If you could bring back one traditional highway practice, what would it be?

[Alex]

Inspired by a radio program I listened to where listeners submitted their nominees for an on-air award show, I started thinking about what might be a good question to ask my fellow road enthusiast. I would opt for all of the answers, but if I had to choose one...

[Takumi]

In order:
Cutouts (what I voted for)
Colored shields
Higher speed limits (because race car)
Button copy
Trusses
Concrete

[TCN7JM]

I wonder how high "reasonable and prudent" would be these days.

[Brandon]

R&P for speed limits.  Do we really need cops hiding out in the bushes like a thief in the night to catch speeders on freeways?

Then I'd bring back cutout shields.

[NE2]

Engine cranks. Sundown towns.

[Brandon]

Engine cranks. Sundown towns.

Hell, at that rate, let's just go back to horses and buggies.

[PHLBOS]

R&P for speed limits.  Do we really need cops hiding out in the bushes like a thief in the night to catch speeders on freeways?

^^This.

One traditional highway practice item not mentioned that I would like to see return is the increased usage of pull-through signs; especially at locations where the through route changes its control destinations but does not veer off onto a different highway corridor.

[US81]

Hmmm, my order would probably be:

Trusses
Cutout shields
Colored shields
Reasonable and prudent*
Concrete
Button copy*

I love button copy, but mostly for the rareness / nostalgia factor. Retro-reflective sheeting seems better in terms of visibility / functionality. (My take as a non-engineer)

Although I'm definitely in favor of reasonable and prudent, I would be leery of going back to it at this point. I wish it had been the standard all along. I'm not sure we could bring it back now that law enforcement has had years to have the practice of aggressive speed enforcement as the "easy" ticket / revenue enhancement it has become. My fear would be that R&P becomes something arbitrary that a cop can determine more or less at whim and load one event into multiple tickets with big fines and points, simply because it's the end of the month and he hasn't met his quota, or doesn't like your make of car or your bumper sticker.

[Molandfreak]

Reasonable and prudent should be anything below 100. The 85 mph ticket that ended Montana's reasonable and prudent limit was absolutely ludacris and he was right to call them out on it. I haven't driven any of MT 200, but a (relatively) straight highway out west with shoulders is safe at those speeds.

[US 41]

Other, cloverleaf interchanges

[NE2]

The 85 mph ticket that ended Montana's reasonable and prudent limit was absolutely ludacris

Proof that R&P is all about DWB.

[DaBigE]

Other: Traffic engineers setting speed limits not politicians.

[hbelkins]

Cutouts was my vote.

As for concrete pavement and trusses as bridge standards, we live in an era where prudent use of tax dollars is essential. Concrete is a more expensive initial investment. As for truss bridges, only if they are the most cost-efficient design. Many times they aren't and it would be a waste of money to build a truss bridge isn't necessary.

I've never experienced R&P speed limits, but they wouldn't necessarily end police patrols. My definition of R&P might be different than the cop's, and his definition will win.

[Jardine]

Nobody wants to repeal right turn on red ??

[oscar]

I've never experienced R&P speed limits, but they wouldn't necessarily end police patrols. My definition of R&P might be different than the cop's, and his definition will win.

I have.  126 mph on a lonely stretch of I-94 east of Miles City, MT was a blast, in my new BMW 328i in 1996 when the "Montanabahn" was still in effect.  But there was enough traffic on I-90 between Billings and Butte to keep me in the 85-100mph range. 

Also, the curve advisories stopped at 65mph, so you were taking your chances on how fast you could take a curve that could be safely driven faster but how much faster was unclear.

More generally, IIRC the general lack of guidance on safe speeds was what doomed R&P in Montana.  Maybe yellow speed advisory signs would've made R&P less legally problematic, as well as promoting driver safety and reining in cops' discretion.

While I voted for restoration of R&P, cutout shields would've been my second choice if that had been allowed.  (I grew up in California, where cutouts rule -- Interstate, U.S., state, and county route markers were and still are all cutouts.)  Button copy, though, I could do without -- sometimes it works nicely, but more often it doesn't, especially where only the marker shape and not the route number are visible at night. 

And no, I think right turn on red is a great idea.

[hbelkins]

Nobody wants to repeal right turn on red ??

No. Why would we?

[Jardine]

Nostalgia?

Restoring things to a simpler, gentler way of life ?

