Text only | Text with Images

AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Traffic Control => Topic started by: Tom89t on January 14, 2012, 01:01:45 AM

Title: Traffic signal
Post by: Tom89t on January 14, 2012, 01:01:45 AM
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dr Frankenstein on January 14, 2012, 01:19:13 AM
Link leads nowhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on January 14, 2012, 02:45:54 AM
To make this thread deliver:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cityofindianwells.com%2Fuser_images%2FTraffic%2520Signal_2.JPG&hash=a40ac5dc4f63647199b22e5c72c33bff1c0d90e2)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 14, 2012, 08:57:26 AM
Quote from: Tom89t on January 14, 2012, 01:01:45 AM
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

Tom, you need to post the entire Google Maps link for these.  When you post, it's not coming through but for the the first bit.  IIRC, there's a copy button on the Google Map you want to post that says "copy link" or some such thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on January 14, 2012, 10:21:07 AM
How to share a map link: http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=72644 (http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=72644)

Look for the Link button, it looks like this: (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fhelp%2Fhc%2Fimages%2Fmaps_1625043_link_button_en.png&hash=65e4d7844b47709974f2bc9de5dc1acae03b6666)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on January 14, 2012, 03:04:11 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 14, 2012, 08:57:26 AM
Tom, you need to post the entire Google Maps link for these.  When you post, it's not coming through but for the the first bit.  IIRC, there's a copy button on the Google Map you want to post that says "copy link" or some such thing.

Quote from: Michael on January 14, 2012, 10:21:07 AM
How to share a map link: http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=72644 (http://support.google.com/maps/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=72644)

Look for the Link button, it looks like this: (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fhelp%2Fhc%2Fimages%2Fmaps_1625043_link_button_en.png&hash=65e4d7844b47709974f2bc9de5dc1acae03b6666)
Guys, Tom is posting to the forums using an iPod Touch.  I tried to find the link icon Michael mentioned but in the mobile version of Google Maps, that icon is no where to be found.

Tom, you need get on a *real* computer in order to be able to link to Google Maps.  If you are unable to get to a computer, don't bother posting links to Google Maps because all we'll get is the generic map of the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on January 14, 2012, 03:31:28 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2012, 02:45:54 AM
To make this thread deliver:


Oh no, everything is broken

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fclickhalah.com%2Fimages%2Ftrafficlight.jpg&hash=c31f71fa362156c4caefb2b61e4e55db83a87af3)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on January 14, 2012, 09:44:35 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fny%2Fsyracuse%2Ftipw.jpg&hash=f085b365c2acd260b6173de3fc163c08d7086605)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on January 14, 2012, 10:11:31 PM
Steve, you beat me to posting that one!  I live about a half hour away from it.

The entrance to SUNY Oswego had double signals, but I think they've been replaced.  The older signals were only visible when you were right under them (they had lenses that restrict the viewing angle).  The double signals can be seen in Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=43.44661,-76.541727&spn=0.002162,0.005284&t=h&z=18&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=43.44672,-76.541513&panoid=qvhScURB65BLJ53j8aMphQ&cbp=12,87.59,,0,-13.61).  The older signals are on the far side of the intersection (the right mast arm in the background).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Tom89t on January 14, 2012, 11:12:54 PM
Thats  what I been telling you guys. :pan:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on January 14, 2012, 11:22:19 PM
Quote from: Tom89t on January 14, 2012, 11:12:54 PM
Thats  what I been telling you guys. :pan:

Not very well, apparently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: adt1982 on January 14, 2012, 11:53:06 PM
What a descriptive title!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 01, 2012, 08:50:16 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6799126368/in/photostream/  http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6945237857/in/photostream/     http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6799126238/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6945237857/in/photostream/


Pictures of an ugly signal assembly in Orlando, FL on US 17, 92, & 441. :pan:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 16, 2012, 08:33:34 PM
That's really fancy, and probably expensive. Whey would they go to all that expense instead of using more standard mounting equipment.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 16, 2012, 09:29:08 PM
Two places in Broward County that I am aware of have a similar massive traffic signal set-up, but diagonally.  One is located at North University Drive (FL 817) and West Sunrise Blvd. (FL 838) on the Plantation/Sunrise city line and the second one is to the south at North/South University Drive (FL 817) and West Broward Blvd. (FL 842) in Plantation.

