Importing ideas on roads / signage etc.

tampopo

One other thing I noticed in the US was that for every white line on a freeway there are about half a dozen cats eyes. So, it's less easy to drift out of your lane by accident. You get the big rumple rumple sound to warn you and get you back on track.

Maskhadov

murphaph wrote:

The NRA has realised the error of their ways and are currently replacing the misleading gantry signs with proper ones that don't deceive!

Before:


After:

They really should use as much of the canvas as possible and make the signs as big as possible.

murphaph

I'd like to imprt the german way of operating ppedestrian crossings at junctions-they just go green at the same time as traffic heading in that direction and traffic MUST yield to peds. It means traffic flows more often and so the junction is much more efficient-however-it requires driver education and discipline to work! won't be seeing that anytime soon then.

dRNk SAnTA

I am living in Vancouver at the moment and its just a different class over here. I'd like to see a couple of changes to improve our urban landscapes.

I'd like to see the street names on a pole at every junction, as they have here in Vancouver.

But most of all, I can't stand they way in Ireland every single meaningless road sign and traffic light sits on its own galvanised steel pole. In vancouver they manage to attach almost everything to the street lamppost. traffic lights, road signs, street names, and even the power lines for the trolley buses hang from the lampposts. and all the lampposts are green rather than ugly grey!

i think in ireland when it comes to signage, we need to just tear everything up and start again.

BrianD

Maskhadov wrote:

They really should use as much of the canvas as possible and make the signs as big as possible.

just looking at the picrure (few posts above) I wonder how many of our trained drivers will take to driving in the hard shoulder in advance of their turn off??

Have the overhead signs on the N7 and N2 been changed? It is amazing the amount of metal work used to hold up a small sign!!

Also has these overheads are not lit at night it is going to be hard to see the junction number. Would be better if it was included on the signage as well.

_Kaiser_

Maskhadov wrote:

They really should use as much of the canvas as possible and make the signs as big as possible.

Good point. I'm not sure why they erected massive gantries and then only use half of the space - the new signs are definitely an improvement though.

murphaph

the gantries were built wide enough for D3M carriageways.

BrianD

I was driving on the M50 today, it seems that very few of the overhead signs have actually changed. Is the example in the photo a one-off?

murphaph

No, the sh!tty 3 panel ones on the M11 southbound before the R somethingorother exit for Bray North and both northbound ones on the M11 approaching M50 diverge have also been changed to 2 panel designs which accurately reflects the lane drops and don't duplicate information across both mainline lanes. They're rather neat actually.

jrar

dRNk SAnTA wrote:

I
But most of all, I can't stand they way in Ireland every single meaningless road sign and traffic light sits on its own galvanised steel pole. In vancouver they manage to attach almost everything to the street lamppost. traffic lights, road signs, street names, and even the power lines for the trolley buses hang from the lampposts. and all the lampposts are green rather than ugly grey!

i think in ireland when it comes to signage, we need to just tear everything up and start again.

I whole-heartedly agree - for example, there's approx. 4 x traffic islands on the N3-Clonee junction flyover, and I recall being so amazed at the sheer volume of grey/steel poles across the junction supporting the various different signs (mostly badly-placed or obscured !) that I counted them one morning and reckoned that there were over 40 !!

My other bugbear is sticking signs on poles and having lots of pole protruding from the top - either stick the sign at the top of the pole to maximise visibility, or if the sign is designed to be set lower, then order shorter poles. It all just looks so sloppy the way they do it at present !

luckat

Harold's Cross Bridge (Emmet Bridge to be correct) going into town: there's a sign place where logically you'd expect a no-right-turn sign, and it has a big red stroke across it like a no-right-turn sign.

So you see it from 100 metres back and, intending to go straight ahead, glide into the right-hand lane.

It's only when you become baffled at the fact that all the cars ahead of you are signalling right that you realise that it's actually a no-5-axles sign.

*Why on earth* did they place it there? Why didn't they place it on the left, on the way up towards the bridge but 10 metres back?

Once again I reiterate: the signage, the design and the placement are a project for homes for the bewildered. Occupational therapy, with a dash of sadism.

Carawaystick

murphaph wrote:

I'd like to imprt the german way of operating ppedestrian crossings at junctions-they just go green at the same time as traffic heading in that direction and traffic MUST yield to peds. It means traffic flows more often and so the junction is much more efficient-however-it requires driver education and discipline to work! won't be seeing that anytime soon then.

This is the way in France too. you've got to be a bit confident to walk out in front of some cars though. a bit of Gallic indifference to the drivers is needed.

