Cones

[hat]

we had a real case last year at work where an accident form was completed after a first aid bag fell off the wall & hit someone in the face

i never heard what the corrective action was..

[traffic-light-man]

Getting back to cones -

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but went on the M62 over to Bradford last week and noticed at several of the entry points to the roadworks, the innermost green and yellow cone had a static red Dorman ConeLITE, presumably to ensure site vehicles stop and give way to traffic entering the site from the carriageway.

Has anyone seen this elsewhere?

[novaecosse]

Getting back to cones -

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but went on the M62 over to Bradford last week and noticed at several of the entry points to the roadworks, the innermost green and yellow cone had a static red Dorman ConeLITE, presumably to ensure site vehicles stop and give way to traffic entering the site from the carriageway.

Has anyone seen this elsewhere?

I'd heard it's so the Site Access can be identified in the dark.

I think it's a bad idea. The only place I've seen red conelites used is on closed snowgates..

[SC2]

A red light means stop. Having one showing on the motorway, where cars might see it and stop, is a downright dangerous idea.

[Conekicker]

A red light means stop. Having one showing on the motorway, where cars might see it and stop, is a downright dangerous idea.

No, no, no. It's safer, much, much safer. Some well-meaning person, (who hasn't considered all [or any?] aspects of this situation), has given it a whole nano-seconds thought (max), honest guv. FFS but this needs stopping quickly before someone gets confused and does something daft (sound of screeching tyres and metallic impact noises off) .

A red light on a warning lamp such as is mentioned above is not permitted by TSRGD and is thus an unlawful obstruction to the highway. Glad it's not my lot doing this.

Edit: Note to self, check tomorrow morning just to make sure it isn't my lot. If it is, write snotty email.

[Bomag]

A red light means stop. Having one showing on the motorway, where cars might see it and stop, is a downright dangerous idea.

No, no, no. It's safer, much, much safer. Some well-meaning person, (who hasn't considered all [or any?] aspects of this situation), has given it a whole nano-seconds thought (max), honest guv. FFS but this needs stopping quickly before someone gets confused and does something daft (sound of screeching tyres and metallic impact noises off) .

A red light on a warning lamp such as is mentioned above is not permitted by TSRGD and is thus an unlawful obstruction to the highway. Glad it's not my lot doing this.

Edit: Note to self, check tomorrow morning just to make sure it isn't my lot. If it is, write snotty email.

I wonder what would happen if I went and collected them? Better still get the Police to remove them

[novaecosse]

A red light means stop. Having one showing on the motorway, where cars might see it and stop, is a downright dangerous idea.

No, no, no. It's safer, much, much safer. Some well-meaning person, (who hasn't considered all [or any?] aspects of this situation), has given it a whole nano-seconds thought (max), honest guv. FFS but this needs stopping quickly before someone gets confused and does something daft (sound of screeching tyres and metallic impact noises off) .

A red light on a warning lamp such as is mentioned above is not permitted by TSRGD and is thus an unlawful obstruction to the highway. Glad it's not my lot doing this.

Edit: Note to self, check tomorrow morning just to make sure it isn't my lot. If it is, write snotty email.

I wonder what would happen if I went and collected them? Better still get the Police to remove them

It's more fun to refuse Network Access for that TM Contractor on the basis they don't comply with the relevant standards.
I'm not shy - I'll raise Improvement Reports against 3rd parties working on our Network who's TM isn't up to scratch. I had one take down signs which were not compliant (distances marked in kilometres)

[Conekicker]

Guess what?
GRRRRRRRRRRRR

Can anyone explain why I bother please?

[novaecosse]

Guess what?
GRRRRRRRRRRRR

Can anyone explain why I bother please?

It must be the money... you get to the stage where you just say... it, just please yourselves...

[Conekicker]

Guess what?
GRRRRRRRRRRRR

Can anyone explain why I bother please?

It must be the money... you get to the stage where you just say... it, just please yourselves...

Blimey, a Jock mind reader - that's EXACTLY what I found myself thinking this afternoon

[Dougman]

More recently, I have included unpredictable live traffic as a site specific hazard - as part of an explanation of how the Blackwall Tunnel tidal flow used to work, coupled with the fact that drivers would reasonably frequently end up in the wrong lane in the tidal flow, and therefore might not approach the works in quite the place you'd expect.

Which is exactly what the regs are trying to get at. This is a risk that is unusual to that location and a Competent Contractor would not be aware of, or have knowledge to minimise.

Actually, that's a really good example, mind if I use that in any training that I give?

[M4Mark]

Getting back to cones -

It's my sad duty to report that the 'multicoloured cone menace' has migrated to the M40
I saw two green cones this morning on the M40 northbound at Stokenchurch.