When these big black behemoths were erected, the reason given for having installing these massive interstate-highway-sign- sized sign bridges for traffic lights was that the intersections were the largest in the County.  I do not support that reasoning since the intersections in both cases consist of 6-lane highways with 2-left turn lanes and 1-right turn lane, neither of which are unusual at all in south Florida.  Each time I have encountered these huge signal bridges, the traffic lights themselves tend to be hard to see, being dwarfed in black-painted steel.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on March 16, 2012, 10:30:41 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

What color is the top head in the two-section signals?  I guess red?  (A first thought was maybe yellows so the assembly could theoretically flash yellow for some reason, but I dismissed that because the top head shouldn't be yellow--it would be disaster to have someone colorblind come along and think it was flashing red.  Maybe the top lights, if red, aren't operational and are placeholders so the green isn't alone?  Where is this light--maybe someone is familiar with it?)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:45:29 PM
This is on US 360 in Richmond, just east of VA 150 at a shopping center. Every time I'be been by this light it's been green, so I don't actually know what color the top is!

Assuming it's red, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on March 16, 2012, 10:50:09 PM
I would assume it's always green, since there's no conflicting movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on March 16, 2012, 10:57:49 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:45:29 PM
This is on US 360 in Richmond, just east of VA 150 at a shopping center. Every time I'be been by this light it's been green, so I don't actually know what color the top is!

Assuming it's red, though.
Is that a location where the traffic in this direction has a protected-only or protected-permissive left turn but no reason for the thru traffic to stop? Every place I've seen that setup, there is a single green straight-ahead arrow only with no other lights that could show. One that comes to mind is exiting Denver International Airport where the road from the remote parking lot enters.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 11:07:50 PM
The leftmost signal has four arrows, so there may be such a phase there. If none of the other Richmond area roadgeeks hasn't seen this fully in action, I'll check it out one day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 16, 2012, 11:45:07 PM
The right three 2-section signals look like they'd have yellow on their top section which I would assume flash during the off hours. New York has plenty of intersections with those type of signals...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6020%2F5992209883_3f647fe150_z.jpg&hash=3d4bf16c26a8c6377001c2fd3da7eb0abf92834e)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on March 17, 2012, 09:43:01 AM
Takumi, I would actually presume the top is yellow, based on another Virginia example I used to drive under daily. On VA 134 (Armistead Ave) at the onramp to I-64 westbound in Hampton, VA was an almost identical setup, where the left turn lanes had three-lens signals (protected arrows only) and the two thru lanes had a green and yellow two-lens signal (I only ever saw it yellow once, when it was first installed the top lens flashed yellow). Unfortunately the two-lens signals were removed a few years ago, and are not even visible in street view anymore. They were added when Armistead Ave was widened through the area at least 10 years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 12:34:28 PM
Go to street view and look at US 90 Eastbound at I-310 near New Orleans.  You will see a full doghouse signal for that movement at the northbound on ramp to the interstate with the through movement being business as usual with two other signal heads.  The thing is there is no other road to conflict movement where the green signal is on constantly with the red and straight through yellow ever used.  Only the yellow and green left are used when WB US 90 is stopped to allow a protected left turn from EB to NB.  Check it out there!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=New+Orleans,+LA&aq=0&oq=new+o&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.957999,86.572266&vpsrc=6&t=h&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+Orleans,+Orleans,+Louisiana&ll=29.896048,-90.395089&spn=0.002404,0.005284&z=18&cbll=29.895983,-90.39519&panoid=DNoe1OaQnlCLQrK-s0Nrtw&cbp=12,25.63,,0,0&ei=YcNkT4HBAcqo8gb1jpW-BA&pw=2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 17, 2012, 01:24:37 PM
Heck, who needs two?

Here is GMSV during road construction; through traffic has only a signal head, which is solid green full-time.
Wichita, KS:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fsignal.png&hash=7c832579882417aa28154f05ab4f8ea480b7636b)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 01:31:03 PM
Exactly!  There should be some permanent arrows there with a left turn signal head that flashes RED to allow left turns when there is chance to move without waiting for the green arrow like it is now.  Good photo to prove this.

Also this looks like what Orlando used to have that was a right lane continous green at one time until drivers started making unsafe lane changes that ended this trend at some three way intersections.  Titusville, FL still uses them along many intersections along US 1 and on the Kennedy Space Center in front of the Visitor's complex on NASA Parkway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 17, 2012, 01:40:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 01:31:03 PM
Exactly!  There should be some permanent arrows there with a left turn signal head that flashes RED to allow left turns when there is chance to move without waiting for the green arrow like it is now.  Good photo to prove this.

Also this looks like what Orlando used to have that was a right lane continous green at one time until drivers started making unsafe lane changes that ended this trend at some three way intersections.  Titusville, FL still uses them along many intersections along US 1 and on the Kennedy Space Center in front of the Visitor's complex on NASA Parkway.