A change in the law to make the onus on drivers to be responsible for all person car collisions would be needed first.

Carawaystick

Terrontress wrote:

As I understand it, Ireland follows an American model with traffic instruction and the UK follows the European. In the States the lights go directly to green, most of Europe it is red amber then green. Other instances of this are the yellow diamond warning signs where the rest of Europe has the white triangles with red edges.

I've only seen the red/amber before green up North and in Britain.
Most other places I've been are same as here. The lights at the far side of a junction sometimes give an indication to go here but it's a bit dangerous in anything above zero traffic to go right at the change here.

In Karnataka in India, a few of the lights have countdown timers for motor traffic, similar to the system at some pedestrian crossings in Dublin city. If you're not bigger than everything else or a bovine, you'ld want to be out of the way 3 or 4 seconds before lift off...

The Irish signs are bigger though, you can fit more on the diamond than a triangle, I think this is a good thing.


One thing that might be worth a try is in Spain most one horse towns have a set of traffic lights. these are on a sensor so they go red as a car approaches but if you stay below the speed limit they go green before you reach them.
Obviously not good for heavy trafficed routes, but very effective, you figure it out easily enough in Spain so with a bit of advertising here it'd be a good idea.

BrianD

murphaph wrote:

No, the sh!tty 3 panel ones on the M11 southbound before the R somethingorother exit for Bray North and both northbound ones on the M11 approaching M50 diverge have also been changed to 2 panel designs which accurately reflects the lane drops and don't duplicate information across both mainline lanes. They're rather neat actually.

I see the still have that daft 2 panel design at what AA roadwatch like to call the "M50/M11 merge". BTW shoule this junction be called 17 when it is still on the M11? It odd seems that when you are on the route that you have to exit the M11 to stay on it? Surely Exit 17 should be changed to the correct exit number for the M11 (even if you have to technically exit it)?

I also notice that the M11 now has junction numbers as well.

luckat

May I offer a paranoid (but not serious) suggestion? Perhaps the companies that make satnavs have bribed the road signage designers and workmen to make the signs as awful as posible so people will have to buy satnavs? Hmmm, and of course they'd have to bribe all the guys putting street names up - or rather, not putting them up - too.

jrar

Carawaystick wrote:

This is the way in France too. you've got to be a bit confident to walk out in front of some cars though. a bit of Gallic indifference to the drivers is needed.

A change in the law to make the onus on drivers to be responsible for all person car collisions would be needed first.

Plus can you imagine the amount of rear-ending that would go on here as driver number 2 ploughs into the back of driver 1 who as s/he turned left, had to brake sharply to aloow a pedestrian to cross over in fromt of them !

steve-o

luckat wrote:

Harold's Cross Bridge (Emmet Bridge to be correct) going into town

That's also an example of the terrible lane layouts at many Dublin junctions. The left lane approaching the junction is a bus lane. The right lane is the traffic lane. The bus lane ends just before the junction. There is a lot of right turning traffic so unless traffic is very light and there are no right-turners all traffic going straight ahead has to change lane at the end of the bus lane. If the lights are red, no-one is quite sure if they should line up in the bus lane or push in to the left lane at the end of the bus lane (annoying the drivers who've chosen to line up in the bus lane). There are many other examples exactly the same.

murphaph

steve-o wrote:

That's also an example of the terrible lane layouts at many Dublin junctions. The left lane approaching the junction is a bus lane. The right lane is the traffic lane. The bus lane ends just before the junction. There is a lot of right turning traffic so unless traffic is very light and there are no right-turners all traffic going straight ahead has to change lane at the end of the bus lane. If the lights are red, no-one is quite sure if they should line up in the bus lane or push in to the left lane at the end of the bus lane (annoying the drivers who've chosen to line up in the bus lane). There are many other examples exactly the same.

The driver's who've lined up in the bus lane are in breach of the law and will be inconveniencing bus users who don't take up anywhere near as much roadspace. The layout may be bad but irish drivers are worse!

axer

I have just started driving here in Germany and have noticed the amount of little things whilst reading the rules of the road. They have alot of laws when it comes to driving.

One of the things that sticks out most is the right of way system they use. In most towns traffic coming from your right will ALWAYS have right of way even if you think you are on the main road unless there is a sign telling you otherwise. They use it as a way to slow down motorists because since you have to make sure that no traffic is coming from the next road when you pass it then you have to drive slowly.

