Signage Rethinks

[Osthagen]

The signage of primary destinations on RCS and DS signs needs a fundamental rejig, in my opinion. We need a signage policy that applies across the board on major motorways and A-roads, so we don't end up with unhelpful situations like the signage changing as soon as you cross an administrative border or signs being utterly devoid of destinations.

First of all, when it comes to primary destinations, I feel that the classifications of "primary" and "super primary" is too simplistic. There should instead be a tier system of destinations, ranked by their importance on a national and regional basis. I would use the following tiers, from highest to lowest.

Ultra-control destinations. A classification within super-control destinations below that rank as more important than other super-control destinations. It is limited to national capital cities and cities whose population exceeds 1 million.
Examples: Birmingham, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London

Super-control destinations. Destinations that represent the centres of major regions, and some major ports.
Examples: Aberdeen, Bristol, Dover, Glasgow, Inverness, Leeds, Leicester, Manchester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Southampton

Control destinations. Places of nationwide importance (that is, within England, Scotland or Wales); this category includes major university cities, locations at or near major junctions, locations of major cultural significance, etc. A least one control destination should be present in every county/council area (even if that county also contains a super-control destination).
Examples: Bangor, Doncaster, Durham, Gloucester, Lincoln, Oxford, Perth, Stirling, Sunderland, Wigan, York

Auxiliary destinations. Primary destinations that have a largely local importance. These would be far more numerous in England than in Scotland and Wales as a result of England having such a copious amount of PDs.
Examples: Bishop Auckland,Brough, Congleton, Montrose, Petersfield, Rugeley, Thirsk, Uttoxeter

When it comes to signage on major, these destinations would function as follows.

In general, RCS signs should contain around 4-5 destinations. On major motorways and long distance D2+ A-roads, the RCS signs would, at bare minimum, contain the following information:
- the next super-control destination.
- the next 2-3 control destinations

In addition:
- the next ultra-control destination would always be signed on an RCS once you are within 150 miles of it.
- a super-control destination that isn't the next one should still be signed if you're within 100 miles of it.

Your DS signs should contain:
- the next super-control destination
- the next control destination.

If your next super-control destination happens to be a mega-control destination, then so be it.
Likewise if your next control destination is a mega- or super-control destination.

[pjr10th]

Any argument that London shouldn't be signed from outwith London is ludicrous.

Use the SOUTH as far south as possible on any route without it being confusing. Then use SOUTH EAST and SOUTH WEST if necessary to split flows while trying to avoid primary destinations. Furthermore, these regions are also cardinal directions. Don't signpost the SOUTH EAST from Ipswich.

Regional destinations are not regions, they're cardinal directions, but a bit more flexible. Take this sign in Carlisle. To get to pretty much any part of the North, you want to use M6(S) or the A69. However, to go north, you want to use M6(N). Manchester here is included as part of The SOUTH, not because Cumbria County Council has strong opinions that the North-South divide is along the Eden, but because they're cardinal directions.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EK1UdmN5sxykd9tz8

THEN when SOUTH EAST is no longer useful, use London until you reach the M25. If necessary, use "London & M25 MXX" or "London MXX (M25)". For the purposes of drivers who use signs, who frankly don't give a toss about administrative boundaries, "London" just means "what's within M25" except maybe Watford and Heathrow. Noone is seriously going to argue that Canary Wharf, Big Ben, Buckingham Palace and Regents Park Zoo are not in London.

When you get to the M25, you can then direct people onto it using cardinal directions. For example, at the M23 junction, signpost

^ Central London, Croydon
< London (W, NW), Heathrow Airport, The WEST, The NORTH
London (E, NE), The EAST >

That's an example and of course destinations need to be signed based on traffic flows, route capacities etc., but it's a vague indication of what should be.

[Osthagen]

Any argument that London shouldn't be signed from outwith London is ludicrous.

Use the SOUTH as far south as possible on any route without it being confusing. Then use SOUTH EAST and SOUTH WEST if necessary to split flows while trying to avoid primary destinations. Furthermore, these regions are also cardinal directions. Don't signpost the SOUTH EAST from Ipswich.

Regional destinations are not regions, they're cardinal directions, but a bit more flexible. Take this sign in Carlisle. To get to pretty much any part of the North, you want to use M6(S) or the A69. However, to go north, you want to use M6(N). Manchester here is included as part of The SOUTH, not because Cumbria County Council has strong opinions that the North-South divide is along the Eden, but because they're cardinal directions.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EK1UdmN5sxykd9tz8

THEN when SOUTH EAST is no longer useful, use London until you reach the M25. If necessary, use "London & M25 MXX" or "London MXX (M25)". For the purposes of drivers who use signs, who frankly don't give a toss about administrative boundaries, "London" just means "what's within M25" except maybe Watford and Heathrow. Noone is seriously going to argue that Canary Wharf, Big Ben, Buckingham Palace and Regents Park Zoo are not in London.

When you get to the M25, you can then direct people onto it using cardinal directions. For example, at the M23 junction, signpost

^ Central London, Croydon
< London (W, NW), Heathrow Airport, The WEST, The NORTH
London (E, NE), The EAST >

That's an example and of course destinations need to be signed based on traffic flows, route capacities etc., but it's a vague indication of what should be.

Neither I nor anybody else said that London shouldn't be signed from outside the M25.

[Bryn666]

Any argument that London shouldn't be signed from outwith London is ludicrous.

Use the SOUTH as far south as possible on any route without it being confusing. Then use SOUTH EAST and SOUTH WEST if necessary to split flows while trying to avoid primary destinations. Furthermore, these regions are also cardinal directions. Don't signpost the SOUTH EAST from Ipswich.

