Poor Road Signage Pictures

Victor

Litcagral wrote:

ford fiesta wrote:

There are around 10 airports in this country

40 approx.

Theres a difference between an airport and an airfield.

MT

There's one thing I'm slightly curious about in relation to signage down there. Why does the NRA use a white/black chevron styled brick pattern on some new roundabouts when chevrons signs in the Republic are always yellow/black? It's certainly a point of pedantry but it just looks a bit daft when the chevron signs on the roundabout use a different colour to the big one circling the whole roundabout. Is there a difficulty in locating a supplier of yellow bricks?

Moreover, why are chevron signs used at all when the same pattern is built into the structure itself?

murphaph

MT wrote:

There's one thing I'm slightly curious about in relation to signage down there. Why does the NRA use a white/black chevron styled brick pattern on some new roundabouts when chevrons signs in the Republic are always yellow/black? It's certainly a point of pedantry but it just looks a bit daft when the chevron signs on the roundabout use a different colour to the big one circling the whole roundabout. Is there a difficulty in locating a supplier of yellow bricks?

A bit of an anomally but not a major one. I'd imagine the reflective brick is difficult to source in anything other than white as that's the common one used in the UK. Ireland is too small a market to get yellow ones I would imagine and it's not een every roundabout that has a reflective brick chevron ring.

MT wrote:

Moreover, why are chevron signs used at all when the same pattern is built into the structure itself?

Added emphasis and the bricks can get dirty quickly, I'd be happier to keep the chevron signage too tbh. I could live without the rather pointless "turn left" signs though.

MT

Added emphasis and the bricks can get dirty quickly,

I've seen a number of roundabouts up here that have had brick chevrons for years and they're still easily visible. And they didn't have the chevron signs. Then again the council may have had these power hosed at some point.

I could live without the rather pointless "turn left" signs though.

I think technically the blue arrow signs on the roundabout are actually instructing you to go straight on, ie. continue round clockwise. But yeah, I'd agree, they're pointless.

I think one of the things that must be given consideration with ever increasing amounts of signage on our roads is the potential for information overload. I think there was an article not too long ago in the New Scientist on this topic of too many signs on our streets. While it's important that the signs we need to navigate and drive safely are displayed the authorities should try not to go beyond a threshold of what the average driver can take in. I often find myself virtually bewildered at certain junctions, especially in towns, by the shear amount of info. you're bombarded with. So in this respect needless duplication like the blue arrow and chevron signs on roundabouts should be done away with.

I also feel that with too many signs they begin to lose their impact: when motorists see too many they probably just switch off. Then there's all the added cost and maintenance of so many superfluous signs. For example, there's just no need for three pairs of warning signs on the run into major roundabouts in the Republic. One or two on your side of the carriageway would quite adequate.

Victor

MT wrote:

I think technically the blue arrow signs on the roundabout are actually instructing you to go straight on, ie. continue round clockwise. But yeah, I'd agree, they're pointless.

I think his problem is the black ones on white backgrounds inside red circles, which strictly speaking, means don't go left.

murphaph

MT wrote:

I think technically the blue arrow signs on the roundabout are actually instructing you to go straight on, ie. continue round clockwise. But yeah, I'd agree, they're pointless.

No, the signs are "turn left" compulsory ones. They are present because legally (as outlined in the RotR and presumably the HC) you "enter a roundabout by turning to the left". If they weren't there and the roundabout warning sign was missing for any reason, you could legally turn right and hit someone head on and it wouldn't be your fault! A "straight ahead" order is conveyed with a vertical arrow with it's head at the top. They're still pointless though so long as proper roundabout warning signs are present (mini roundabouts never have them!).

Victor

murphaph wrote:

If they weren't there and the roundabout warning sign was missing for any reason, you could legally turn right and hit someone head on and it wouldn't be your fault!

Thats why roundabouts should have lane arrows. get them for going the wrong way on a one-way street.

murphaph

Victor wrote:

Thats why roundabouts should have lane arrows. get them for going the wrong way on a one-way street.