Their autobahn signage is so well thought out. They have permanent diversion signs at all the exits so that if a piece of autobahn is shut down it is very easy to take a diversion as the signs will guide you all the way around the stretch of autobahn you wish to avoid.

spacetweek

RadioCity wrote:

This is the normal way for an upcoming off slip to be signed in the UK (borrowed from Highway Code online) :

This image is an example of why British motorway signage is very poor compared to other countries (though not us).

murphaph wrote:

The NRA has realised the error of their ways and are currently replacing the misleading gantry signs with proper ones that don't deceive!

I've also noticed that new signage configuration. It's a huge improvement. Now they need to go over the new N7, and the rest of the M50, and roll it out.

RadioCity

Those M11 signs are prefect, unlike the misleading nonsense on the M1 northbound where lane 1 is the Airport (fair enough), lane 2 is apparently for Swords (was Skerries) and lane 3 for Belfast. The sign is taken too literally by motorists who seemingly stay in the right hand lane for Belfast until Dundalk.

Would anyone hazard a guess as to what these signs cost to make and who takes the responsiblilty for incompentence and the cost associated with the replacement??

BrianD

RadioCity wrote:

Those M11 signs are prefect, unlike the misleading nonsense on the M1 northbound where lane 1 is the Airport (fair enough), lane 2 is apparently for Swords (was Skerries) and lane 3 for Belfast. The sign is taken too literally by motorists who seemingly stay in the right hand lane for Belfast until Dundalk.

Would anyone hazard a guess as to what these signs cost to make and who takes the responsiblilty for incompentence and the cost associated with the replacement??

Speaking of Dublin AIrport. It must be the worst signposted international airport in the world, particularly if you are travelling southbound on the M1. Blink and you'd miss that exit. Anywhere else and you'd have a stack of advance signage and overheads. Particularly necessary as the M1 now extends to the border making it more convenient for those up north.

murphaph

speaking of airport signage, in the UK the policy is just to display the plane symbol and name of airport beside. For example, on the M60 you'll see signs for Manchester x or even M'cr x where x is the airport symbol, so why do we insist on an airplane symbol AND ALSO the word 'airport', for example Dublin Airport x where x is the airplane symbol. That's the same as saying 'Dublin Airport Airport'. Pointlessness-symbols are there for a reason, to dispense with worded phrases! :rolleyes:

gjim

BrianD wrote:

Speaking of Dublin AIrport. It must be the worst signposted international airport in the world, particularly if you are travelling southbound on the M1. Blink and you'd miss that exit. Anywhere else and you'd have a stack of advance signage and overheads. Particularly necessary as the M1 now extends to the border making it more convenient for those up north.

It's diabolical particularly with the mess of multi-laned roundabouts you have to negotiate. I've never experienced worse at any comparably sized airport.

RadioCity

The icing on the cake is the information overload on the overhead gantry signs over the roads in the Airport.
That relatively new one at the security hut has a mine of information on it and is impossible to read, especially with so much Irish on it.
The one on the way out is as bad, with English on one side and Irish on the other side...why???
And then theres the signs for Santry. I suppose that'll have to do as "This road might get you to Whitehall Quicker than the Motorway" wouldn't fit.

jrar

murphaph wrote:

speaking of airport signage, in the UK the policy is just to display the plane symbol and name of airport beside. For example, on the M60 you'll see signs for Manchester x or even M'cr x where x is the airport symbol, so why do we insist on an airplane symbol AND ALSO the word 'airport', for example Dublin Airport x where x is the airplane symbol. That's the same as saying 'Dublin Airport Airport'. Pointlessness-symbols are there for a reason, to dispense with worded phrases! :rolleyes:

Probably an Irish thing, like we have AIB Bank

BrianD

jrar wrote:

Probably an Irish thing, like we have AIB Bank

... and your PIN number for your AIB Bank account so you can get your money out for the NCT test on a car theat probably payed alot of VRT tax.:D

probe

ich_verschwinde wrote:

I see a number of improvements that could be made to the above sign:

1) The R113 is a local road (and not a motorway) so the sign on the left should be white with black lettering. It is misleading to suggest that the R113 is another motorway by using this colour scheme. The arrow should be angled left, just next to the 1 km.

2) There is too much emphasis of matter in the road numbers in the right hand sign. Junction names are used on the continent, and the road number is in a small colour coded box.

3) The list of junction names should be in order of arrival at the junction. i.e.

Tallaght [N81]
The South [N7][E20]
The West [N4]
Navan/NW [N3]
Monaghan [N2]
Belfast [M1][E1]
Dublin NE [N32]

In this way the sign-dependant motorist would know that Tallaght was next after the Dundrum interchange, to give them notice to move over from the right-hand lane. This will be more important when it becomes a 3 lane motorway in heavy traffic conditions when lane change timing becomes more critical.