Regional destinations are not regions, they're cardinal directions, but a bit more flexible. Take this sign in Carlisle. To get to pretty much any part of the North, you want to use M6(S) or the A69. However, to go north, you want to use M6(N). Manchester here is included as part of The SOUTH, not because Cumbria County Council has strong opinions that the North-South divide is along the Eden, but because they're cardinal directions.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EK1UdmN5sxykd9tz8

THEN when SOUTH EAST is no longer useful, use London until you reach the M25. If necessary, use "London & M25 MXX" or "London MXX (M25)". For the purposes of drivers who use signs, who frankly don't give a toss about administrative boundaries, "London" just means "what's within M25" except maybe Watford and Heathrow. Noone is seriously going to argue that Canary Wharf, Big Ben, Buckingham Palace and Regents Park Zoo are not in London.

When you get to the M25, you can then direct people onto it using cardinal directions. For example, at the M23 junction, signpost

^ Central London, Croydon
< London (W, NW), Heathrow Airport, The WEST, The NORTH
London (E, NE), The EAST >

That's an example and of course destinations need to be signed based on traffic flows, route capacities etc., but it's a vague indication of what should be.

Neither I nor anybody else said that London shouldn't be signed from outside the M25.

With the sole exception of the people writing the guidance for traffic signs...

[Vierwielen]

What would you signpost on the M42 southbound as you approach the M6? If I were going to northern or eastern parts of London, I would use the M6, but if I were going to the western or southern parts of London, I would continue on the M42 and then pick up the M40. Likewise (assuming that the A1(M) has been properly upgraded), the route from Leeds to Dover is quite different to the route from Leeds to Southampton, but both Dover and Southampton are in the South East!

[Vierwielen]

Of course, one of the things that could be added to British roadsigns is the Euroroute number. This can be justified on grounds that the current road numbering system is London-centric, so this is just an exercise in levelling up. (Mr Gove, please take note). Where long-distance routes exist that are not part of the Euroroute scheme, UK-specific numbers could be developed which would use the same format as the E routes, but would be on a red background rather than a green background. One route that woudl be a candidate for a UK-route would be Penzance to Hull.

[Osthagen]

What would you signpost on the M42 southbound as you approach the M6? If I were going to northern or eastern parts of London, I would use the M6, but if I were going to the western or southern parts of London, I would continue on the M42 and then pick up the M40. Likewise (assuming that the A1(M) has been properly upgraded), the route from Leeds to Dover is quite different to the route from Leeds to Southampton, but both Dover and Southampton are in the South East!

I was at M42 J7A in late August, approaching from the M42 South. So unless they've changed it extremely recently, the gantry sign reads something along the lines of:
M42: The SOUTH WEST (M5), London W & S (M40)
M6: Coventry, London N & E (M1)

[Osthagen]

As for the signage to London discussion upthread, I would say that:

Within Greater London and on the M25:
The individual Primary Destinations (Central London, Croydon, Dagenham, Ilford, Richmond, Sutton) within Greater London should be signed on motorways and primary routes.

On London-radial routes outside of the M25:
Only "London" should appear on signage, accompanied with directional (N, E, S, W) suffixes where appropriate.

[the cheesecake man]

Of course, one of the things that could be added to British roadsigns is the Euroroute number.

It could, but what would that achieve? I suspect few people have even heard of Euroroutes. The last thing our highway authorities need is more information to get wrong and present unclearly. And how many Brexiteers might take misguided exception to them?

[Vierwielen]

Of course, one of the things that could be added to British roadsigns is the Euroroute number.

It could, but what would that achieve? I suspect few people have even heard of Euroroutes. The last thing our highway authorities need is more information to get wrong and present unclearly. And how many Brexiteers might take misguided exception to them?

Euroroutes would help travellers who wish to by-pass London to do so, especially if they are aiming to use the Channel ports. Other users who would be helped are those who are wishing to travel from Ireland to the Continent via England. While they would not be of too much help to British drivers within the UK, their use in the UK would remind British drivers of their existance and British drivers might find them useful when driving on the Continent - for example, if driving from Calais to Cologne, one need only follow the E40 signs and not worry local French or Belgian route markers.

[Osthagen]

I kind of like some of the primary destination signage on RCSs on autoroutes in France. You have the main super-strategic destinations, the one's that a lot of long-distance traffic are probably headed to or changing roads at, on one panel, and a smaller plate for one more regional importance destination.


I'd do something similar on UK motorways and long-distance a roads, sign 3-4 from a list of strategic control destinations on RCS (plus 2 as forward destinations), with a single more local one on an extra plate on RCS.
On the M1, for example, I'd personally have (S-N)
London - Watford - Luton - Milton Keynes - Northampton - Rugby (placeholder M6/A14 traffic) - Leicester - Nottingham - Derby - Sheffield - Barnsley - Leeds
As the only destinations on the main plate, plus probably the nearest 1 of St Albans - Bedford - Loughborough - Mansfield - Rotherham - Wakefield - Wetherby, for the lower plate.

[wallmeerkat]

Of course, one of the things that could be added to British roadsigns is the Euroroute number.

It could, but what would that achieve? I suspect few people have even heard of Euroroutes. The last thing our highway authorities need is more information to get wrong and present unclearly. And how many Brexiteers might take misguided exception to them?

Euroroutes would help travellers who wish to by-pass London to do so, especially if they are aiming to use the Channel ports. Other users who would be helped are those who are wishing to travel from Ireland to the Continent via England. While they would not be of too much help to British drivers within the UK, their use in the UK would remind British drivers of their existance and British drivers might find them useful when driving on the Continent - for example, if driving from Calais to Cologne, one need only follow the E40 signs and not worry local French or Belgian route markers.

Depends on their usefulness. E18 for example is a Craigavon to St Petersberg route https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E18 that can't be fully travelled due to lack of North Sea ferry