Very true Victor-mini roundabouts sometimes have them, they invariably have them on UK mini roundabouts. They should really be painted on all min-roundabouts here too, but that's just symptomatic of the attitude here.

MT

Yeah, that's an interesting point you raise Murphaph. The other thing I notice about mini-roundabouts down there is the lack of a blue circular sign telling motorists to circle in a clockwise direction. Instead there's just a yellow diamond warning of the mini-roundabout ahead. Does this mean, as you've highlighted with large roundabouts, that there's no legal onus on a driver to circle a mini-r the correct way? Add to this the lack of lane arrows and you've a recipe for some interesting conversations with a traffic cop!

MT

Does anyone have any links to diagrams of the signage for the proposed motorway service areas?

Here's a link to some European MSA signage on this UK trivia site.

Personally, I like the German half gantry sign at the top. Displayed like this the information would clear and highly visible.

icdg

Supposedly we are getting a whole new sign style during the year. Given that they are probably not going to wholesale renumber the roads (again), and that it will have to remain dual-language, I would say we are in for some sort of update of the current system. Probably more of the style of signage on the South Eastern Motorway and N2 Ashbourne dual carrigeway schemes.

Often forgotten about, there's a service area off the N4 at Mullingar. I think it just gets brown tourist signage with "Services" on it though.

pedestrian

Murphaph, you appear to be very familiar you the junction at Clonsilla train station. Do you know if there are plans to improve the safety of the access to the train station for pedestrians? The reason I ask this question is because I was hit by a car whilst walking across the bridge there this week - nothing serious, but it could have been a lot worse.

murphaph

pedestrian wrote:

Murphaph, you appear to be very familiar you the junction at Clonsilla train station. Do you know if there are plans to improve the safety of the access to the train station for pedestrians? The reason I ask this question is because I was hit by a car whilst walking across the bridge there this week - nothing serious, but it could have been a lot worse.

Yes, IE lodged a planning application recently for a new pedestrian bridge over the canal to the station proper. I have no idea on the details but I remember reading in one of the local papers that it's to be built in 2006 (could be December!). Presumably the bridge will be outside the eisting bridge walls, on the Leixlip side. Without further measures like decent footpaths and pedestrian crossings it won't be enough to make the junction acceptablely safe. I'm not surprised you were hit. I'd say people get 'nipped' every week and it's just lucky that nobody's been crushed against the canal bridge wall. I use the bridge as a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist an car driver and it's not particularly safe for any group! Maybe lorry drivers are relatively 'safe' using this junction!

spacetweek

murphaph wrote:

Very true Victor-mini roundabouts sometimes have them, they invariably have them on UK mini roundabouts. They should really be painted on all min-roundabouts here too, but that's just symptomatic of the attitude here.

Nonsense. The only thing that should be done with mini-roundabouts to get rid of them.

Alun

spacetweek wrote:

Nonsense. The only thing that should be done with mini-roundabouts to get rid of them.

Why's that then? I think they work just as well as ordinary roundabouts in those places where limited space prohibits building a full blown version. What do you have against them?

MT

As I see it, the problem with mini-roundabouts in the Republic is that they aren't accompanied by an instructive blue circle sign with clockwise arrows (as in the UK and anti-clockwise in Europe) but instead only have a warning sign before them. This means that when lane arrows are absent (often the case) you would not be breaking the law to go the wrong way around. Am I right about this?

Then again are the rules pertaining to mini-roundabouts specifically covered in the rules of the road? Link anyone?

mackerski

icdg wrote:

Supposedly we are getting a whole new sign style during the year. Given that they are probably not going to wholesale renumber the roads (again), and that it will have to remain dual-language, I would say we are in for some sort of update of the current system. Probably more of the style of signage on the South Eastern Motorway and N2 Ashbourne dual carrigeway schemes.