If you're referring to my Wichita photo, then....  The two full signal heads are dedicated left turn arrows; oncoming traffic gets a red light to allow this green phase, and then it's through-only again.  Traffic here is heavy, as it is a mall entrance on a major thoroughfare AND very near one of Wichita's two most important highways.  So, the protected arrow is very important for the safety of traffic coming off Kellogg and turning into the mall.  Here's the satellite image:
http://g.co/maps/bkdc4 (http://g.co/maps/bkdc4)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 17, 2012, 04:54:06 PM
Don't ya' just hate when they don't chop the mast-arm at the left-most signal head, as in that Wichita photo. Virginia is famous for that too. It looks so sloppy and unfinished; very unprofessional. Bet you don't see that in Calif. or Nevada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 09:55:37 PM
Actually I was referring to the one in LA on US 90 that I posted.  The Wichita setup should have been used there with a flashing red arrow to allow traffic to turn left there when the on-coming traffic is NOT stopped.

It looks like Florida there in Wichita with the brown mast arms.  I know that KDOT used non painted mast arms and was amazed that on East Kellog that there were two span wire assemblies back in 01 when I went through there then.  Usually you do not find span wires in the mid-west.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on March 18, 2012, 01:02:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 09:55:37 PM
Usually you do not find span wires in the mid-west.

There are quite a few in lower Michigan, from what I remember, especially in more rural locations.  WisDOT uses them frequently for temporary signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 18, 2012, 06:41:48 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 17, 2012, 04:54:06 PM
Don't ya' just hate when they don't chop the mast-arm at the left-most signal head, as in that Wichita photo. Virginia is famous for that too. It looks so sloppy and unfinished; very unprofessional. Bet you don't see that in Calif. or Nevada.

Actually, longer-than-necessary mast arms do pop up in Nevada from time to time. Generally, it's because there is the potential for future expansion of turn lanes or something and the mast arm is ordered long enough to accommodate that. Other times, it's because mast arms come in standard lengths and the roadway is an odd width...in these cases, the arm is likely to have been salvaged from another previous installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2012, 09:40:15 AM
Quote from: roadfro on March 18, 2012, 06:41:48 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 17, 2012, 04:54:06 PM
Don't ya' just hate when they don't chop the mast-arm at the left-most signal head, as in that Wichita photo. Virginia is famous for that too. It looks so sloppy and unfinished; very unprofessional. Bet you don't see that in Calif. or Nevada.

Actually, longer-than-necessary mast arms do pop up in Nevada from time to time. Generally, it's because there is the potential for future expansion of turn lanes or something and the mast arm is ordered long enough to accommodate that. Other times, it's because mast arms come in standard lengths and the roadway is an odd width...in these cases, the arm is likely to have been salvaged from another previous installation.

We have plenty of longer than needed mast arms in Orlando.  Peppermill Boulevard at Orange Blossom Trail has one for EB Peppermill that is twice the length needed.  There is no plans to widen Peppermill Boulevard in this life and the furthermost left signal head is only half way to the middle of the arm there.

http://maps.google.com/maps/svpw?url=http:%2F%2Fmaps.google.com%2Fmaps%3Ff%3Dq%26source%3Ds_q%26hl%3Den%26geocode%3D%26q%3DOrlando,%2BFL%26aq%3D0%26oq%3DOrla%26sll%3D37.0625,-95.677068%26sspn%3D35.957999,86.572266%26vpsrc%3D6%26t%3Dh%26ie%3DUTF8%26hq%3D%26hnear%3DOrlando,%2BOrange,%2BFlorida%26ll%3D28.538336,-81.379236%26spn%3D0.00244,0.005284%26z%3D14%26layer%3Dc%26cbll%3D28.390605,-81.404864%26panoid%3DIlLuizyilO5f9mIecFGJMw%26cbp%3D12,73.59,,0,0%26output%3Dembed&hl=en&gl=us
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2012, 09:59:16 AM
Here is a picture of a signal with a RIGHT LANE CONTINUOUS GREEN where the right lane does not have to stop ever, but vehicles in the left lane have to.  This is a three way intersection, where vehicles coming in from the left, only have to swing into the left lane, while the right lane stays free. 

We used to have more of these around Central Florida, but many are being eliminated for those who choose to change lanes to avoid the light are making unsafe lane changes ruining this type of set up.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Titusville,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.526038,-80.679109&spn=0.009747,0.021136&sll=28.390603,-81.404867&sspn=0.002459,0.005284&oq=Ti&t=h&hnear=Titusville,+Brevard,+Florida&z=16&layer=c&cbll=28.526226,-80.679079&panoid=brDF0fEy4bSNUIeEO9WsLg&cbp=12,270,,0,0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: pianocello on March 18, 2012, 12:06:20 PM
There's a few of them in mid-Michigan, like this (http://g.co/maps/62a7r) one used for an exit ramp and one here (http://g.co/maps/p9qys) that functions more of a right turn arrow. It's only on when there's an WB-SB left turn arrow (pic faces north).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 18, 2012, 12:57:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 17, 2012, 04:54:06 PM
Don't ya' just hate when they don't chop the mast-arm at the left-most signal head, as in that Wichita photo. Virginia is famous for that too. It looks so sloppy and unfinished; very unprofessional. Bet you don't see that in Calif. or Nevada.

