Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

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

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jonnyf90
Member
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 22:53
Location: Between Derby and Nottingham

Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by jonnyf90 »

Came across a few crazy signs today with unnecessarily accurate distances on them.

Anyone got any others?

Links
https://goo.gl/maps/1eySZykWU382 (43yds)

https://goo.gl/maps/rxYFe25YtMo (7/8 mile)
Una vida, bien vivida.
Veni, vidi, vici.
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Vierwielen »

I suspect that the humps extended for 40 metres (=43.77 yards) which was wrongly rounded to 43 yards.
User avatar
Viator
Member
Posts: 1768
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 19:06
Location: Llan-giwg

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Viator »

Not so much unnecessarily as charmingly accurate in this case, I feel:
Image
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Bryn666 »

Outside the village of Belmont on the A675 there is a clearway sign with a "For 4.04 miles" plate.

The .04 has since been scrubbed off but it is still visible.
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
User avatar
Owain
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 26147
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:02
Location: Leodis

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Owain »

I've posted this one before.
Former President & F99 Driver

Viva la Repubblica!
User avatar
jonnyf90
Member
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 22:53
Location: Between Derby and Nottingham

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by jonnyf90 »

Bryn666 wrote:Outside the village of Belmont on the A675 there is a clearway sign with a "For 4.04 miles" plate.

The .04 has since been scrubbed off but it is still visible.
Equivalent to 6.5km if I'm not mistaken :)
Viator wrote:Not so much unnecessarily as charmingly accurate in this case, I feel:
Image
Love the use of furlongs! 1 mile, 275 yards?
Una vida, bien vivida.
Veni, vidi, vici.
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3847
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Brenley Corner »

One I know about from sunny Bournemouth, or about 6 miles away to be precise: LINK

Tony
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Berk »

Brenley Corner wrote:One I know about from sunny Bournemouth, or about 6 miles away to be precise: LINK

Tony
You don't often see that level of precision on RCS's, usually just on fingerposts. Also, has anyone seen thirds of a mile, or is it just a Peterborough thing??
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Bryn666 »

That level of precision was abandoned in 1994 when all distances greater than 3 miles had to be rounded to the nearest whole mile.
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
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8984
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by wrinkly »

Berk wrote: Also, has anyone seen thirds of a mile, or is it just a Peterborough thing??
I assume you're not including 1/3 and 2/3 mile distances on advance exit signs on motorways where closely-spaced junctions prevent the use of 1 mile and 1/2 mile.
Sou'wester
Member
Posts: 416
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 17:39

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Sou'wester »

Funny this came up as I noticed this really accurate and rather new sign on the A303 the other day: -

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.20731 ... 312!8i6656
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Vierwielen »

wrinkly wrote:
Berk wrote: Also, has anyone seen thirds of a mile, or is it just a Peterborough thing??
I assume you're not including 1/3 and 2/3 mile distances on advance exit signs on motorways where closely-spaced junctions prevent the use of 1 mile and 1/2 mile.
Alternatively the text "1/3 mile" and "2/3" mile were ready to be plated over as "500 m" and "1000 m". I have also seen "1 1/4 mile" signs which I assume are a "shorthand" for "2000 m"
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Stevie D »

Sou'wester wrote:Funny this came up as I noticed this really accurate and rather new sign on the A303 the other day: -

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.20731 ... 312!8i6656
That's correct in that distances under 3 miles are supposed to be given to the nearest ¼ mile.

But it's incorrect to show inconsequential villages on a primary ADS. Amesbury I can just about accept, but then it should be Honiton, Exeter and maybe Yeovil or Taunton – the other villages have absolutely no place on that sign.
User avatar
Owain
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 26147
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:02
Location: Leodis

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Owain »

Stevie D wrote:
Sou'wester wrote:Funny this came up as I noticed this really accurate and rather new sign on the A303 the other day: -

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.20731 ... 312!8i6656
That's correct in that distances under 3 miles are supposed to be given to the nearest ¼ mile.

But it's incorrect to show inconsequential villages on a primary ADS. Amesbury I can just about accept, but then it should be Honiton, Exeter and maybe Yeovil or Taunton – the other villages have absolutely no place on that sign.
You could argue that at that point, it ought to have "(Warminster)" and even "(Frome)" on it, instead of the villages.
Former President & F99 Driver

Viva la Repubblica!
User avatar
Bfivethousand
Member
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
Location: Derbyshire

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Bfivethousand »

jonnyf90 wrote:Came across a few crazy signs today with unnecessarily accurate distances on them.
https://goo.gl/maps/1eySZykWU382 (43yds)
It would be accurate if it was, erm, accurate!!

Judging by the hazard marking module on the main road, I'd suggest the hump was only around 24 yards from the junction.
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Berk »

wrinkly wrote:
Berk wrote: Also, has anyone seen thirds of a mile, or is it just a Peterborough thing??
I assume you're not including 1/3 and 2/3 mile distances on advance exit signs on motorways where closely-spaced junctions prevent the use of 1 mile and 1/2 mile.
Ah yes, I'd forgotten about those...

It's a similar principle in Peterborough though.
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by A9NWIL »

jonnyf90 wrote:Came across a few crazy signs today with unnecessarily accurate distances on them.

Anyone got any others?

Links
https://goo.gl/maps/1eySZykWU382 (43yds)

https://goo.gl/maps/rxYFe25YtMo (7/8 mile)
What about this
I have posted it like this as I dont want the anti-metric brigade getting their hands on it! They will likely tear it down or deface it!
Attachments
road sign 120 metres.jpg
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
James1978
Member
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 18:12
Location: Darlington

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by James1978 »

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.52676 ... 6656?hl=en

I know it's blurred out on that image but that sign says "For 372 yds"!!
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Berk »

Stevie D wrote:
Sou'wester wrote:Funny this came up as I noticed this really accurate and rather new sign on the A303 the other day: -

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.20731 ... 312!8i6656
That's correct in that distances under 3 miles are supposed to be given to the nearest ¼ mile.

But it's incorrect to show inconsequential villages on a primary ADS. Amesbury I can just about accept, but then it should be Honiton, Exeter and maybe Yeovil or Taunton – the other villages have absolutely no place on that sign.
But (and it's quite a significant but)... I thought that when you aren't signing a PD, but a local one (e.g. Market Deeping, or the villages on the RCS), you can put them when they are the next available destination (i.e. The next available junction, or junctions)?? That's how I took it.
User avatar
Bfivethousand
Member
Posts: 1386
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
Location: Derbyshire

Re: Unnecessarily Accurate Distances on Signs

Post by Bfivethousand »

Overtaking prohibitions always seemed to bring out extreme precision amongst sign designers of yesteryear!
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
Post Reply