Botched Roadsigns

[Komi san]

No sign in middle of road(?)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/WTKyJMrR1u9BEFW97

[MotorwayGuy]

I've posted before about countdown markers at lane drops, there is a set on the A2 Londonbound at Bean. There was also another set at Bexleyheath (only one remains now though). These are a relic from before the junction was remarked as a lane drop in the early 2000s, and are also fully present in the other direction and here.

As for the lane drop signs, I have posted about these before. These ones on the A102 would have been installed no earlier than 1999. There's one here on the A6. Then there's this thing on the M2 (NI) that exists because clearly nobody could think of a better way of signing it.

This junction on the A417 gets everything wrong. It has one of the werid lane drop signs, some signs in the wrong colour, countdown markers and a fork sign for a lane drop.

[EthanL13]

No sign in middle of road(?)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/WTKyJMrR1u9BEFW97

They're all strangely placed, should be right after the gore. These are placed on the slip roads leaving the carriageway for some reason too.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gyQ2wktwdYFfaK5B7
https://maps.app.goo.gl/9kuovjuFcn95M2kh7

[wallmeerkat]

Then there's this thing on the M2 (NI) that exists because clearly nobody could think of a better way of signing it.

The previous iteration was slightly more curved, representing where the motorway curves away to the right

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.6700833 ... ?entry=ttu

Current sign makes it look more like a fork.

Surely it's not the only place where a lane drop + optional left become 2 lanes on an offslip? Where is it signed elsewhere?

[Nathan_A_RF]

Probably one of the more well known examples
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.31584 ... ?entry=ttu

[MotorwayGuy]

Then there's this thing on the M2 (NI) that exists because clearly nobody could think of a better way of signing it.

The previous iteration was slightly more curved, representing where the motorway curves away to the right

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.6700833 ... ?entry=ttu

Current sign makes it look more like a fork.

Surely it's not the only place where a lane drop + optional left become 2 lanes on an offslip? Where is it signed elsewhere?

The only similar one I can think of is M25 Junction 5, where there are these and standard stacked gantry signs. New layouts would use the seperated "tiger-tail" design but these take up more space and IMO don't provide much benefit.

[jnty]

Then there's this thing on the M2 (NI) that exists because clearly nobody could think of a better way of signing it.

The previous iteration was slightly more curved, representing where the motorway curves away to the right

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.6700833 ... ?entry=ttu

Current sign makes it look more like a fork.

Surely it's not the only place where a lane drop + optional left become 2 lanes on an offslip? Where is it signed elsewhere?

The only similar one I can think of is M25 Junction 5, where there are these and standard stacked gantry signs. New layouts would use the seperated "tiger-tail" design but these take up more space and IMO don't provide much benefit.

I think I prefer the later design because it highlights that if you 'do nothing' in lane 2 you will stay on the mainline. The older design makes it look like you'll be fired at a gore and have to make an active choice which side to go, which isn't quite true.

[Conekicker]

...and then there's the standard clueless design error of installing countdown markers on the approach to a lane drop. Counting down to what exactly?

Top tip to any designers reading this - NEVER INSTALL COUNTDOWN MARKERS ON THE APPROACH TO A LANE DROP you clueless numpties

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.02720 ... &entry=ttu

It's easy to laugh at junior technicians for making these errors but who is signing off and approving their work? Senior managers. They need hauling over the coals if they're letting this stuff through. Every mistake has been designed, checked, approved, and installed, yet nobody has flagged the error?

Roll on licensing for sign designers.

It's been designed yes. Checked and approved by someone who knows what they are doing? These days? Really? I suppose there might be one or two organisations in the country where this is the case but it's VERY much the exception in my experience.

Installed - there's no one on site with anything like enough knowledge to spot a wrong 'un, unless it's so chronically bad that a blind man on a galloping horse could spot it. Even then, the "don't rock the boat" attitude will usually come into play.

[Bryn666]

...and then there's the standard clueless design error of installing countdown markers on the approach to a lane drop. Counting down to what exactly?

