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
Gareth
Member
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 19:16
Location: Liverpool
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Gareth »

Speaking of which, are Mellors still being manufactured? I know TSC were making them well into the last decade but I've personally not seen a new installation for years.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4728
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

TSC have now merged with Motus and I think as such, most if not all of the TSC lines will have been discontinued. Unless they're still manufacturing the TSC modular head, it was incredibly short lived really!
Simon
boing_uk
Account deactivated at user request
Posts: 5366
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 16:01

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by boing_uk »

Not merged; bought out. Considering most of Motus was formed out of ex-TSC guys forming USCO and then the tie up with Techmiracle to form Motus, the irony is obvious.
mercer
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 17:48
Location: Preston

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by mercer »

We are currently in the middle of a big retrofitting programme in Leicester converting Halogen to LED (See http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Thous ... story.html) which is throwing up the odd botch here or there.

Most recent one I noticed today was on this junction https://goo.gl/maps/Uj2d5VCd2p82 The head in the link was been replaced but the lower left turn aspect has been fitted upside down so its displaying a right aspect, however the right turn is a banned movement.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4728
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

Check this one out. Only just spotted it.

I'll have to go and see if it's been rectified yet, I don't travel that direction along there all to often.
Simon
User avatar
dragonv480
Member
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 23:14
Location: Dumfries and Galloway
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by dragonv480 »

traffic-light-man wrote:Check this one out. Only just spotted it.

I'll have to go and see if it's been rectified yet, I don't travel that direction along there all to often.
"Definitely no U-Turns, do you hear me?!"

;)
Cheers! Image

Gaz Wilson
User avatar
MotorwayGuy
Member
Posts: 1001
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
Location: S.E. London

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by MotorwayGuy »

Andy33gmail
Member
Posts: 3943
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 09:26
Location: Littleport, Ely, Cambridge

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Andy33gmail »

dragonv480 wrote:
traffic-light-man wrote:Check this one out. Only just spotted it.

I'll have to go and see if it's been rectified yet, I don't travel that direction along there all to often.
"Definitely no U-Turns, do you hear me?!"

;)
Given the recent trend of having different signs applying to each lane - e.g. an ahead only arrow on the left pole and right only on the right pole - I think it's fair to say that the double sign means the restriction applies to lane 2 as well as 3. So it's very clear, if you want to do a u-turn, you must do so from lane 1 :-)
User avatar
michael769
Member
Posts: 11413
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 20:36
Location: Polbeth, West Lothian
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by michael769 »

MotorwayGuy wrote:Why not double up?

The lack of borders on those lights somehow make them seem dirty.
Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
Thomas Robert Dewar(1864-1930)
Take the pledge
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris5156 »

michael769 wrote:
MotorwayGuy wrote:Why not double up?
The lack of borders on those lights somehow make them seem dirty.
Before I moved to London, I always thought the same about London traffic lights. Outside London it's almost completely unknown for lights to be installed without the white backing boards, but within London most don't have them.

We've had threads before discussing this difference, but nobody's ever quite got to the bottom of why that is!
Andy33gmail
Member
Posts: 3943
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 09:26
Location: Littleport, Ely, Cambridge

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Andy33gmail »

Because junctions almost always have lights in London, you're always looking for them. And the skill level of drivers is much better. Plus the speed limits are never higher than 40mph, so they're never required

Elsewhere, they're more likely to be a surprise

Just a guess
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Johnathan404 »

Is it me or are backing boards becoming more common on London traffic lights?

(It's entirely possible I just drive on the wrong roads.)
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Chris5156 »

Johnathan404 wrote:Is it me or are backing boards becoming more common on London traffic lights?

(It's entirely possible I just drive on the wrong roads.)
I'm not sure I think they are. I'd say that as sets of lights are renewed with new equipment, the overall ratio of lights with backing boards to lights without never changes - ie, the presence of backing boards in general never seems to change much. But the presence of backing boards at any given junction often changes when the equipment is renewed. And more than that, the presence of backing boards at any one set of lights doesn't seem related to anything in particular: lights with backing boards get replaced with new lights without and vice versa; there's successive sets of lights on the same road both with and without, etc.

It seems to be down to the whim of the installation team, or perhaps whether they've got any backing boards in the van! I can certainly never see any logic or consistency in their application.
urbanfox
Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 06:45

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by urbanfox »

The lights on the roundabout at M42 J10 aren't quite right this week. Been causing delays back up the A5 towards Tamworth and the roundabout itself has been near gridlocked every morning when I've gone in to work.

For all its signage faults, it usually runs pretty smoothly.
User avatar
Dougman
Member
Posts: 974
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 10:15
Location: Dundee

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by Dougman »

lose: (v): to suffer the deprivation of - to lose one's job; to lose one's life.

loose: (a): free or released from fastening or attachment - a loose end.
User avatar
dragonv480
Member
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 23:14
Location: Dumfries and Galloway
Contact:

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by dragonv480 »

MotorwayGuy wrote:Why not double up?

I raise you this and this
Cheers! Image

Gaz Wilson
User avatar
kit
Banned
Posts: 2596
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 19:57

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by kit »

Somewhat in contrast to the trend to fit multiple secondary lights these lights inexplicably only have a secondary for straight on, which is just about okay in the opposite direction but heading south the left signal changes before straight.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Mar ... bd4675cbe5

I now stop a bit behind the lead car in case they don't see the change so I can go around them, but they are very poorly sequenced lights.
I didn't want to believe my Dad was stealing from his job as a road worker. But when I got home, all the signs were there.
UTCPaul
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2013 13:34

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by UTCPaul »

MotorwayGuy wrote:Why not double up?
They are primary and secondary signals - you can tell as they have different hoods.

They are waaaayy too close together though - I wonder if they were designed by someone with a book, GSV, and autocad, rather than someone who has been to the site and thought about it ;)
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4728
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by traffic-light-man »

dragonv480 wrote:
MotorwayGuy wrote:Why not double up?

I raise you this and this
I know of a few sites like that. I guess in practise, it achieves the same as having two offside heads on separate poles.

There's this site in Liverpool, and this site in Warrington.
Simon
ianwallis
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 13:48

Re: Botched Traffic Signals

Post by ianwallis »

Why on earth would you do this. It looks awful and doesn't seem to serve any useful purpose. At a push the one in Warrington could be argued to improve visibility to the side road traffic but I struggle to really see the need.

Incidentally I note the stoplines don't extend across the hatched areas which I believe they should do.
Post Reply