There should be two down arrows on the right hand sign which should cover both lanes so that sign-reliant drivers don't change lane un-necessarily.

By [ ] I mean a colour coded box with the route number.

Aside from putting the E in front of the E road number, there is no need to have M or N in front of the road number if standardised colour boxes are used. The N4 turns into the M4 and back again to the N4 - it is all route 4 going to the same destinations.

Road interchange names should be appropriate to the main destinations they serve. "Red Cow" doesn't tell one anything. e.g. "Southern Interchange" would be more memorable and meaningful. Similarly "Western Interchange" for the M50xN4 gyratory.

.probe

jrar

probe wrote:

Road interchange names should be appropriate to the main destinations they serve. "Red Cow" doesn't tell one anything. e.g. "Southern Interchange" would be more memorable and meaningful. Similarly "Western Interchange" for the M50xN4 gyratory.

.probe

Why can't we just use junction numbers ?? I know they're boring in relative terms but at least you can follow them vis-a-vis where you are on a given stetch of motorway (provided the NRA have remembered to put up signage that actually shows junction numbers e.g. the M1 !!) - of course, the non-local motorist isn't helped either by the fact that our OS maps don't usually show junction numbers despite our growing motorway/HQDC network !

As long as AA traffic reports use location names such as "Red Cow Roundabout", "Firhouse interchange" (whatever that is !), "the M50/N4 junction", "Maudlins" etc. then we have no hope of ever getting people to adopt junction numbers. I wrote to the AA some time back to ask them why they persisted with using place-names when unless one is familiar with an area they mean absolutely nothing (Maudlins and Newhall being 2 obvious ones) but they replied that whilst they might be considering such a move, they had no plans to change their approach in the short-term. I live beside the Maudlins junction but no-one I know ever calls it that, so how in God's name is a motorist unfamiliar with the N7 supposed to know where it is !!

If the AA were to start using junction numbers AND names to break road-users in gently to the idea of adopting junction numbers in the longer-term, it would be a start

icdg

probe wrote:

I see a number of improvements that could be made to the above sign:

1) The R113 is a local road (and not a motorway) so the sign on the left should be white with black lettering. It is misleading to suggest that the R113 is another motorway by using this colour scheme. The arrow should be angled left, just next to the 1 km.

Back in the day it was decided by the powers that be in the UK Ministry of Transport and various committees (Anderson and Warboys) that patching wouldn't be used on motorways, except at terminal junctions. Not sure why this is the case, although I rather suspect it is because the blue motorway signs were actually designed a couple of years before the green and white signs adopted for other roads a few years later. We follow an adaption of UK practice in directional signs (our NORMAL motorway signs, not dodgey gantries like this, are virtually identical other than being billingual) so like the UK we don't patch on motorways (despite the odd incorrect sign, esp on the M50...).

2) There is too much emphasis of matter in the road numbers in the right hand sign. Junction names are used on the continent, and the road number is in a small colour coded box.

See above....

3) The list of junction names should be in order of arrival at the junction. i.e.

Tallaght [N81]
The South [N7][E20]
The West [N4]
Navan/NW [N3]
Monaghan [N2]
Belfast [M1][E1]
Dublin NE [N32]

In this way the sign-dependant motorist would know that Tallaght was next after the Dundrum interchange, to give them notice to move over from the right-hand lane. This will be more important when it becomes a 3 lane motorway in heavy traffic conditions when lane change timing becomes more critical.

There should be two down arrows on the right hand sign which should cover both lanes so that sign-reliant drivers don't change lane un-necessarily.

By [ ] I mean a colour coded box with the route number.

Aside from putting the E in front of the E road number, there is no need to have M or N in front of the road number if standardised colour boxes are used. The N4 turns into the M4 and back again to the N4 - it is all route 4 going to the same destinations.

Road interchange names should be appropriate to the main destinations they serve. "Red Cow" doesn't tell one anything. e.g. "Southern Interchange" would be more memorable and meaningful. Similarly "Western Interchange" for the M50xN4 gyratory.

.probe

To do what you suggest, AND maintain bilingual signage, would require either extremly small text or extremely large signs. Of course, that opens up another debate over whether we should billingually sign at all, I'm rather of the opinion we shouldn't, but the "Irish is our national langauge" lobby would probably disagree....

I agree though, that road numbers on their own should not have been used in this manner.