Yes, it should have "(A14)" in yellow on a green patch.tom66 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 22:37Is A14 in the wrong colour?
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4043609 ... ?entry=ttu
Botched Roadsigns
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: Botched Roadsigns
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
- multiraider2
- Member
- Posts: 3730
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 17:42
- Location: London, SE
Re: Botched Roadsigns
OK. Had booked a day's holiday to use it up before March year-end and had nothing much to do or people to see it with. I had a bit of a travel day. All public transport, but including passing the King George V stop on the DLR. I got off there and went to look at the sign I last posted. The lane allocation sign has been replaced with a Primary Route version. With the addition of a traffic island plus keep left bollard at the crown of the bend, it's actually probably not as potentially dangerous as before. Still think as it is situated before the traffic is separated with the later dualling it still qualifies as botched, but hey ho. Onward!
Re: Botched Roadsigns
I agree it's still botched - the destination "through traffic" leads to a non-primary route so should be in a black on white panel.multiraider2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 16:31OK. Had booked a day's holiday to use it up before March year-end and had nothing much to do or people to see it with. I had a bit of a travel day. All public transport, but including passing the King George V stop on the DLR. I got off there and went to look at the sign I last posted. The lane allocation sign has been replaced with a Primary Route version. With the addition of a traffic island plus keep left bollard at the crown of the bend, it's actually probably not as potentially dangerous as before. Still think as it is situated before the traffic is separated with the later dualling it still qualifies as botched, but hey ho. Onward!
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42
Re: Botched Roadsigns
Are roads allowed to be no entry in both directions? I thought they should have used no vehicle or no motor vehicle signs.tom66 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 22:37 Not a bodged roadsign, but how on earth did the Google car end up here given they would have to drive through a no entry sign on each end...
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4032023 ... ?entry=ttu
(well I know how, but it's not a good look!)
Re: Botched Roadsigns
To drag a topic of conversation in from another thread, perhaps it should be a blue circle with "ambulance" in it...swissferry wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 19:54Are roads allowed to be no entry in both directions? I thought they should have used no vehicle or no motor vehicle signs.tom66 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 22:37 Not a bodged roadsign, but how on earth did the Google car end up here given they would have to drive through a no entry sign on each end...
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4032023 ... ?entry=ttu
(well I know how, but it's not a good look!)
Re: Botched Roadsigns
Maybe Google requested and received specific permission?swissferry wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 19:54Are roads allowed to be no entry in both directions? I thought they should have used no vehicle or no motor vehicle signs.tom66 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2024 22:37 Not a bodged roadsign, but how on earth did the Google car end up here given they would have to drive through a no entry sign on each end...
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4032023 ... ?entry=ttu
(well I know how, but it's not a good look!)
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.
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.
- Nathan_A_RF
- Member
- Posts: 735
- Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:53
- Location: East Sussex/Southampton
- Contact:
Re: Botched Roadsigns
I suppose it gets the message across, if not in an entirely legal way.Nathan_A_RF wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 00:23 No
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.74436 ... ?entry=ttu
And I guess someone from another country did the text on this sign.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
Big and complex.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1388
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2018 16:49
- Location: County Down
Re: Botched Roadsigns
Is there convention for when Ramp should be used vs Speed humps?
Ramp - https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4422,0. ... ?entry=ttu
Ramp - https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4422,0. ... ?entry=ttu
Re: Botched Roadsigns
I think the convention is that this sign shouldn’t exist!wallmeerkat wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 13:16 Is there convention for when Ramp should be used vs Speed humps?
Ramp - https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4422,0. ... ?entry=ttu
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: Botched Roadsigns
I'm not sure the proper sign *did* exist when those went up - it was in the early 90s, IIRC, when the council spent a load of money making Bluetown look more prosperous. In came "traffic calming", and those signs ahead of every single ramp/speed bump/whatever you'd call them.
- Conekicker
- Member
- Posts: 3782
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
- Location: South Yorks
Re: Botched Roadsigns
The road hump sign (Diagram 557.1) was first prescribed in 1994. The triangle in the photo is very old, based on the visible rivets on the sign face. I can't recall exactly when visible rivets were removed from the BS but sometime in late '80s rings a vague bell. So perhaps the installation is an early road hump installation from the late '80s or early '90s, with the supplementary plate being (hopefully) authorised by DfT (or whatever they were called) at the time.Chris5156 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 13:35I think the convention is that this sign shouldn’t exist!wallmeerkat wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 13:16 Is there convention for when Ramp should be used vs Speed humps?
Ramp - https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4422,0. ... ?entry=ttu
Although you'd like to think someone would have replaced such an old sign by now.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
- MotorwayGuy
- Member
- Posts: 1026
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
- Location: S.E. London
Re: Botched Roadsigns
A similar situation to these "Queues Likely" signs, presumably they predate the introduction of the symbol.
- Conekicker
- Member
- Posts: 3782
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
- Location: South Yorks
Re: Botched Roadsigns
So if you want to go to Brid or Hull, you can either turn left or go straight ahead, because both are good. The number of idiots who design signs like this is frightening.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.95885 ... &entry=ttu
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.95885 ... &entry=ttu
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42
Re: Botched Roadsigns
Think this no right turn is botched. If not its out of date but I cannot recall there ever being a gap in the crash barrier.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42
Re: Botched Roadsigns
So what's the difference between a round and triangle height sign? One's regulatory and the other's a warning but both have the same meaning in that a vehicle over the height won't be able to get under the bridge.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
Big and complex.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42
Re: Botched Roadsigns
I've happily driven under this bridge with a warning triangle but I wouldn't if it was a roundel as I'd be committing an offence.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1741
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 20:20
- Location: Powys
Re: Botched Roadsigns
They can't decide how high the bridge is. On the advance warning signs, it's 4'6" but on the sign over the bridge it's 4'9".swissferry wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2024 21:50 I've happily driven under this bridge with a warning triangle but I wouldn't if it was a roundel as I'd be committing an offence.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 20:42
Re: Botched Roadsigns
The 4' 6" signs replaced some of the 4' 9" ones. Lowest point I measured was around 5' 1": viewtopic.php?p=1329944#p1329944Octaviadriver wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2024 11:18They can't decide how high the bridge is. On the advance warning signs, it's 4'6" but on the sign over the bridge it's 4'9".swissferry wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2024 21:50 I've happily driven under this bridge with a warning triangle but I wouldn't if it was a roundel as I'd be committing an offence.