Top tip to any designers reading this - NEVER INSTALL COUNTDOWN MARKERS ON THE APPROACH TO A LANE DROP you clueless numpties

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.02720 ... &entry=ttu

It's easy to laugh at junior technicians for making these errors but who is signing off and approving their work? Senior managers. They need hauling over the coals if they're letting this stuff through. Every mistake has been designed, checked, approved, and installed, yet nobody has flagged the error?

Roll on licensing for sign designers.

It's been designed yes. Checked and approved by someone who knows what they are doing? These days? Really? I suppose there might be one or two organisations in the country where this is the case but it's VERY much the exception in my experience.

Installed - there's no one on site with anything like enough knowledge to spot a wrong 'un, unless it's so chronically bad that a blind man on a galloping horse could spot it. Even then, the "don't rock the boat" attitude will usually come into play.

Alas so. I have made this argument a lot at my place. Signs now get sent my way to doodle up usually......

[Nathan_A_RF]

I think I prefer the later design because it highlights that if you 'do nothing' in lane 2 you will stay on the mainline. The older design makes it look like you'll be fired at a gore and have to make an active choice which side to go, which isn't quite true.

Well...
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.69758 ... ?entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.68528 ... ?entry=ttu

[Chris5156]

It's been designed yes. Checked and approved by someone who knows what they are doing? These days? Really? I suppose there might be one or two organisations in the country where this is the case but it's VERY much the exception in my experience.

Installed - there's no one on site with anything like enough knowledge to spot a wrong 'un, unless it's so chronically bad that a blind man on a galloping horse could spot it. Even then, the "don't rock the boat" attitude will usually come into play.

This all feels very true, and comes as I am in the midst of an argument with TfL customer service over a new gantry sign on the Westway that blatantly does not belong there - it signposts the through lanes as Westfield A3220 and the right hand lane (!) as White City A219. It clearly belongs on the other end of the same gantry structure where it would be positioned over the exit sliproad to Wood Lane. Some work crew came and put it in the wrong place. Anyone with working eyes and a basic grasp of the layout of the junction could spot that. But they are arguing the toss because their “specialist team” tell me it’s correct.

TfL have not told me what this team’s specialism is, but my guess would be an unrelated field like archaeology or the hits of Buddy Holly.

[ellandback]

I don't have a picture so I'm afraid you'll just have to take my word for it, but since Leeds City Council decided to exterminate the loop road they have been doing their best to eradicate any evidence of its former existence from signage, but obviously as cheaply as possible . We thus end up with this sign in which the word "LOOP" has been removed from the banner at the top, so it now just says "CITY CENTRE". A bit odd, but tolerable, I guess.

However, the word "Loop" has also been removed from the direction to the right, so this now reads "All Traffic". Given that traffic for the IRR, Skipton, Harrogate and Wetherby is still directed straight on as previously, this is completely contradictory and potentially confusing. Would it have been that difficult to change it to "All other traffic", "Local traffic only" or some other thing that actually makes sense?

[wallmeerkat]

"CAUTION" with a plethora of warning signs on the A801

https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9409088 ... ?entry=ttu

Arguably the sign does its job about warning of the dangerous road. Had history been different the A801 would've continued on a nice new bridge over the Avon.

[swissferry]

Couple of blue bordered signs with non local destinations.

Achnasheen 40
M90

[Chris56000]

. . . Shouldn't this one on the A586 be a white background with "Kirkham, Thisleton" to the left and "Poulton, Thornton Cleveleys" both on green panels with black left and ahead arrows, with the brown caravan site panel on a white background only, also with a black right–pointing arrow?

A586
https://maps.app.goo.gl/13k4tT2FhiD9eiFy7

. . .In fact GSV from March 2009 shows that Lancs. County Council had got it right then so why did it get replaced with an incorrect all–green one?!

Chris Williams

PS!

National Highways says the new dual–carriageway A585 Little Singleton Bypass opens to traffic on Monday morning, so as the eastern junction with the A586 Garstang Road will have been widened as part of the scheme, I presume the signage would have been re–designed for the new layout, and as GSV here is from 11 months ago I don't know if the signage has been corrected!

[Chris5156]

. . . Shouldn't this one on the A586 be a white background with "Kirkham, Thisleton" to the left and "Poulton, Thornton Cleveleys" both on green panels with black left and ahead arrows, with the brown caravan site panel on a white background only, also with a black right–pointing arrow?