They'd better not resemble the N2 and SEM, whose signage is just plain wrong. Is there supposed to be a new design manual for these?

Dermot

MT

Just looked through the site linked to by the OP and came across this pic which shows the layout I described above. Nb. the blue instructive regulatory sign and lane arrows.

In contrast mini-roundabouts in the Republic just have this warning sign. There’s no obligatory signage.

Interesting bi-directional ‘Magic roundabout’ in Swindon. Looks crazy but I think these are a good idea. You’ve got one big anti-clockwise roundabout surrounded by regular mini-roundabouts. The T-shirts are a bit naff though.

More from wikipedia. Pity they hadn’t been called gyratory circuses here. That name had to have been invented by an Englishman ‘I say Henry, just up the road and then take the second turn off on the gyratory circus.'

MT

A Welsh give way sign from that site makes me wonder if the Republic will ever adopt bi-lingual warning signs?

Another obligatory roundabout sign, this time from Turkey.

mackerski wrote:

They'd better not resemble the N2 and SEM, whose signage is just plain wrong. Is there supposed to be a new design manual for these?

Yeah, those new signs are crap by international standards. Using their design everywhere would be a retrograde step. These pics of interchanges and junctions (click to enlarge) in the Netherlands show how it should be done. Traffic engineers in these parts could do with looking at that site as they might learn how to build a free flowing motorway junctions.

mackerski

MT wrote:

A Welsh give way sign from that site makes me wonder if the Republic will ever adopt bi-lingual warning signs?

Wales is actually worse at bilingual signs than we are. They have no typographical distinction between the languages, which makes for clutter since the reader has no clues to enable him to focus on his preferred language. Coupled with this is the fact that the order of the languages in Wales varies - presumably according to which language is the majority one in the area.

MT wrote:

Yeah, those new signs are crap by international standards.

They're actually crap by National standards - at least the rulebook knows the difference between a normal exit and a lane drop, which is some comfort.

Dermot

MT

mackerski wrote:

Wales is actually worse at bilingual signs than we are. They have no typographical distinction between the languages, which makes for clutter since the reader has no clues to enable him to focus on his preferred language. ...

Hmm, I think it's six of one and half a dozen of the other, tbh. While the two fonts on Irish signs are distinguishable they in themselves are more difficult to read. Upper case and italics being less comprehensible than lower case: hence why most countries use non-italic lower case.

The best option, to get distinction and readibility, may be the Scottish option of both Gaelic and English in lower case but in different colours.

Or keep both languages in lower case but prioritise the one predominantly spoken in that area by giving it a larger font size, pic

I’d forgotten how good a source that website is for this sort of thing.

mackerski

Colouring doesn't really help here IMHO: green on white has awful contrast, and the idea doesn't scale well to different background colours. I'd favour normal colour, mixed case for English, keep italics for Irish. _Or_ perhaps go monolingual for all names - afford us English speakers the same status as the Gaeltacht dwellers. Every place name could reflect what the residents actually call it. I wonder will it ever catch on...

Dermot

MT

You could go for the idea you have but make the mixed(substitute for where I've used lower previously) case English names a larger font to get the size differential the upper case currently gives you.

_Or_ perhaps go monolingual for all names - afford us English speakers the same status as the Gaeltacht dwellers. ...

Aaaaagh, but dare I say it that would make your signs very like a certain benighted place to the North where some politicos might tell you that English signage is another oppressive reminder of the sectarian statelet!! :eek:

*Runs for cover*

Victor

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054884683

:v:

Victor

Some I found myself:

Ha'penny Bridge, Dublin

Foxrock Church, Dublin (note angle of recline)

MT

Have been ill for a few days so i've only got around to taking a brief look over the signs manual you sent me, Murphaph. And I have to say it really is very detailed. The bits I looked at seem to cover extensively and in detail how to display proper signage. It even covers things such as the need for regular inspection and cleaning. Amazing. And I say that because the evidence on the ground points to a clear chasm between whats written on paper and how it's done in reality.

