Botched Roadsigns

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

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Johnathan404 »

stop.jpg
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15744
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Chris Bertram »

Johnathan404 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 14:31stop.jpg
Where?
“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
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Johnathan404 »

Chris Bertram wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 14:57 Where?
Ferrybank, Wexford
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Big L »

Johnathan404 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 18:40
Chris Bertram wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 14:57 Where?
Ferrybank, Wexford
I didn't think it looked like a Moto services, but I have seen the same sign at several of those. Stopping prohibited!
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Big L »

Steep hill upwards. Granted, there is a 16% climb some distance forwards, after a pretty steep drop, but it has its own sign. So have Bath just used the wrong sign here? There was another similar one elsewhere locally, but I can't find it at the moment.
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
Chris56000
Member
Posts: 1035
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 21:16
Location: Walsall Wood, WALSALL, West Midlands

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Chris56000 »

I do not know if is technically botched, but trying to make sense in the two seconds as you approach it before reaching the roundabout is quite a challenge.

https://goo.gl/maps/ea9DJiAqeZ62

I know that location, and can quite appreciate what it's trying to say, though one feels that there ought to be the regulation gap in the roundabout, at about 5 o'clock in the circle. Sudbury has a large gyratory system around its town centre, I think it takes about 10 minutes to do a complete circuit. This is at the SE corner, where traffic coming in from Great Cornard (I'm sure that should be a breed of bird) meets the circulation, and is more-or-less forced to head via the market place. The roundabout is there to enable traffic from the minor road on the left to turn right, and for traffic from the north to reach said minor road, while traffic already on the gyratory is given a cut-off that avoids the roundabout altogether.
The sign is clearly not new - a modern version would have a larger green patch to include Bury St Edmunds as well as the route number.
Hi!

I think the correct method now is to use one green patch for each number with the number in brackets in each patch. I've seen this idea depicted on the Sudbury sign in a number of places, it was common in the transition period of late 1980s to the late 1990s when the Guildford Rules were coming into general use – for a few years after the 1994 TSRGD made Guildford design principles law, it was common at primary/non–primary junctions to use Guildford Designs on the primary route, and a non–Guildford Rules design on the non–primary side roads with number patches like the example shown!

Chris Williams
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Arcuarius »

rw93 wrote: Thu Oct 11, 2018 14:39 I pass this sign everyday on the way back from work and it irritates me, just after J12 on the M6 northbound.

https://goo.gl/maps/HtBtg4WMa9N2

The "8" is upside down, the "4" of "24" is on a plate, as is "64". "Stoke-on" and "Manchester" are the same.

I can only assume that the sign was in a different location at some point and had to be adapted for it's new location? Bit weird.
Also the "M6" at the top is in the wrong font and "North West" should be in capitals.

But at least it's mostly the right colour...
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
User avatar
ellandback
Member
Posts: 1366
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 08:48
Location: Elland, West Yorkshire

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by ellandback »

I kind of get why this is here (it's where the M53 becomes the A55) but it still seems a bit unnecessary.
User avatar
IrishCrusader
Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 09:30
Location: Amersham

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by IrishCrusader »

ellandback wrote: Wed Oct 24, 2018 13:06 I kind of get why this is here (it's where the M53 becomes the A55) but it still seems a bit unnecessary.
Surely the M53 IS a dual carriageway?
What a completely pointless sign.
User avatar
Euan
Member
Posts: 1851
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 07:59
Location: North Ayrshire

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Euan »

ellandback wrote: Wed Oct 24, 2018 13:06 I kind of get why this is here (it's where the M53 becomes the A55) but it still seems a bit unnecessary.
Surely a "motorway end" sign or something indicating the end of the motorway however far ahead would have been better?
E-roads, M-roads, A-roads, N-roads, B-roads, R-roads, C-roads, L-roads, U-roads, footpaths
mikehindsonevans
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:44
Location: Cheshire, but working week time in Cambridge

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by mikehindsonevans »

Euan wrote: Thu Oct 25, 2018 21:51
ellandback wrote: Wed Oct 24, 2018 13:06 I kind of get why this is here (it's where the M53 becomes the A55) but it still seems a bit unnecessary.
Surely a "motorway end" sign or something indicating the end of the motorway however far ahead would have been better?
"I associate myself with the comments of the previous speaker" - deffo an EoM sign would have been better and less prone to incurring scorn or derision.
Mike Hindson-Evans.
Never argue with a conspiracy theorist.
They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Arcuarius »

Google hasn't been updated yet but the brand new half-mile gantry ADS on the northbound M1 approaching junction 25 are missing their arrows.

It's a sign designing error at its most basic, and an overseeing organisation that seemingly only cares when it suits them about what's being installed on their network... but what really gets me is the fact that similar signs at 1 mile and the diverge do have them, and sign plates are ordered in together, so surely somebody must have noticed that one gantry is not like the others?

I've been able to design signs for 11 years and could spot glaring omissions like this at a glance.

