Botched Roadsigns

[vlad]

Tram Tracks

In fairness, it's easier to skid in that way on a bicycle than in a car.

[Johnathan404]

It's a silly botch but in this case I'd take it as a hint that a real symbol for this situation would be helpful.

[drm567]

Tram Tracks

My late father used to talk of riding his bike, when he was a teenager, down London Road in Leicester. He commented how dodgy the tram tracks were. I don't suppose there were any signs like that then, mind you he wouldn't have seen them - one of his tricks was riding backwards sitting on the handlebars.

[Goldberg]

This sign on the A19:

sunderland9.png (18.78 KiB) Viewed 1949 times

The message being conveyed here is that Sunderland is 9 miles away, whereas in actual fact, Sunderland is 20 miles away from this sign.

The sign seems to be a replacement for this one:

sunderland9.png (17.91 KiB) Viewed 1949 times

It could be that this sign was intended for use further north or that it originally said 'Sunderland A19', where the '-A1-' bit has worn off. The older sign, with the number '9' in yellow would seemingly favour the latter theory & that this was carried-over onto the new sign.

[Chris5156]

We've probably had this before, but what is going on with this pair of warning signs on the A40? I didn't know hazards could be non-primary or primary.

Elsewhere, LB Hillingdon installed a new set of traffic lights in South Ruislip with some terrible signage. I'm delighted to be able to get two botched signs facing two different directions in the same picture here.

[Blatso]

Going over the Queensferry Crossing on Friday, and saw a no chopsticks sign on the main carriageway just before the bridge, then followed by the blue signs on the overhead gantries

The Queensferry Crossing isn't subject to motorway regulations yet.

Yeah, noticed the yellow sign heading north yesterday. Just confused by all the blue signs and stuff

[Klepsydra]

The MSA sign "designers" appear to have branched out into mosques.

"Enter With Care Forbidden"?

[A303Chris]

.Elsewhere, LB Hillingdon installed a new set of traffic lights in South Ruislip with some terrible signage. I'm delighted to be able to get two botched signs facing two different directions in the same picture here.

That looks like a consultant undertaking S278 works not understanding the TSRGD then the council officer checking it not understanding the TSRGD as well. You would have thought that was picked up in the checking process. I like the fact the ADS is actually after the junction its referring to.

[Chris5156]

That looks like a consultant undertaking S278 works not understanding the TSRGD then the council officer checking it not understanding the TSRGD as well. You would have thought that was picked up in the checking process. I like the fact the ADS is actually after the junction its referring to.

Yes, I think you're right. The ADS in the other direction is correctly positioned in advance, so I wonder how this one came to be placed where it is.

[Arcuarius]

The MSA sign "designers" appear to have branched out into mosques.

"Enter With Care Forbidden"?

"You must not enter with care?"

[Big L]

I don't know - I would probably have at least mentioned the M56 somewhere on the new sign.

EDIT Maybe there wasn't room after they made sure to leave that odd blank grey space on the left.

[Chris5156]

I don't know - I would probably have at least mentioned the M56 somewhere on the new sign.

EDIT Maybe there wasn't room after they made sure to leave that odd blank grey space on the left.

I reckon I could just about have shoehorned it in next to the airport symbol...

[Bryn666]

Hmmm, looks like my original design got changed somewhat there as it said M56 but not Altrincham, which shouldn't be under the A556 patch. I also specified new posts, not recycling the old ones... That's why there's a stupid grey blob there.

Also I'm sure it just said (M6) on my design!

They've replaced a load of signs to have Altrincham on and made a right horlicks of it. Tinkers. Obviously gone back to getting civils staff to do traffic work :-/

[Robert Kilcoyne]

BigL191017Capture.JPG
I don't know - I would probably have at least mentioned the M56 somewhere on the new sign.

EDIT Maybe there wasn't room after they made sure to leave that odd blank grey space on the left.

Three obvious errors on the new sign; no mention of the (M56); Altrincham is not reached by the A50, but the A50 would lead to the M6 North, which is not signed at all.

[Burns]

I don't know enough about Norwegian signage standards to know if this is botched or not but can you work out, at a glance, what message it's trying to convey?

The left turn, which is marked as a no entry, is two way for the first 100m or so. The right turn is also a two way road for about a kilometre before the one way kicks in. The right turn, as mentioned on the sign is 3km away and you pass through two tunnels before reaching it but the spacing doesn't accurately indicate that that's the case. I know the area quite well but I'd imagine most tourists would be perplexed by it. Let me know how you interpret it.

[vlad]

Let me know how you interpret it.

I don't know anything about Norwegian signs either but I'd understand this to mean we're approaching a staggered crossroads where our road (the E16 to Voss) runs straight through. Traffic can't turn left as it's presumably one-way towards us. The right turn will take us onto a road that reaches Stalheimskleiva after 3 km. I've no idea where the white arrow fits in as it seems incidental to the rest of the sign (is it one of these diversion symbols?).

[Big L]

Is this a sign for A47 Junction 1/2 ?

[ais523]

An interesting combination: this road sign is a) 100% clear but b) utterly baffling. "Give way to oncoming traffic" is normally used (like it is on the previous sign at this location) for a sign that describes a specific hazard at a single point; that hazard has already been and gone (it's for what's presumably a traffic calming measure on the *other* side of the bridge just behind the camera, and the road itself is an S2 as it passes under the bridge). There's no "for X yards" on the "give way to oncoming traffic" sign either. So why would anyone feel compelled to put up an "end of give way to oncoming traffic" sign (which I strongly suspect is not actually an approved sort of sign) a short distance afterwards?

[Johnathan404]

I've shared this before but Street View didn't do it justice. It's pointing down an unclassified road.

I would excuse it as a product of a time when all the signs were shabby, but the way the N11 has been included - which is required to access the motorways - just rubs salt in the wound.

[Bryn666]

An interesting combination: this road sign is a) 100% clear but b) utterly baffling. "Give way to oncoming traffic" is normally used (like it is on the previous sign at this location) for a sign that describes a specific hazard at a single point; that hazard has already been and gone (it's for what's presumably a traffic calming measure on the *other* side of the bridge just behind the camera, and the road itself is an S2 as it passes under the bridge). There's no "for X yards" on the "give way to oncoming traffic" sign either. So why would anyone feel compelled to put up an "end of give way to oncoming traffic" sign (which I strongly suspect is not actually an approved sort of sign) a short distance afterwards?

The end sign is allowed but should be provided only where visibility is poor and the restricted length is not obvious. So that is a rubbish sign.