How many signal heads is "enough"?

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

Moderator: Site Management Team

User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

Speaking of height I always found Coventrys way of high poles was rather ridiculously high. I think those are way too high there's a few dotted around Coventry. The set I linked have recently been replaced with a lower one. There's two I've seen elsewhere in combination with arms.
tom66
Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 16:47

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by tom66 »

Conversely, while it's a horrid junction in so many other respects, I quite like the sign-gantry combo on the M62-M60 Bury Interchange:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.55059 ... 312!8i6656

...and, only 6 signals. Not quite sure of the purpose of the two heads on one arm at the far end - can't imagine the angle difference between the two makes much difference. The GSV car shows both green globes quite well.
User avatar
Nathan_A_RF
Member
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:53
Location: East Sussex/Southampton
Contact:

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by Nathan_A_RF »

I think 7 signals demonstrates how dangerous Bassett Avenue is.
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

Nathan_A_RF wrote: Wed Dec 15, 2021 13:43 I think 7 signals demonstrates how dangerous Bassett Avenue is.
Meanwhile in Aberdeen you've got this awfully under signalled crossing. I saw a news report about it a while back apparently alot of red light runners. Which isn't surprising. They were supposed to be adding a mast arm but it's yet to happen. I cannot understand who thought designing a crossing like that was a good idea it's awful especially with the roundabout approach.
User avatar
ReissOmari
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 21:51
Location: Birmingham

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by ReissOmari »

L.J.D wrote: Tue Dec 14, 2021 12:10 Speaking of height I always found Coventrys way of high poles was rather ridiculously high. I think those are way too high there's a few dotted around Coventry. The set I linked have recently been replaced with a lower one. There's two I've seen elsewhere in combination with arms.
Ever since I was younger I always thought these were incredibly high, I don't think I've ever seen ones as high as this in the country.

This junction in Coventry used to have 8 heads, including 2 secondary lights that were probably as high as the ones in Rednal that I posted above. They were removed earlier this year.
ReissOmari..
User avatar
Nathan_A_RF
Member
Posts: 719
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:53
Location: East Sussex/Southampton
Contact:

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by Nathan_A_RF »

There's quite a tall one here on the A272
Jonathan24
Member
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 19:45

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by Jonathan24 »

ReissOmari wrote: Fri Dec 17, 2021 22:25
L.J.D wrote: Tue Dec 14, 2021 12:10 Speaking of height I always found Coventrys way of high poles was rather ridiculously high. I think those are way too high there's a few dotted around Coventry. The set I linked have recently been replaced with a lower one. There's two I've seen elsewhere in combination with arms.
Ever since I was younger I always thought these were incredibly high, I don't think I've ever seen ones as high as this in the country.

This junction in Coventry used to have 8 heads, including 2 secondary lights that were probably as high as the ones in Rednal that I posted above. They were removed earlier this year.
Interesting to see 3 on amber and 1 on red - presumably one of them has been changed to LED, which changes slightly quicker than the others?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.40422 ... 312!8i6656
User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2457
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by the cheesecake man »

Does a standard pedestrian crossing really need six?
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

Also 8 here at Tingley Interchange
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

Now this is absolutely overkill. You can tell it was funded by National Highways as opposed to the local authority. I bet at night time its bright there. Mad how just that one crossing has 13 signal heads! That's more than some junctions!
User avatar
MotorwayGuy
Member
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
Location: S.E. London

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by MotorwayGuy »

It make me laugh in both from an environmental and budgetary point of view how we over-engineer things like signal head provision, especially with things like the above example which are clearly designed to encourage people to walk/cycle. Most countries seem to get away with far fewer signal heads. Mast arms are much more common in many European countries and in the States, but they often only use them with no primary heads.
tom66
Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 16:47

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by tom66 »

Three here on each side seems excessive
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3064944 ... 384!8i8192
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

tom66 wrote: Wed Jul 27, 2022 23:25 Three here on each side seems excessive
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3064944 ... 384!8i8192
I'd say its fair given one approach has a bend which blocks the view of the signals. They've doubled up on heads so the approach on the bend sees them coming round.
tom66
Member
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 16:47

