How accurate are distance signs?

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

Moderator: Site Management Team

User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Vierwielen »

linuxrocks wrote: Thu Mar 04, 2021 14:14
I'm from Adelaide, [... snip ...]

As to road distances on signs, they've never meant very much to me. If it says 5 miles to where ever, I just drive until I get there and not worry about counting down the distance. Maybe that's why I seem to get lost quite often.
As long as you didn't just follow the A1 out of Adelaide and continue driving until you got to the next major settlement. :D
User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2457
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by the cheesecake man »

crb11 wrote: Thu Mar 04, 2021 09:14 By proportion, this one is pretty bad: 'Cambridge 1 1/2', whereas it's 4 to the city centre (not allowing for the access restrictions, which add a further mile and a half). It looks like they measured things to the city council boundary rather than the centre.
It should be obvious from the rural location it's more than 1 1/2 miles to the City centre :ipunch: , even allowing for it being more of an overgrown market town than a city.
Even more strangely the 1 1/2 looks patched. :confused: How far was it previously?
Rambo
Member
Posts: 1055
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 19:56
Contact:

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Rambo »

Going slightly O/T again but related to imperial /metric.
My work has revolved around timber supply / sale and builders merchants especially still refer to lengths in both inches & MM. eg 4x2 / 100mm x 50mm. And often these sizes don't actually compare 100% The building industry has never fully converted.
crb11
Member
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 21:35
Location: Cambridge

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by crb11 »

the cheesecake man wrote: Fri Mar 05, 2021 12:41
crb11 wrote: Thu Mar 04, 2021 09:14 By proportion, this one is pretty bad: 'Cambridge 1 1/2', whereas it's 4 to the city centre (not allowing for the access restrictions, which add a further mile and a half). It looks like they measured things to the city council boundary rather than the centre.
It should be obvious from the rural location it's more than 1 1/2 miles to the City centre :ipunch: , even allowing for it being more of an overgrown market town than a city.
Even more strangely the 1 1/2 looks patched. :confused: How far was it previously?
Good question. I think it's been like that thirty years though - I first noticed it, including miscolouration, when walking that way as an undergraduate.
[real name Colin]
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Vierwielen »

Rambo wrote: Fri Mar 05, 2021 19:29 Going slightly O/T again but related to imperial /metric.
My work has revolved around timber supply / sale and builders merchants especially still refer to lengths in both inches & MM. eg 4x2 / 100mm x 50mm. And often these sizes don't actually compare 100% The building industry has never fully converted.
I believe that prior to metrication, the dimensions of planed timber related to the unplanned original and an allowance was made for planning. Metrication and EU rules came in at the same time and according to EU rules, the quoted dimensions had to be the dimensions of the supplied timber, not the dimensions before planning - hence dimensions such as 95 x 45 (it was 100 x 50, alternatively 2 x 4 before planning).
Runwell
Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 00:16

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Runwell »

On the A12 southbound after Witham South, the RCS installed a decade ago (following the addition of a third lane to Hatfield Peverel) states Chelmsford is 5 miles away. A mile and a half on, the old RCS dating from the 80s states Chelmsford is 6 miles away! It is actually the older RCS that is closer to being accurate, although Google Maps says the distance between the centre of Chelmsford and the older RCS is 6.6 miles, even though the route would still be the same as it was 30-40 years ago.
linuxrocks
Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 15:31

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by linuxrocks »

Rambo wrote: Fri Mar 05, 2021 19:29 Going slightly O/T again but related to imperial /metric.
My work has revolved around timber supply / sale and builders merchants especially still refer to lengths in both inches & MM. eg 4x2 / 100mm x 50mm. And often these sizes don't actually compare 100% The building industry has never fully converted.
In Australia, the Metric Conversion Board was disbanded in 1981, the country having gone completely metric. Except, you still buy a 900mm wide door (3 feet), and you probably always will. The costs of changing every door in every building to 1m or something, would be prohibitive. Type pressures too are generally refered to in lbs/sq in rather than kpa, by the average Joe. It doesn't matter much; it's just a number on the gauge, although govt vehicles generally have the kpa painted on the wheel arch. We still measure TVs in inches.

