VMS Font Display

[Doyler]

Can anyone advise on the font particulars used with VMS signs - it is noticed that the standards provide you with a table in BSEN 12966 (Table N.1) for minimum heights of characters dependent on road type and speed but the character width and character spacing dimensions given have a footnote saying these can vary if proportional character font is used? Is it standard in the UK for proportional character font to be used on VMS signs?

[nowster]

MS3s and older have fixed matrix characters and use a monospace uppercase font.

MS4s and later have arbitrarily accessible pixels and normally use a proportional mixed case font, based on Transport.

[AndyB]

TSRGD specifies that monospace font where a VMS isn’t capable of displaying Transport or Motorway. In practice, portable VMSs don’t use it at all, but permanent MS2 and MS3 do.

[traffic-light-man]

MS3s and older have fixed matrix characters and use a monospace uppercase font.

MS4s and later have arbitrarily accessible pixels and normally use a proportional mixed case font, based on Transport.

The newer versions of the old signs (certainly in the NW for EMS and MS3 signs) are now using MS4-type technology with RGB pixels and so display the messages using the same Transport font as MS4s. From observation, they display in upper-case only, whereas the MS4 is generally mixed case, but that is what's prescribed for messages on that type of sign. The wickets, however, do utilise the red colour to the bar across the top of closed lanes.

The new MS1-type signals at M55 J1 are also constructed of this type of display and are essentially just one big panel of LEDs, with a specific set in the corners for the lanterns. I'm yet to see one of those display anything, but I suspect they'll use the Transport font for the messages, too.

[Conekicker]

TSRGD specifies that monospace font where a VMS isn’t capable of displaying Transport or Motorway. In practice, portable VMSs don’t use it at all, but permanent MS2 and MS3 do.

Given that most portable VMS, or significant parts of them, are sourced from the US, is it the case that the control software "simply" needs to have the correct UK fonts uploading?

The ability of the portables to unlawfully page messages is bad enough. I recall scrolling through the available graphics of a certain PVMS, to find that most of them were of US origin.

[AndyB]

This is just my observation, but I would suggest that commercially available portable VMSs, despite being a standard size, have too high a resolution for the authorised monospace font to have an adequate x-height for reading at speed and too low a resolution to have adequate space at the achievable x-height to display a road closure notice on one page. Compare the size of a typical 2x12 MS2 on a motorway which can only just handle “no phones await police” or “Queue Caution”.

I think they are being overlooked because a portable VMS is normally only used to either repeat the message of a fixed sign or to present supplemental information that is useful to know but a driver can miss without putting themselves in danger such as advance notice of road closures, and what it does display is more easily read than a 1000mm wide “Diverted Traffic” sign on the hard shoulder. Substance over style.

[Bomag]

TSRGD specifies that monospace font where a VMS isn’t capable of displaying Transport or Motorway. In practice, portable VMSs don’t use it at all, but permanent MS2 and MS3 do.

Given that most portable VMS, or significant parts of them, are sourced from the US, is it the case that the control software "simply" needs to have the correct UK fonts uploading?

The ability of the portables to unlawfully page messages is bad enough. I recall scrolling through the available graphics of a certain PVMS, to find that most of them were of US origin.

Most mVMS now have a 20mm dot pitch and can have something like a UK acceptable font upload as a dot map (Schedule 17 Parts 1 to 4 for Transport font etc and Part 5 for VMS). The problem comes with multi coloured stuff as the LEDs are offset; not an issue with having white text but some authorities e.g. Leeds, have text all colours if the rainbow. Not only is the text less readable, it's often misshapen.

It would help if the convener of TC226 WG11 had got the latest version of EN 12966 drafted in compliance with CPR which means its not been notified in the EUJ and is a right pain. Therefore table N.1 is not relevant to mVMS. Hopefully the requirements in the upcoming CC130/CD130 will reduce the amount of dodgy stuff but I am not holding my breath.

As for comment about MS4 aspects these were authorised as they predated TSRGD 2016. They have symbols - which went through various iterations before going into TSRGD and normal text. Many old MS4 on the NH network still show the authorised version rather than as per TSRGD.

Paging and scrolling text on a mVMS is like misspelling road works and getting time and date formats wrong - a clear indication of not being a competent sign designer.

[Gaz909909]

It is as close to Transport as a colour dot matrix sign can get. The 'a' and 't' give it away.

All hail Jock and Margaret!

[Conekicker]

This is just my observation, but I would suggest that commercially available portable VMSs, despite being a standard size, have too high a resolution for the authorised monospace font to have an adequate x-height for reading at speed and too low a resolution to have adequate space at the achievable x-height to display a road closure notice on one page. Compare the size of a typical 2x12 MS2 on a motorway which can only just handle “no phones await police” or “Queue Caution”.

I think they are being overlooked because a portable VMS is normally only used to either repeat the message of a fixed sign or to present supplemental information that is useful to know but a driver can miss without putting themselves in danger such as advance notice of road closures, and what it does display is more easily read than a 1000mm wide “Diverted Traffic” sign on the hard shoulder. Substance over style.

The main problem with portables, as you say, is their inability to display a large/long message. I see them used at work sites where the message on them could easily be displayed on a static sign. With the static sign being easily readable if the 'x' height was big enough, which it sadly rarely is of course.