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by tom66 »

L.J.D wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 14:50
tom66 wrote: Wed Jul 27, 2022 23:25 Three here on each side seems excessive
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3064944 ... 384!8i8192
I'd say its fair given one approach has a bend which blocks the view of the signals. They've doubled up on heads so the approach on the bend sees them coming round.
Fair enough, but is there a rule that states that has to be applied to all phases? The other direction has significantly better visibility.
User avatar
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

tom66 wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 18:45 Fair enough, but is there a rule that states that has to be applied to all phases? The other direction has significantly better visibility.
Maybe it's due to the slight bend here

This one here used to have 3 when it was Mellor but they removed the other one when they refurbished it and it was replaced with a higher level one. The intention was to have 3 heads there because they did install the NAL socket for another. I'd say 3 heads was justified there from this view and given the limit is NSL and the risk of trees obscuring the higher one.

Hard to believe that location at one point had NO signals until the 90s due to a fatal. If the Featherstone and Ackworth bypass is built it would be nice to see that old bridge returned to nature with a footpath across it. Unsure if it's listed but I doubt it.

Edit: It is listed grade 2 under the name of Little Went Bridge
User avatar
MotorwayGuy
Member
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
Location: S.E. London

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by MotorwayGuy »

L.J.D wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 19:22
tom66 wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 18:45 Fair enough, but is there a rule that states that has to be applied to all phases? The other direction has significantly better visibility.
Maybe it's due to the slight bend here

This one here used to have 3 when it was Mellor but they removed the other one when they refurbished it and it was replaced with a higher level one. The intention was to have 3 heads there because they did install the NAL socket for another. I'd say 3 heads was justified there from this view and given the limit is NSL and the risk of trees obscuring the higher one.

Hard to believe that location at one point had NO signals until the 90s due to a fatal. If the Featherstone and Ackworth bypass is built it would be nice to see that old bridge returned to nature with a footpath across it. Unsure if it's listed but I doubt it.

Edit: It is listed grade 2 under the name of Little Went Bridge
I'm surprised they didn't widen the footpath slightly when they put the signals there, the road over the bridge looks just wide enough for smaller cars to slither past each other. This one desperately needs to be signal controlled, especially since they are planning to build lots of housing nearby.
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3847
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by Brenley Corner »

The newest installation at Brenley Corner (2020?) on the A2 arm has quite a few!
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15721
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by Chris Bertram »

Brenley Corner wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 09:44 The newest installation at Brenley Corner (2020?) on the A2 arm has quite a few!
I'll say this again - what is the point of a totem pole on a far side (or indeed on any) secondary signal? Secondaries are there to assist traffic standing at a red signal waiting for it to change. You don't need a high-level signal in that situation.
“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
L.J.D
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 06:34
Location: W.Yorkshire

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by L.J.D »

Chris Bertram wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:34 I'll say this again - what is the point of a totem pole on a far side (or indeed on any) secondary signal? Secondaries are there to assist traffic standing at a red signal waiting for it to change. You don't need a high-level signal in that situation.
I'd say from this view the totem is reasonable if there are HGVs around blocking signals on the other side of the stop line. Plus there is a slight curve. The double chevron signs also lead me to believe there has been issues before with people missing the roundabout and going straight through.

Like here they doubled up on secondary heads again likely due to HGVs and buses blocking signals off if your in the middle lane you cannot see them.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4723
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: How many signal heads is "enough"?

Post by traffic-light-man »

In theory, on a two-lane approach with a signal on the immediate offside, canyoning from HGVs shouldn't really cause an issue as you'll be able to see one or the other, or you'll be stationary behind a big truck and won't be able to see anything anyway regardless of where it's positioned. When it does cause an issue, mast arms are usually the real answer, but of course there's a fear of mast arms in most authorities.

I have seen tall pole secondaries used where there's multiple movements signalled from the stop line, such as this site, as it avoids this situation where the primary tall poles viewed at distance are giving conflicting instructions that might not be ideal.
Simon
Post Reply