Some examples - the manual clearly states that chevron signs should not be used to indicate the end of a hard shoulder. But how many times have I seen this? Too many.

Signs should be displayed at the top of their posts. But I've seen countless new signs mounted with a bit of post still exposed above.

The manual states that when a direction sign indicates adequately the layout of a junction ahead there's no need for something like a T diamond. But again, puting up needless signs causing excessive clutter seems commonplace.

Which brings me to another area which may be in the manual but I haven't seen it yet. Why can't operatives take down the older signs they've just replaced? What's the point of having two sets of signs: one old, one new? You see this all over Donegal.

But back to the manual again why is it issued by the Dept of Environment and not Transport?

MT

Since my camera’s been nicked and I don’t live in the Republic anyway, I’ve done a bit of a search for an example of bad signage on google. I got this holiday shot from a Kerry Gaeltacht I think. Anyway, it does the job.

So what’s wrong here? Just about everything it seems.

Stop sign> Hard to see being so low down. At that height and being so close to the roadside it’s much more at risk of being knocked around to face the wrong way.

Finger posts> Shouldn’t be any. All signage should be of the plate form with at least two posts for direction signs to stop rotation. The two white directional signs on the newer looking post are in the same plane. The manual gives specific instructions not to do this due to reduced visibility. The other white finger is hardly in a clear location sitting beneath a canopy of what should be less important tourist signs on a post that isn’t even straight. What’s more it appears to be obscured from the view of motorists on the road in the background by a clump of hedge.

Tourist signs> Are there any regulations covering the number of these that can seemingly be tacked onto posts at a junction. Too many and the result, as seen here, is that they begin to detract from the more important directional and regulatory signage at a junction. Few if any here seem to be of a consistent design or have the same font/case of lettering. This inconsistency makes each individual sing less comprehensible at a glance. I wonder how long that ‘sale’ poster has been stuck on one?

Stack sign> This can only be a pedestrian sign as its font is much too small to read at a distance. But if so is it best placed here where any readers will serve as a background distraction for drivers trying to decipher the signage info. Couldn’t it have been placed somewhere else? And even on this note it hasn’t been done right as it’s nowhere near the top of its posts.

Over all appearance> cluttered, chaotic and in no way easy to follow and that’s while the signs remain pointing in the correct direction!! Oh, and it’s funny that directional signage is solely in Gaelic for the purists but for the tourist things are bilingual. Would it be cynical to say that the destination signs aren’t advertising for lucre?

MT

Dear me, what can you say about this lot other than Clare mustn’t only have a problem with one off houses!

How on earth is the average motorist meant to take in that amount of info. without causing an accident. Is there simply no control on the number of tourist signs that can be stuck up? Will this number continue to grow until a solid hedge of brown faced aluminium has been created? Not only is all of this confusing and incomprehensible – try to pick out the important signage at a glance – but it’s so unsightly. So much for tourism. :rolleyes:

murphaph

Hi MT,
Some craccking pics there, a real rogues gallery. The TSM was published by the DoE because at the time the DoT did not exist! It's only very recently that Transport has been it's own brief at cabinet!

The manual is basically a copy of the Guildford Rules and if it were applied religioulsy we would have signage just as good as the UK. I thank God the manual actually exists and we can point out the mistakes and not in a "we should do it like the UK" way but in a "that doesn't conform to our own rule book" way which is hopefully more likely to achieve results.

I take heart from the latest overhead gantries erected with the opening of the Drinan Interchange on the M1 just before the airport junction heading northbound. They are proper lane drop style gantries as you find in Belfast and on the M50 Northern Cross Route in Dublin (though it contains a small error, one I have also seen in the UK however!).

MT

I take heart from the latest overhead gantries erected with the opening of the Drinan Interchange on the M1 just before the airport junction heading northbound.

It might be an idea to put up some pics of these. This thread may be more effective if examples of best practice (when they get it right!) are also acknowledged.