Maryland seems to be famous for that as well. They seem to have a "one size fits all" policy in terms of mast arms.
http://g.co/maps/4kst2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2012, 06:16:42 PM
In fact they do have shorter mast arms out there that are shorter.  Plus some states like New Jersey will turn the arm on a 45 degree angle if the arm is too long to make its extension only half its way and not creating any sight problems.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on April 08, 2012, 03:29:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2012, 01:24:37 PM
Heck, who needs two?

Here is GMSV during road construction; through traffic has only a signal head, which is solid green full-time.
Wichita, KS

I saw one of these in Richmond yesterday, where VA 197 leaves Laburnum Ave for Saunders Ave. Turning traffic and eastbound Laburnum traffic each have protected cycles, while westbound Laburnum traffic has the continuous straight green arrow. Traffic cannot turn west onto Laburnum from Saunders here, as the road is split.

I also saw another signal with two lights on VA 161 northbound, just past US 60. Southbound has a normal three light signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JREwing78 on April 09, 2012, 08:09:34 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 18, 2012, 01:02:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 17, 2012, 09:55:37 PM
Usually you do not find span wires in the mid-west.

There are quite a few in lower Michigan, from what I remember, especially in more rural locations.  WisDOT uses them frequently for temporary signals.

Michigan's default is the span wire; only occasionally do you see MDOT using masts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SidS1045 on April 09, 2012, 10:51:10 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?

NYC did quite well without them for decades.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fforgotten-ny.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fwheelies_2%2Ftraffic-light-1985.jpg&hash=b8b766e74aba4b661359c32f5114a83bc247b3f7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 09, 2012, 11:47:14 PM
That's a hell of a mastarm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Sanctimoniously on April 10, 2012, 07:00:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 01, 2012, 08:50:16 PM

Pictures of an ugly signal assembly in Orlando, FL on US 17, 92, & 441. :pan:

The new signals for Lejeune Boulevard (NC 24) and Piney Green Road at the Piney Green gate of Camp Lejeune are like that, except in sort of a stair-step shape, both sets of signals for Piney Green Road are on the same gantry. . .thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 22, 2012, 10:33:57 AM
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.019645,-75.149209&spn=0.002025,0.005284&hnear=6670+Cecil+Rd,+Port+St+John,+Brevard,+Florida+32927&t=m&layer=c&cbll=40.01961,-75.148954&panoid=X9qnZG_POx2TfaKJuTqVXQ&cbp=12,93.63,,0,-22.5&z=18

This is an oddity of a signal without the visors for the red and green left with the middle one in tact.  Almost looks like the signal is giving the finger.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: architect77 on April 25, 2012, 11:03:31 PM
Interesting signal gantry in Jacksonville, NC near Camp Legeune:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fphoto78.jpg&hash=698163447c1ab69f347ff7817e6f3fa0d98a631e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fphoto77.jpg&hash=5187b173ee0fd380f3c9159c9c16323070868e3e)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: architect77 on April 25, 2012, 11:05:18 PM
Wilmington, NC has these citywide. They look good:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fphoto76.jpg&hash=46f87bd50bd8eb3cf60bea99404d580a57811ddb)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: blawp on April 26, 2012, 01:04:36 AM
Does every state besides California have rickety looking power lines?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: architect77 on April 26, 2012, 02:10:47 PM
Quote from: blawp on April 26, 2012, 01:04:36 AM
Does every state besides California have rickety looking power lines?
I would reply with a resounding, "Yes."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 11, 2012, 04:13:44 PM
Just wondering about the MUTCD and its ruling on overhead signals.   I am aware that on straight through signals there must be TWO signal heads always, but left turn and right turn signals only need one.  Only NJ, DE, IL, and some states feature more signal heads as an added bonus.

San Fransisco, Washington, cities in Illinois and Wisconsin, and parts of New Jersey have side mounted signals where there is no overhead assemblies whatsoever.  Then in some places like California, Pennsylvania, and some others you have only one overhead straight through head with the other one side mounted to make the required two that is needed.