Here in the UK, I recently needed a Whitworth nut to repair a knitting machine. Can't get them in B&Q, Homebase, etc - they only sell metric nuts and bolts. I had to buy it over the internet.
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Vierwielen »

linuxrocks wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:02 In Australia, the Metric Conversion Board was disbanded in 1981, the country having gone completely metric. Except, you still buy a 900mm wide door (3 feet), and you probably always will. The costs of changing every door in every building to 1m or something, would be prohibitive. Type pressures too are generally refered to in lbs/sq in rather than kpa, by the average Joe. It doesn't matter much; it's just a number on the gauge, although govt vehicles generally have the kpa painted on the wheel arch. We still measure TVs in inches.
What you are looking at is the difference between "soft metrication" and "hard metrication". One of the best examples of "soft metrication" is railway gauges where 4 ft 8.5 in became 1435 mm (the exact value is 1435.1 mm). An example of "hard metrication" is in certain grocery sectors where 1 lb packs of butter etc were replaced by 500 g packs and 2 lb packs of sugar were replaced with 1 kg packs, however other grocery sectors, such as jam, used "soft metrication" where they replaced 1 lb jars with 450 g jars.
swissferry
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by swissferry »

Chris5156 wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 09:54
swissferry wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 21:28
swissferry wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 22:26 So the signage here is wrong as the countdown markers are on a lane drop and indicate the distance to the nose and taper (diagram 1042). Had previously thought this a little dangerous.
Wasn't sure if I should inform Traffic Scotland, Transport Scotland or BEAR Scotland, so informed all three and received a reply back from BEAR Scotland from message that Traffic Scotland forwarded to them advising "that we have made arrangements for the countdown markers to be picked up on next inspection for removal".
Excellent, well done! Great that you reported it and even better that you had a positive response :D
Drove past today and can confirm the countdown markers have been removed.
User avatar
RichardA626
Member
Posts: 7793
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 22:19
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by RichardA626 »

One imperial legacy are the screws on camera tripod mounts, which are a quarter inch. I'm not sure which thread pitch they used though.
Beware of the trickster on the roof
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Vierwielen »

James1 wrote: Tue Feb 02, 2021 16:34
Conekicker wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 23:41
James1 wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 22:29 Adopting the metric system would also solve this problem...
:pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig:

:D
you're probably right :lol:
One of the things that bugs me is that the Daily ***** uses "kpm" for "kilometres per hour" whereas the correct symbol (look at your car's speedo!) is "km/h". In Ireland, if you are charged with "driving at 80 kph in a 50 kph zone", can you get away using the technicality that "kph" has no meaning?
Chris56000
Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 21:16
Location: Walsall Wood, WALSALL, West Midlands

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Chris56000 »

Hi!

Apart from all this stupid and irrelevant discussion over beer, etc., which quite frankly isn't wanted in this thread, I have the following remarks and observations to make!

The current TSRGD stipulation is distances up to and including 3 miles are rounded to the nearest ¼ mile,whilst over three miles they're rounded up to the nearest mile – that I have no issue with – if you have one of the old AA Road Books of England and Wales in the black or maroon covers it's quite common to see a town plan with e.g. "A158 SKEGNESS 40¾" at the plan's edge, and really the ¾ added on the end is superfluous, but this used to be standard universal practice on P.W. finger–posts!

Fractions of a mile are more relavent to the cyclist or pedestrian than a motor–vehicle driver over medium to long distances, and for short distances, they're most useful where settlements are particularly small or close together, and it's not always obvious you're in the second or third of them in succession!

I definitely do NOT agree with the elimination of all local distances from directional signage – they don't need to be an any upright map–type first or second ADS – the correct place for distances to be quoted is on the "flag" or "pointer" signs at the junction itself, and on RCS.

My view is that the distance should only be omitted where it is walkable by a reasonably able–bodied adult without being too fatiguing – therefore a direction sign pointing off a main classified road to a village or locality should only have a distance omitted for 300 yards or less – anything including ¼ mile and above should have the distance shown on the sign!

Another bugbear which I've come across is very short distances to hazards in built–up and suburban areas – it's very common to see a triangular warning sign and "Hump 5 yards" on a supplementary plate below it pointing down a side street – the "5 yards" is totally irrelevant as this is approximately one car length and if anybody's eyesight is so bad that they can't see the hump than they shouldn't be driving!

All these silly very short distances serve no useful purpose whatsoever and the only indication needed is "Hump" with a left pointing arrow!

The A10 in Cambridgeshire and Norfolk north of Ely had a lot of local pointer signs giving distances to phone–boxes at or near lay–bys – there were a few where "5 yards" or "10 yards" was quoted, again totally unnecessary as you should be able to see where it's located from the main road if your eyesight meets the legal driving standards!

I can sum this up very simply as, if your eyesight meets the legal driving standards, there is no need for any distance under 25 yards to be quoted on any sign since you can see where the hazard is or the traffic restriction commences from – all that is needed is a direction arrow if appropriate!

Chris Williams
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: How accurate are distance signs?

Post by Vierwielen »

In 1980/1 I did a trans-Sahara trip. Travelling along one of the main roads (surfaced), I noticed that many of the villages were signposted to the nearest 0.1 km - they were typically no more than 2 or 3 km from the road.
Post Reply