (since they can go but you cannot). This is especially worse for bicycles since they would either have to go into the left lane and then find themselves in between two vehicles going ahead, or alternatively someone could pass on their left and cut across in front of them.
Those sort of pedestrian crossings are standard in almost all the rest of the world.

I'm not really a fan of right on red, but where it's allowed, there should be a right only lane. But it's common enough in North America, where right on red doesn't have a sign and is the default situation.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

I had reason to be looking around Kirkcaldy, Scotland on GSV and happened to notice their frequent use of both nearside and farside indicators together (perhaps authorised by the Scottish government). There's a examples of older Elite sites, LED 3G sites and newer Helios sites. I particularly enjoy this one, given the resident has a PEEK controller cabinet in their front yard!

I also came across two 'interesting' cycle facilities in Bristol, also on GSV. Firstly this non-standard use of a nearside Toucan indicator, and latterly this bizarre selection of push buttons, I assume with the intention of allowing cycles to cross the carriageway to and from the cycle lane.
Simon
tom66
Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 16:47

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by tom66 »

Talking about in-line lights this one in Leeds has interested me:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.81486 ... 384!8i8192

I've only ever seen the other two lamps lit up once. My guess is it allows left and right turns if the pedestrian signal ahead is active. Also has another unusual single traffic signal mounted on the pedestrian pole too.
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris Bertram »

tom66 wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:13 Talking about in-line lights this one in Leeds has interested me:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.81486 ... 384!8i8192

I've only ever seen the other two lamps lit up once. My guess is it allows left and right turns if the pedestrian signal ahead is active. Also has another unusual single traffic signal mounted on the pedestrian pole too.
From the size of it, a Mellor-style green arrow.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

tom66 wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:13 Talking about in-line lights this one in Leeds has interested me:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.81486 ... 384!8i8192

I've only ever seen the other two lamps lit up once. My guess is it allows left and right turns if the pedestrian signal ahead is active. Also has another unusual single traffic signal mounted on the pedestrian pole too.
We discussed this one a few pages back in this thread, it's an ahead and right filter.
traffic-light-man wrote: Sun Nov 01, 2020 10:50It seems the latter Leeds example has some quite clever staging using filters to allow walk-with-traffic pedestrian crossings. Firstly, the A660 city-bound runs an ahead and right filter, allowing the ped crossing on Woodhouse Street (left) to run. Then it would appear Woodhouse Street runs a 'Humberside right' (though not back-to-back), allowing the ped crossing on the A660 and Hyde Park Road to run concurrently.
Simon
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Stevie D »

Rambo wrote: Tue Dec 08, 2020 22:33 https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4630111 ... 384!8i8192
theres straight ahead and straight ahead? was there once a right turn filter here?
I believe that is the correct installation.
A green 'ahead' arrow on its own doesn't make it illegal to turn left or right, you need a traffic order backed up by a mandatory 'ahead only' sign.
I'm not sure what the legal situation is if you pass a green arrow but take a different route from the one indicated by the arrow – I don't recommend anyone tries it to find out though!
Post Reply