My question is are side mounted allowed at all according to the latest MUTCD guidelines?  If they are, does that still mean you have to have two overhead assemblies to work with the rest?  I have seen some places in NJ where you have two overhead and maybe one or two side mounted.  Then there are some streets in CA and NJ that have overhead signals for the main road and side mounted on the secondary street, or even side mounted posts at the end of a road at a signal where the heads are on 6 feet poles directly across the end of the street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: xcellntbuy on May 11, 2012, 04:20:11 PM
Quote from: architect77 on April 25, 2012, 11:05:18 PM
Wilmington, NC has these citywide. They look good:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fphoto76.jpg&hash=46f87bd50bd8eb3cf60bea99404d580a57811ddb)
These are popping up all over Broward County, Florida.  Most are black, some are silver.  The silver looks better.  The big gantry "cage" exists in a few places in Broward.  All black.  Not too fond of them myself.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 11, 2012, 08:51:54 PM
Roadman: the two required heads in each direction do not necessarily have to be overhead. They can be overhead or pole-mounted or a combination. The only requirement is that they fit into the drivers' so called "cone-of-vision" which you can read about and see a diagram of, in the MUTCD on the FHWA website. Just Google MUTCD and you should find it. However the Manual does encourage agencies to use two overhead signals as the preferred arrangement. That's considered the most effective, though I personally think in some cases, one overhead and one on the far-right pole is a good arrangement, especially when there are only 1 or 2 thru lanes. But, as they say: "It's all good."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 12, 2012, 02:20:25 PM
SignBridge I do know that there is also a 40 feet distance must be maintained between the stop bar and the signals itself.  Someone I know, who I do not see quite frequently anymore, works for Orange County, FL repairing signals.  He told me that.

I assume that only one of them needs to be in the cone of vision as New Jersey has one on each side of the street with only one, I have seen, in the vision of the first car in line.  The other is either overhead or to the left on the opposite side of the road.

NJ, NYC, and part of PA seem to install signals where one signal head is over the opposing traffic lane except where left turn signals are installed.   Having one straight through to the left of the left turn light, for obvious reasons, is not right.  Only where there is one signal around a curve where a left side head is needed to display to the traffic before the curve the signal's orientation.

I would like to know how NYC in Rockaway Beach, NY is allowed to operate amber less signals and only have two colors: red and green.  Both together are used to warn motorists of the change when the green time is up.  I have a photo of the red and green both on at the same time back in 03 along the beach where they are still used unless it was modified since then.  Plus, how does the signal work in flash mode?  It must only be a four way stop flashing red on all signals, or does like Boston does and flashes the green at some intersections on the dominate roadway instead of the yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM
Roadman, you make some good points. You're right about that 40 ft. from the stop-line rule. That's in Section 4D along with the cone of vision. And it does also say that at least one and preferably both required heads, must be within the cone. I remember some talk among engineers on the FHWA discussion forum about the need to change that rule to require both heads to be within the cone.

I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow. Regrettably this is a common practice in Calif, and N.J. But I think it's misleading. New York had a rule against this practice. I don't know if they retained it when they abolished their own Manual and went with the Federal Manual, with a State Supplement. A near-right pole mounted head is a good alternative on a right-hand curved approach.

I can't believe that NYC still had any 2-color signals in use in 2003. They changed most or all of them to 3-color back in the 1960's. As you suggested, it was probably used in flashing red/yellow mode.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on May 12, 2012, 11:09:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM


I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow.
While I'm not against it, I note that when a signal turns horizontal, the up-down order of the signal becomes a right-left order. In keeping with that, I expect the left-turn arrows to be at the far right of the signal, after the RYG. It violates my expectancy to see arrows mixed between the balls. Just doesn't look natural.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on May 13, 2012, 12:22:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM
I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow. Regrettably this is a common practice in Calif, and N.J. But I think it's misleading. New York had a rule against this practice.
Can you provide some examples of this particular signal setup because I don't think this is common practice in California... at least in Northern California and I don't ever recall seeing a green ball left of a left turn signal.  If there is an overhead left turn signal, then the pole-mounted signal on the far left corner is also a left turn signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 13, 2012, 01:31:00 PM
Correct Myosh, re: the far-left corner. But, if the approach is a right-hand curve, Calif. will often have a near-left corner pole or mast-arm mounted green ball or both. Three examples:

In Serramonte (Bay Area) on eastbound Hickey Blvd. at Campus Dr.

In San Diego's Mission Valley area, eastbound on Camino De La Reina at Avenida Del Rio. (near the N/W corner of the interchange of I-5 and SR-163.

Also (s/w corner of same interchange) on westbound Hotel Circle South at Bachmann Place. Ain't Google Earth great? Have fun!

And Steve, yes I agree that horizontal signals result in an unusual arrangement that I don't really like either. I guess they feel that the left-turn arrow needs to be to the left of the green-ball. Logical in a way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on May 14, 2012, 11:46:50 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 13, 2012, 01:31:00 PM
Correct Myosh, re: the far-left corner. But, if the approach is a right-hand curve, Calif. will often have a near-left corner pole or mast-arm mounted green ball or both. Three examples:

In Serramonte (Bay Area) on eastbound Hickey Blvd. at Campus Dr.

In San Diego's Mission Valley area, eastbound on Camino De La Reina at Avenida Del Rio. (near the N/W corner of the interchange of I-5 and SR-163.

