Arrows

[texaskdog]

So I noticed today, to go on 35 South they have an arrow pointing straight down.  For 35 North it is an arrow pointing up and to the right.  To be consistent either the North arrow should be pointing DOWN and right, to match the southbound pointing down, or the Southbound arrow should be pointing UP to match the up & right.  WHy the inconsistency?

[jakeroot]

That's the style that's been in use for several decades. "Through" movements use down arrows. "Exiting" movements use up/right or up/left arrows. If both movements are considered "exit" movements, typically the "left" movement gets the down arrow, or they both get up arrows pointing in the correct direction.

Signs with all up arrows, where some/most of the arrows point straight up, are APLs. Signs with all down arrows are generally either two through movements, or a through movement + and exit-only lane.

We've discussed the drawbacks/benefits of combo up/down arrow signs endlessly in many other threads. I don't particularly care for them, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

[hbelkins]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Which stinks. "Dancing arrows" work perfectly well.

[jakeroot]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Which stinks. "Dancing arrows" work perfectly well.

I've always thought it looked funny. But I'm also not used to seeing it.

I think the issue is that its not always clear where they're pointing.

[Scott5114]

Yeah, you had agencies like ODOT that would pull tricks like this:

[machias]

Yeah, you had agencies like ODOT that would pull tricks like this:

Yeah, those dancing arrows in Oklahoma City caught my eye a few years ago but I kind of forgave ODOT because the road does curve there a bit. Still weird though.

NYSDOT used to dance arrows at Interstate to Interstate (or freeway to freeway) interchanges from time to time in the 70s. I can easily remember dancing arrows in Binghamton at 81/17 and in the Rochester area at 104 and 590. I think dancing arrows used in that manner are all well and good as they convey a high speed ramp instead of a regular exit ramp.

[6a]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

[jakeroot]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

[cl94]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

District 6 (Columbus) has changed over with interesting results, as APLs don't allow for 2 option lanes [Credit OHOKRoads]. Previously, ODOT would have done dancing arrows on 3 signs (1 for each movement).

[jakeroot]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

District 6 (Columbus) has changed over with interesting results, as APLs don't allow for 2 option lanes [Credit OHOKRoads]. Previously, ODOT would have done dancing arrows on 3 signs (1 for each movement).

Not in their current form, anyway. Once the FHWA loosens their grip on the required designs, states will come up with new ways of signing multiple option lanes using up arrows.

[cl94]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

District 6 (Columbus) has changed over with interesting results, as APLs don't allow for 2 option lanes [Credit OHOKRoads]. Previously, ODOT would have done dancing arrows on 3 signs (1 for each movement).

Not in their current form, anyway. Once the FHWA loosens their grip on the required designs, states will come up with new ways of signing multiple option lanes using up arrows.

Yeah, several of us have mentioned that to FHWA people at TRB. We're seriously hoping they took our suggestions seriously.

[PurdueBill]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

Numerous dancing arrow assemblies appeared last year around Akron for the "Do The Detour" stuff where the Central Interchange or other things like the Kenmore leg would be closed in different directions on and off.  Probably the excuse/rationale was that the new dancing arrow signs were replacing like-sized signs without dancing arrows, so the load on the gantry had to not increase to what it would with OAPLs.

South of Akron, two exits on I-77 southbound got new dancing arrow setups for one of the advance assemblies; neither being system interchanges, they wouldn't be eligible for OAPLs based on FHWA regs, instead favoring advance signage that LIES about how many lanes exit.  Good call to keep the dancing arrows here as well.

[6a]

FWIW, "down and..." isn't allowed. Down arrows may only point directly down.

Ohio still hasn't received that memo.

I know that Ohio was a heavy user, but are they still installing them?

District 6 (Columbus) has changed over with interesting results, as APLs don't allow for 2 option lanes [Credit OHOKRoads]. Previously, ODOT would have done dancing arrows on 3 signs (1 for each movement).

Some of the new installs (replacing button copy) still use dancing arrows, too.

[SignBridge]

Re: down pointing arrows........an older (1988) MUTCD contained a statement that permitted tilting down arrows "where desired to emphasize the separation of roadways".

Unfortunately that statement does not seem to appear in the current (2009) Manual. I don't know if that was their intent, maybe to eliminate use of dancing arrows, or if they omitted it inadvertently.

I agree with the 1988 Manual that it is reasonable in some cases to tilt down pointing arrows slightly.

[1995hoo]

Dancing arrows may not be inherently bad, but then you have extreme implementations like this one in Maryland (it's worse when you see it on the road for real).....

[MNHighwayMan]

Did someone say bad?

Well, not just bad, but also lazy.

[roadman]

Until the 2009 MUTCD emphasized the use of up arrows only for all exit signing, Massachusetts practice was to use downward slanted Type "A" arrows for overhead exit signs where the exit ramp sharply curved after leaving the mainline and/or the exit lane was 'exit only' and was preceded by 'lane assignment' advance signs with downward arrows.

Many examples of this treatment still exist, particularly in the Downtown Boston area ("Big Dig" project), but are being phased out in favor of the upward arrows as signs are upgraded through MassDOT's ongoing freeway sign replacement/upgrading program.

When properly executed, I generally don't mind "dancing arrows" on signs, provided they are the longer Type "A" arrows, and not just kicking the Type "C" down arrow at an angle.

[Brian556]

Tennessee uses diagonal down arrows, which I dislike

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1557108,-86.8274784,3a,29.2y,72.51h,93.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.34396%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

[roadman]

Tennessee uses diagonal down arrows, which I dislike

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1557108,-86.8274784,3a,29.2y,72.51h,93.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.34396%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

Proving my point about slanted Type "C" arrows - thank you.  The problem is that, at any sort of distance, it is very difficult to discern the slant of the arrow due to the lack of noticeable shaft.

[jakeroot]

Tennessee uses diagonal down arrows, which I dislike

Proving my point about slanted Type "C" arrows - thank you.  The problem is that, at any sort of distance, it is very difficult to discern the slant of the arrow due to the lack of noticeable shaft.

I have a hard time discerning which direction any slanted down arrows are pointing. The lack of a shaft makes it worse, but it's so hard to tell which lane it's pointing to until you're right up on the sign. Although that issue extends to down arrows in general, so maybe I'm not being fair.

[hbelkins]

Tennessee uses diagonal down arrows, which I dislike

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1557108,-86.8274784,3a,29.2y,72.51h,93.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DKhnYeLIc-lPdBZyWYCKQOQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.34396%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

I have no problems with those dancing arrows. Lane selection should have been made well before coming across this sign.