Getting back to basics and eschewing ill conceived liberalizations from the 70s that fostered a decline in traditional values ?

[Brian556]

Gateless railroad crossing signals.
In my opinion, gates are not needed. Lights work just fine. Gates are really annoying because they block traffic unnessessarily during the following situations: Hi-rail truck near crossing, track work near crossing, switching near crossing.
I like the old style mast signals where the crossbuck and lights are mounted more flush with the pole, and the crossbuck isn't too far from the lights.

Barricade lights.
In many states, such as Texas, they aren't used anymore.
Two reasons I would bring them back. 1. Safety. 2. They look cool.
Yes, there are situations where they are not needed due to bright sheeting. However, there are some situations where they would be beneficial. Especially isolated repair spots that aren't part of a large project.

[TEG24601]

I voted for R&P, but simply having traffic engineers set speed limits based on what is safe, not having them politically motivated would be a great thing.  Having driven across the US nearly a dozen times, there are more places that I care to list where the speed limits are ridiculously slow.  With few exceptions, like going through the panhandle of Idaho and some twists through Montana, no less than 90 would be acceptable throughout most of the Freeways in the West, all the way to Chicago.


I would also like to see cutout shields, and have seen a few in recent years installed along US-421 in Carroll County, IN, and they look awesome and should be the norm, not the exception.

[1995hoo]

I voted for "other." I would get rid of signs saying "Slower Traffic Keep Right" in favor of "Keep Right Except to Pass" ("Left Lane for Passing Only" might be OK on roads with no left-lane exits).

[DaBigE]

Gateless railroad crossing signals.
In my opinion, gates are not needed. Lights work just fine. Gates are really annoying because they block traffic unnessessarily during the following situations: Hi-rail truck near crossing, track work near crossing, switching near crossing.
I like the old style mast signals where the crossbuck and lights are mounted more flush with the pole, and the crossbuck isn't too far from the lights.

With modern signaling techniques (pair of lights per lane), I can agree. When gates malfunction, they can be a bitch. There's a pair of xings several miles from where I work that have a habit of malfunctioning just as the afternoon rush is beginning. What makes matters worse is the railroad is extremely slow to respond. Responding police end up getting caught in the traffic gridlock. Once they finally reach the xing, they end up lifting the gates by hand and tying them to the signal pole.

Barricade lights.
In many states, such as Texas, they aren't used anymore.
Two reasons I would bring them back. 1. Safety. 2. They look cool.
Yes, there are situations where they are not needed due to bright sheeting. However, there are some situations where they would be beneficial. Especially isolated repair spots that aren't part of a large project.

While I can't speak for many other states, barricade lights are alive and kicking in Wisconsin with no signs of eliminating them. They're still in the spec book and have specific notes on their usage in the standard detail drawings for closures and detours.

[Brandon]

I voted for "other." I would get rid of signs saying "Slower Traffic Keep Right" in favor of "Keep Right Except to Pass" ("Left Lane for Passing Only" might be OK on roads with no left-lane exits).

Some states already use a similar phrasing.  Michigan's say "KEEP RIGHT / PASS LEFT".

[Molandfreak]

Nostalgia?

Restoring things to a simpler, gentler way of life ?

Getting back to basics and eschewing ill conceived liberalizations from the 70s that fostered a decline in traditional values ?

what

[Dr Frankenstein]

1. Truss bridges.
2. Button copy.
3. Concrete pacement.
4. Reasonale & Prudent speed limit. (Or at the very least, 70 mph in Canada; should be at least 120 km/h / 75 mph now.)
5. Cutout shields. (US; Does not apply here.)
6. Coloured shields. (Idem.)

[1995hoo]

I voted for "other." I would get rid of signs saying "Slower Traffic Keep Right" in favor of "Keep Right Except to Pass" ("Left Lane for Passing Only" might be OK on roads with no left-lane exits).

Some states already use a similar phrasing.  Michigan's say "KEEP RIGHT / PASS LEFT".

Yeah, I recall there used to be a sign like that just west of Breezewood. But they're all too rare (or nonexistent) in most states I've visited.

California's driver ed materials apparently now call the left lane the "fast cruising lane." I hate that sort of crap. I mean, look, we all know sometimes due to traffic you wind up in the left lane, especially in urban areas or when there are a lot of slow trucks. That's life. What irks me is the number of people who see no problem with essentially defaulting to the left lane–unless, of course, you're in a country where they drive on the left!