Also (s/w corner of same interchange) on westbound Hotel Circle South at Bachmann Place. Ain't Google Earth great? Have fun!
I don't see how the signal arrangements in your three examples are bad.  I looked at the first two intersections on Google Maps and eliminating the near left signals would be a very bad idea because the main signals are located on a blind curve where drivers are not given enough warning on the current state of the signal.  This situation is really not that common in California but when it is used, there appears to be a good reason why the signals were set up that way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 16, 2012, 08:33:59 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 12, 2012, 11:09:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM


I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow.
While I'm not against it, I note that when a signal turns horizontal, the up-down order of the signal becomes a right-left order. In keeping with that, I expect the left-turn arrows to be at the far right of the signal, after the RYG. It violates my expectancy to see arrows mixed between the balls. Just doesn't look natural.

Florida's horizontal signals have the yellow arrow and green arrow to the left of the green ball and right of the yellow ball.  Yet on the normal vertical mount it is all on the bottom below the green ball.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 16, 2012, 08:36:38 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on May 13, 2012, 12:22:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM
I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow. Regrettably this is a common practice in Calif, and N.J. But I think it's misleading. New York had a rule against this practice.
Can you provide some examples of this particular signal setup because I don't think this is common practice in California... at least in Northern California and I don't ever recall seeing a green ball left of a left turn signal.  If there is an overhead left turn signal, then the pole-mounted signal on the far left corner is also a left turn signal.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Clark,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.630256,-74.309142&spn=0.007817,0.021136&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.082817,86.572266&oq=clark&hnear=Clark,+Union,+New+Jersey&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.630286,-74.309022&panoid=YfsZJzRsd8OpoQshCXANbg&cbp=12,225,,0,0

Raritan Road Southbound at Central Avenue in Clark, NJ where a green ball is to the left of the left turn signal (hidden behind the GSP shield) as Raritan Road has a curve leading into Central Avenue.  The green 8 inch signal head (on the NB signal pole) is out of the cone of view for those making a left turn. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 17, 2012, 04:17:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 16, 2012, 08:33:59 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 12, 2012, 11:09:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM
I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow.

While I'm not against it, I note that when a signal turns horizontal, the up-down order of the signal becomes a right-left order. In keeping with that, I expect the left-turn arrows to be at the far right of the signal, after the RYG. It violates my expectancy to see arrows mixed between the balls. Just doesn't look natural.

Florida's horizontal signals have the yellow arrow and green arrow to the left of the green ball and right of the yellow ball.  Yet on the normal vertical mount it is all on the bottom below the green ball.

The MUTCD prescribes the required positioning of arrows and circular faces of different colors. The order of arrows does change when a 5-section vertical is moved to horizontal, and also changes depending on whether it's a left or right arrow. The layout Roadman65 describes is the standard for a horizontal 5-section PPLT display.

I think the positioning of arrows for the left turn is this way to avoid having the left green arrow to the right of the circular green, which might be confusing. The concept is similar to how on a green guide sign, a left arrow is always left of the destination and a right arrow is always on the right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 27, 2012, 06:57:30 PM
Is there any place other than Downtown Orlando, FL that has special bus signals using the Pennsylvania Railroad's positional bars rather than the red, yellow, and green balls?  For exclusive bus lanes there are these non MUTCD signal heads that use a cross bar for stop, an angle bar for caution, and a vertical bar for clear to proceed. 
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Orlando,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.545605,-81.37747&spn=0.009575,0.021136&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.082817,86.572266&oq=or&hnear=Orlando,+Orange,+Florida&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=28.545668,-81.37747&panoid=hQl0dEsvAl5Bsqy0M2t3Xg&cbp=12,0,,0,0

The assembly being questioned is to the left of the two main signal heads here.  Sorry I do not have a closeup to give you, but was wondering if any other place uses these for city buses on exclusive ROW?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on May 27, 2012, 08:58:39 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 27, 2012, 06:57:30 PM
Is there any place other than Downtown Orlando, FL that has special bus signals using the Pennsylvania Railroad's positional bars rather than the red, yellow, and green balls?  For exclusive bus lanes there are these non MUTCD signal heads that use a cross bar for stop, an angle bar for caution, and a vertical bar for clear to proceed.  
The assembly being questioned is to the left of the two main signal heads here.  Sorry I do not have a closeup to give you, but was wondering if any other place uses these for city buses on exclusive ROW?

The "HealthLine" RTA bus on Euclid Ave in Cleveland (http://goo.gl/maps/g4fe) has dedicated signals something similar to that type.  They are in black housings vs. the vehicular ones in yellow, to increase the difference.

I could swear that I saw color-coded ones with bars in California one time--maybe Santa Clara? but I would have to dig for the possible picture I may have taken, if I am remembering right.