Hardshoulder closure on the downhill through the cutting with standard TM until I saw at the end where there is clear works exit signs two green cones one either side marking the exit. You'd have to be blind not to see the Works Exit sign or an idiot to exit straight into Lane 1 instead of going out the end onto the shoulder so serve no purpose.

I fear that it won't be long until some well meaning but wrong headed person puts one of these multicoloured menaces' in a line of red cones.

[Bryn666]

Someone in authority should alert the DfT and HA to put a stop to it?

[novaecosse]

Hardshoulder closure on the downhill through the cutting with standard TM until I saw at the end where there is clear works exit signs two green cones one either side marking the exit. You'd have to be blind not to see the Works Exit sign or an idiot to exit straight into Lane 1 instead of going out the end onto the shoulder so serve no purpose..

Am I understanding you correctly?!

They have the hardshoulder coned off, and the Works Exit directing works vehicles into Lane 1, instead of using the hardshoulder to pick up speed, then join the main carriageway?

That's causing an unneccessary hazard!

[M4Mark]

Am I understanding you correctly?!
They have the hardshoulder coned off, and the Works Exit directing works vehicles into Lane 1, instead of using the hardshoulder to pick up speed, then join the main carriageway?
That's causing an unneccessary hazard!

No, it's not that at all, sorry, it's a standard hardshoulder closure with a straight on works exit continuing on the hardshoulder. There is a works exit sign on the verge and a green cone on the verge and one on the works side next to the last red cone along the carriageway edge of the hardshoulder (I'd refer to the Ch8 diagram but I don't have time before the office is locked and I have to leave).

[Conekicker]

Am I understanding you correctly?!
They have the hardshoulder coned off, and the Works Exit directing works vehicles into Lane 1, instead of using the hardshoulder to pick up speed, then join the main carriageway?
That's causing an unneccessary hazard!

No, it's not that at all, sorry, it's a standard hardshoulder closure with a straight on works exit continuing on the hardshoulder. There is a works exit sign on the verge and a green cone on the verge and one on the works side next to the last red cone along the carriageway edge of the hardshoulder (I'd refer to the Ch8 diagram but I don't have time before the office is locked and I have to leave).

Hmmm, so let me get this right. A bog standard works exit sign and total lack on coning after the last red and white cone, closely followed by a "roadworks end" aren't enough to tell experienced site workers that they are leaving site and the only way to solve this mahoosive problem is to bung a couple of green cones into the mix.

Yes.

Right.

Obviously a brilliant solution to a problem that doesn't now, never has or ever will exist.

When questioned, the moron, errm, genius who thought this up will, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever, claim that "It's safer". Is it bollo...

[SC2]

Is the issue with this (and dodgy signs etc in general) the people in question don't have a good enough knowledge of the relevant standards, or do they just choose to ignore them?

[M4Simon]

More recently, I have included unpredictable live traffic as a site specific hazard - as part of an explanation of how the Blackwall Tunnel tidal flow used to work, coupled with the fact that drivers would reasonably frequently end up in the wrong lane in the tidal flow, and therefore might not approach the works in quite the place you'd expect.

Which is exactly what the regs are trying to get at. This is a risk that is unusual to that location and a Competent Contractor would not be aware of, or have knowledge to minimise.

Actually, that's a really good example, mind if I use that in any training that I give?

Fine by me. They no longer run tidal flow because of this reason - police decision if I recall correctly. They still run maintenance ocntraflows from time to time though.

Cheers,

Simon

[novaecosse]

Is the issue with this (and dodgy signs etc in general) the people in question don't have a good enough knowledge of the relevant standards, or do they just choose to ignore them?

It's people inventing solutions to problems which don't exist, under the guise of innovation.

I must be a right misery guts... I sit at TM meetings and get shown all sorts of innovations... the majority are met with "that's a stupid idea... next!"

Occasionally someone presents something decent, which solves an actual problem, and I'm happy to drive it forward... such as NAL's telescopic goalpost system for overhead cables.

[Bomag]

Is the issue with this (and dodgy signs etc in general) the people in question don't have a good enough knowledge of the relevant standards, or do they just choose to ignore them?

It's people inventing solutions to problems which don't exist, under the guise of innovation.

I must be a right misery guts... I sit at TM meetings and get shown all sorts of innovations... the majority are met with "that's a stupid idea... next!"

Occasionally someone presents something decent, which solves an actual problem, and I'm happy to drive it forward... such as NAL's telescopic goalpost system for overhead cables.

I haven't heard of the NAL system, which is a first as I get sent some really wacky stuff.

I just looked at their site and saw the support sitting in the working width of the barrier