Their only useful function in the UK, which a static sign could not be used for, is to act as a means of getting a message to drivers in (potentially) emergency situations. Typically this would be at major schemes where either the permanent VMS are out of operation or don't exist. Using them to display messages such as, "QUEUE AHEAD", "STRANDED VEHICLE" or "ACCIDENT AHEAD" for example.

Apart from such usage, I'm struggling to think of any use for them that a static sign couldn't perform. With the static sign being a considerably lower burden on the public purse into the bargain.

[Bryn666]

This is just my observation, but I would suggest that commercially available portable VMSs, despite being a standard size, have too high a resolution for the authorised monospace font to have an adequate x-height for reading at speed and too low a resolution to have adequate space at the achievable x-height to display a road closure notice on one page. Compare the size of a typical 2x12 MS2 on a motorway which can only just handle “no phones await police” or “Queue Caution”.

I think they are being overlooked because a portable VMS is normally only used to either repeat the message of a fixed sign or to present supplemental information that is useful to know but a driver can miss without putting themselves in danger such as advance notice of road closures, and what it does display is more easily read than a 1000mm wide “Diverted Traffic” sign on the hard shoulder. Substance over style.

The main problem with portables, as you say, is their inability to display a large/long message. I see them used at work sites where the message on them could easily be displayed on a static sign. With the static sign being easily readable if the 'x' height was big enough, which it sadly rarely is of course.

Their only useful function in the UK, which a static sign could not be used for, is to act as a means of getting a message to drivers in (potentially) emergency situations. Typically this would be at major schemes where either the permanent VMS are out of operation or don't exist. Using them to display messages such as, "QUEUE AHEAD", "STRANDED VEHICLE" or "ACCIDENT AHEAD" for example.

Apart from such usage, I'm struggling to think of any use for them that a static sign couldn't perform. With the static sign being a considerably lower burden on the public purse into the bargain.

Once again one has to ask what leverage TTM firms have over the industry given everything going out recently, like stupid multi-coloured cones, purple lights, scrolling and paging VMS, pointless signs like "End of construction zone thank you for your patience" are all seemingly done to ship more product and do nothing to actually enhance road safety for the travelling public.

[Conekicker]

This is just my observation, but I would suggest that commercially available portable VMSs, despite being a standard size, have too high a resolution for the authorised monospace font to have an adequate x-height for reading at speed and too low a resolution to have adequate space at the achievable x-height to display a road closure notice on one page. Compare the size of a typical 2x12 MS2 on a motorway which can only just handle “no phones await police” or “Queue Caution”.

I think they are being overlooked because a portable VMS is normally only used to either repeat the message of a fixed sign or to present supplemental information that is useful to know but a driver can miss without putting themselves in danger such as advance notice of road closures, and what it does display is more easily read than a 1000mm wide “Diverted Traffic” sign on the hard shoulder. Substance over style.

The main problem with portables, as you say, is their inability to display a large/long message. I see them used at work sites where the message on them could easily be displayed on a static sign. With the static sign being easily readable if the 'x' height was big enough, which it sadly rarely is of course.

Their only useful function in the UK, which a static sign could not be used for, is to act as a means of getting a message to drivers in (potentially) emergency situations. Typically this would be at major schemes where either the permanent VMS are out of operation or don't exist. Using them to display messages such as, "QUEUE AHEAD", "STRANDED VEHICLE" or "ACCIDENT AHEAD" for example.

Apart from such usage, I'm struggling to think of any use for them that a static sign couldn't perform. With the static sign being a considerably lower burden on the public purse into the bargain.

Once again one has to ask what leverage TTM firms have over the industry given everything going out recently, like stupid multi-coloured cones, purple lights, scrolling and paging VMS, pointless signs like "End of construction zone thank you for your patience" are all seemingly done to ship more product and do nothing to actually enhance road safety for the travelling public.

That would be the good old innovation bandwagon, where you have to come up with a "good" idea to impress the client as to how forward thinking you are. It obviously doesn't matter if the idea is total rubbish or even unlawful, you MUST be ahead of the competition.

All not helped by the client having a team whose purpose is to "improve the customer experience", (whatever that means), who are desperate to justify their existence. So they gladly go along with anything that is put forward. Even when those within the client organisation who know much better tell them it's not a good idea at all, they still go ahead with it. SME's they most definitely are not in my experience.

[swissferry]

The main problem with portables, as you say, is their inability to display a large/long message. I see them used at work sites where the message on them could easily be displayed on a static sign. With the static sign being easily readable if the 'x' height was big enough, which it sadly rarely is of course.

Their only useful function in the UK, which a static sign could not be used for, is to act as a means of getting a message to drivers in (potentially) emergency situations. Typically this would be at major schemes where either the permanent VMS are out of operation or don't exist. Using them to display messages such as, "QUEUE AHEAD", "STRANDED VEHICLE" or "ACCIDENT AHEAD" for example.

Apart from such usage, I'm struggling to think of any use for them that a static sign couldn't perform. With the static sign being a considerably lower burden on the public purse into the bargain.

I agree that works messages would be clearer on static signs than portable VMSs.

I have seen portable VMSs display journey times which is useful. However they seem to be prone to not updating.

[nowster]

I agree that works messages would be clearer on static signs than portable VMSs.

With the proviso that the x-height should be appropriate to the speed of the road.