Edit: It wasn't a bus signal but a trolley signal (http://www2.uakron.edu/genchem/P1010478.JPG) in California--probably more common to have the bar indications.  The color as well as bar direction is interesting.  (Note that the picture was not taken from the trolley but from a conventional bus.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 27, 2012, 09:38:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 27, 2012, 06:57:30 PM
Is there any place other than Downtown Orlando, FL that has special bus signals using the Pennsylvania Railroad's positional bars rather than the red, yellow, and green balls?  For exclusive bus lanes there are these non MUTCD signal heads that use a cross bar for stop, an angle bar for caution, and a vertical bar for clear to proceed. 

The MUTCD has a similar signal scheme primarily designed for light rail vehicles but is also allowed to be used for bus rapid transit lanes and bus queue jumper lanes. This uses white indications with a horizontal bar signifying stop/red, a vertical bar signifying go/green (with an additional angle bar in a separate face used to indicate a turning movement, with the upper end of the bar slanted left or right as appropriate), and an equilateral triangle pointing up and flashing to indicate the caution/yellow.


This standard MUTCD transit signal is being used on Grand Central Pkwy in downtown Las Vegas where the express buses drive in exclusive bus lanes.

Reno, NV is also using the standard signal at selected bus lanes/queue jump lanes for the RTC Rapid bus along Virginia Street.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on May 30, 2012, 02:22:36 AM
The MBTA uses that for streetcar signals, but with the horizontal bar colored red rather than white.
I'm not sure if any of the BRT uses these or not though, as the only part I've had any exposure to is the Silver Line Washington Street, which does not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on May 30, 2012, 04:30:08 PM
I find it strange the the Baltimore light rail uses signals that look like they're encased in pedestrian signals.
We also use a diagonal line as opposed to a triangle.
http://goo.gl/maps/KFG7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 13, 2012, 05:37:58 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on May 30, 2012, 04:30:08 PM
I find it strange the the Baltimore light rail uses signals that look like they're encased in pedestrian signals.
We also use a diagonal line as opposed to a triangle.
http://goo.gl/maps/KFG7

In 2003 I noticed the NJ Transit Hudson-North Bergen Light Rail used (or might still use) signals that are also encased inside pedestrian signal heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bulkyorled on June 14, 2012, 12:48:14 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on May 13, 2012, 12:22:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 12, 2012, 09:55:04 PM
I agree that a green ball should not be located to the left of a left-turn arrow. Regrettably this is a common practice in Calif, and N.J. But I think it's misleading. New York had a rule against this practice.
Can you provide some examples of this particular signal setup because I don't think this is common practice in California... at least in Northern California and I don't ever recall seeing a green ball left of a left turn signal.  If there is an overhead left turn signal, then the pole-mounted signal on the far left corner is also a left turn signal.

Yea I'd like to know where I can find that too haha There's actually ONE spot I know if that's even related to this at all but it's got a right turn arrow. But it's still the only one I've seen like it. Its in LA at the end of Cahuenga Blvd EAST for the right turn onto Barham Blvd
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 14, 2012, 04:31:38 PM
Bulkyorled, see my post on this page from 5/13/12 where I gave several Calif. examples of a green ball being postioned to the left of left-turn arrows where the road curves sharply to the right.

Also I just looked at that interesection of Cahuenga Bl. East at Barham Blvd. on Google Earth. The situation we're talking about doesn't exist there, if the view shown is current. There is a right-turn arrow, but no green-ball to the right of it. So...........maybe you misunderstood? 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bulkyorled on June 14, 2012, 08:51:45 PM
I did misunderstand haha I had the imagine in my head of the one at Barham & Cahuenga and went with it. :pan:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 22, 2012, 08:20:40 AM
Well, just to say that I have been wrong about NJ having the best timed signals in the nation.  I just rode US 206 from Somerville to Lawrenceville, NJ and almost got nailed at every single signal.    I think NJ has gotten worse in addition to drivers sleeping at the wheel when the light turns green.  The Garden State always had perfectly timed signals on state highways.  I do not know what happened here, but it is not a good drive in this area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr. Matté on June 22, 2012, 10:31:40 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 22, 2012, 08:20:40 AM
Well, just to say that I have been wrong about NJ having the best timed signals in the nation.

Not to mention that 63 out of the 85 red light cameras in the state have been temporarily suspended because of possibly mistimed yellow lights...

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/nj_slams_the_breaks_on_red-lig.html
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on June 23, 2012, 08:18:04 AM
We are in Fort Myers on vacation visiting relatives (leaving for Miami this morning) and I've noticed that a couple of traffic lights around here have an odd bright blue light attached to the bottom. Does anyone know what it's for? I haven't been able to get a picture (iPhone camera on a rainy day yesterday wasn't going to help) and I can't do Street View on my phone. But the primary instance I noted of this lighting was at the intersection of Gladiolus Drive and US-41. Even my wife noticed the blue lights and found them odd.