A586
https://maps.app.goo.gl/13k4tT2FhiD9eiFy7

. . .In fact GSV from March 2009 shows that Lancs. County Council had got it right then so why did it get replaced with an incorrect all–green one?!

Chris Williams

Yes, if the road it’s on is non-primary then that all green sign is wrong.

[Conekicker]

Any Geordies care to translate the following sign into English please?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.98295 ... &entry=ttu

If they could also define what "Slow" means, that would be helpful as well:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.04579 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.00321 ... &entry=ttu

The previous nonsense refers to these equally nonsensical abortions:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.03817 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.03411 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.01940 ... &entry=ttu
Bucket up, bucket down. They even bodge the bodge!
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.97052 ... &entry=ttu

Maybe it's me, but if they want to ban "Slow" vehicles from the A1 at certain times, surely installing rotating plank signs (linked to a timer), capable of displaying minimum speed limit roundels, Diagram 672 (S10-2-3) and Diagram 673 (S10-2-4) is the correct and most importantly, prescribed solution. Note that there are no signs stating where the end of the slow vehicles restriction is, so a completely flawed bit of signing overall.

[SteelCamel]

If they could also define what "Slow" means, that would be helpful as well:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.04579 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.00321 ... &entry=ttu

It would seem the definiton is in the "A1 Trunk Road (Birtley to North Brunton) (Prohibition of Slow Moving Vehicles) Order 2001" S.I. 2001/2230 - which you can (not) read here.

The definition appears to be "This item of legislation isn’t available on this site as it isn’t currently available in a web-publishable format. This could be because the new legislation item hasn’t published yet. However, if you are looking for an older item of legislation that we do not hold but you’d like to see on this site, please let us know via legislation@nationalarchives.gov.uk". Make sure you remember that next time you're out in your tractor...

Maybe it's me, but if they want to ban "Slow" vehicles from the A1 at certain times, surely installing rotating plank signs (linked to a timer), capable of displaying minimum speed limit roundels, Diagram 672 (S10-2-3) and Diagram 673 (S10-2-4) is the correct and most importantly, prescribed solution. Note that there are no signs stating where the end of the slow vehicles restriction is, so a completely flawed bit of signing overall.

Not the same thing. If you're in a vehicle which isn't "slow", you can drive as slowly as you like. A minimum speed limit would require everyone to go that fast.
Also I don't think variable speed limits are allowed to use rotating signs, only matrix signs, and AFAIK they're only authorised to show maximum speeds.

[Conekicker]

If they could also define what "Slow" means, that would be helpful as well:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.04579 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.00321 ... &entry=ttu

It would seem the definiton is in the "A1 Trunk Road (Birtley to North Brunton) (Prohibition of Slow Moving Vehicles) Order 2001" S.I. 2001/2230 - which you can (not) read here.

The definition appears to be "This item of legislation isn’t available on this site as it isn’t currently available in a web-publishable format. This could be because the new legislation item hasn’t published yet. However, if you are looking for an older item of legislation that we do not hold but you’d like to see on this site, please let us know via legislation@nationalarchives.gov.uk". Make sure you remember that next time you're out in your tractor...

Maybe it's me, but if they want to ban "Slow" vehicles from the A1 at certain times, surely installing rotating plank signs (linked to a timer), capable of displaying minimum speed limit roundels, Diagram 672 (S10-2-3) and Diagram 673 (S10-2-4) is the correct and most importantly, prescribed solution. Note that there are no signs stating where the end of the slow vehicles restriction is, so a completely flawed bit of signing overall.

Not the same thing. If you're in a vehicle which isn't "slow", you can drive as slowly as you like. A minimum speed limit would require everyone to go that fast.
Also I don't think variable speed limits are allowed to use rotating signs, only matrix signs, and AFAIK they're only authorised to show maximum speeds.

The few times I've driven that route during peak periods, the presence of "slow" vehicles would generally not be noticed, due to most of the route crawling along, even after the recent widening. £5 says there's precious little enforcement that happens.

[Truvelo]

There were no tractor signs on that part of the A1, I believe they were banned during certain times of the day.