Does nobody in Highways England (or their Major Projects design contractors, come to that) even care any more? :evil:
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
User avatar
Viator
Member
Posts: 1768
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 19:06
Location: Llan-giwg

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Viator »

Big L wrote: Thu Oct 18, 2018 20:06 Steep hill upwards. Granted, there is a 16% climb some distance forwards, after a pretty steep drop, but it has its own sign. So have Bath just used the wrong sign here? There was another similar one elsewhere locally, but I can't find it at the moment.
It also seems odd to me (your second example) to have "Keep in low gear" on the upward slope.
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3331
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by ManomayLR »

Arcuarius wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:37 Google hasn't been updated yet but the brand new half-mile gantry ADS on the northbound M1 approaching junction 25 are missing their arrows.
There's a very simple misunderstanding associated with that - the type of gantry used. The gantries currently being installed are smart motorway ones supporting VSL and MS4 systems. These new ones have only the lane control signals on the gantry itself and the lane arrows are supposed to be on the ADS above the actual gantry beam and ABOVE the lane control signals, like here on the M1 at J19 where the ADS are properly done.

But on older-style, non-smart gantries with MS1 signals, often the lane arrows are BELOW the lane control signals on the actual gantry beam. An example is here on the M1 near LFE.

They've probably just mixed up which gantries are used with where the lane arrows need to be. The funniest thing will be seeing lane arrows below VSL signals, like on the M4 in Wales. The same mistake has been made on the M25 at J16.
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Arcuarius »

EpicChef wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 15:15
Arcuarius wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:37 Google hasn't been updated yet but the brand new half-mile gantry ADS on the northbound M1 approaching junction 25 are missing their arrows.
There's a very simple misunderstanding associated with that - the type of gantry used. The gantries currently being installed are smart motorway ones supporting VSL and MS4 systems. These new ones have only the lane control signals on the gantry itself and the lane arrows are supposed to be on the ADS above the actual gantry beam and ABOVE the lane control signals, like here on the M1 at J19 where the ADS are properly done.

But on older-style, non-smart gantries with MS1 signals, often the lane arrows are BELOW the lane control signals on the actual gantry beam. An example is here on the M1 near LFE.

They've probably just mixed up which gantries are used with where the lane arrows need to be. The funniest thing will be seeing lane arrows below VSL signals, like on the M4 in Wales. The same mistake has been made on the M25 at J16.
These are offset stack-type signs, the ones with the arrows on the sign itself off to the side. The space is obvious where the arrows should have been printed. The other gantries are of exactly the same design; a copy-and-paste is all that was needed.
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Conekicker »

Arcuarius wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:37 Google hasn't been updated yet but the brand new half-mile gantry ADS on the northbound M1 approaching junction 25 are missing their arrows.

It's a sign designing error at its most basic, and an overseeing organisation that seemingly only cares when it suits them about what's being installed on their network... but what really gets me is the fact that similar signs at 1 mile and the diverge do have them, and sign plates are ordered in together, so surely somebody must have noticed that one gantry is not like the others?

I've been able to design signs for 11 years and could spot glaring omissions like this at a glance.

Does nobody in Highways England (or their Major Projects design contractors, come to that) even care any more? :evil:
No one at HE checks contractor designs because that's what the contractors are paid to do - provide a conforming design that has been designed and checked by staff with the appropriate skill level. If the contractor is incompetent, which sadly is becoming more likely these days due to the ever-worsening skills shortage, then they should be brought to task.

Allowing that I haven't seen the sign in question, note also that TSRGD does not show what gantry signs should look like these days, so legally speaking the sign probably isn't unlawful, unless there's some other aspect of the design that makes it non-prescribed. I doubt that would be very likely to be the case here though.

Having said that, someone in the chain from designer, through manufacturer to installer should perhaps have at least queried matters. Which raises a different set of issues entirely.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3331
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by ManomayLR »

Conekicker wrote:
Allowing that I haven't seen the sign in question, note also that TSRGD does not show what gantry signs should look like these days, so legally speaking the sign probably isn't unlawful, unless there's some other aspect of the design that makes it non-prescribed.
The TSRGD should make it clear where lane arrows should go. Below lane control signals or above them?
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Conekicker »

EpicChef wrote: Sat Oct 27, 2018 00:31
Conekicker wrote:
Allowing that I haven't seen the sign in question, note also that TSRGD does not show what gantry signs should look like these days, so legally speaking the sign probably isn't unlawful, unless there's some other aspect of the design that makes it non-prescribed.
The TSRGD should make it clear where lane arrows should go. Below lane control signals or above them?
The preference these days is for the arrow to be included within the sign face, much like the old Diagram 2021.1. See IAN 144.

http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/h ... IAN144.pdf

Although quite where that advice will end up when DMRB is rejigged over the next year or two I'm not aware.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
DB617
Member
Posts: 1286
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2017 00:51
Location: Bristol

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by DB617 »

EpicChef wrote: Fri Oct 26, 2018 15:15

They've probably just mixed up which gantries are used with where the lane arrows need to be. The funniest thing will be seeing lane arrows below VSL signals, like on the M4 in Wales
You know, for all my time spent on the M4 near The Coldra I had never noticed the contraflow AMIs on the eastbound side of that gantry. That's some expensive and mostly completely useless provision for a crossover. I've never even seen a contraflow used on the Newport Bypass as widening works have never and will never be seen there. If there was a total closure the diversion would be via the A48 SDR through Newport. Anyone know what the point of those AMIs is?
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3331
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by ManomayLR »

2.28 Gantry arrows must not be shown beneath matrix or variable speed limit indicator
signs mounted on the fascia of gantries.
So this is wrong, even though it has been the design for so many years, and this is right? Even on non-smart motorways?
But the M4 in London has the weirdest solution: BOTH above and below!
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
Post Reply