Edited to add: Never mind. The first result when I did a Bing search was a thread on this forum about that issue:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4918.0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 09:17:01 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on June 23, 2012, 08:18:04 AM
We are in Fort Myers on vacation visiting relatives (leaving for Miami this morning) and I've noticed that a couple of traffic lights around here have an odd bright blue light attached to the bottom. Does anyone know what it's for? I haven't been able to get a picture (iPhone camera on a rainy day yesterday wasn't going to help) and I can't do Street View on my phone. But the primary instance I noted of this lighting was at the intersection of Gladiolus Drive and US-41. Even my wife noticed the blue lights and found them odd.


Edited to add: Never mind. The first result when I did a Bing search was a thread on this forum about that issue:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4918.0
Probably the "fink" lights that allow a police officer to see the orientation of the red signal (only goes on when your side is red?) from the side road or from the other direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 10:41:53 AM
I was noticing in New Jersey in some places rather than the five lens doghouse, they use a four headed tower.  Unlike Illinois where there is a five lens tower with the yellow and green arrows below, these intersections have both the yellow and green arrow through the same lens.

I do not know what changes the color, but the green turns to yellow instead.  Plus, I have not seen it elsewhere.  It must be as new as the flashing yellow arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on June 23, 2012, 01:10:56 PM
The inline 4 head signals in New Jersey aren't new by any means.  Many of these signals used to have a green only incandescent arrow.  Once dual color LED arrows came out, places began using them in signal installations.  But they've been in use for quite some time now. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 05:05:36 PM
I dislike that New Jersey arrow arrangement, but I guess it saves them money. Seeing the arrow change position as it goes from green to yellow in a conventional signal gives drivers an additional visual aid to observe the change. Especially helpful for drivers who may have any degree of color-blindness. I'm a little surprised at New Jersey. They are usually pretty sharp re: traffic signal installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: swbrotha100 on June 23, 2012, 06:09:14 PM
When did New Jersey start using more of the straight mast arm signals? Nice to see, just don't remember them when I lived there in the 90s.

I've noticed that in living out west, the majority of areas that use left turn arrows or left turn signals have a minimum of two signals, either in the median on a divided road, or the far left overhead and the far left side. Most areas tend to use five head signals for permissive lefts, although in Arizona, the city of Scottsdale and ADOT are trending towards four head signals. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing more of the "doghouse" permissive overhead signals out there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 23, 2012, 06:20:08 PM
Quote from: swbrotha100 on June 23, 2012, 06:09:14 PM
When did New Jersey start using more of the straight mast arm signals? Nice to see, just don't remember them when I lived there in the 90s.

I've noticed that in living out west, the majority of areas that use left turn arrows or left turn signals have a minimum of two signals, either in the median on a divided road, or the far left overhead and the far left side. Most areas tend to use five head signals for permissive lefts, although in Arizona, the city of Scottsdale and ADOT are trending towards four head signals. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing more of the "doghouse" permissive overhead signals out there.
New Jersey had them in the 1980's when I lived there and the US 1 and Stiles Street intersection in Linden had them from the late 70's.   Atlantic City  even used them back in the mid 70's along Atlantic Avenue.

NJ also uses 2 signal heads for left turns like out west as well.  New Jersey, though, along with NYC will have one of its straight through heads on the left side (opposing) side of the road as well.  However, new signals on NJ 21 in Newark have them with three heads over each lane like other states do for through traffic with no left side heads.  MUTCD must be cracking down on New Jersey, as NJ always did their signals differently then the rest of the nation.
Heck, even the NJTA says FU to the MUCTD as their lane striping uses more paint then what is necessary meaning thicker and longer lines.  They were  even the last roadway around to convert the old safety control signs (merging traffic,etc.) to the international diagramical ones.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 06:53:53 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 05:05:36 PM
I dislike that New Jersey arrow arrangement, but I guess it saves them money. Seeing the arrow change position as it goes from green to yellow in a conventional signal gives drivers an additional visual aid to observe the change. Especially helpful for drivers who may have any degree of color-blindness. I'm a little surprised at New Jersey. They are usually pretty sharp re: traffic signal installations.

This is exactly why the MUTCD doesn't allow them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: akotchi on June 23, 2012, 08:05:58 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 06:53:53 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 05:05:36 PM
I dislike that New Jersey arrow arrangement, but I guess it saves them money. Seeing the arrow change position as it goes from green to yellow in a conventional signal gives drivers an additional visual aid to observe the change. Especially helpful for drivers who may have any degree of color-blindness. I'm a little surprised at New Jersey. They are usually pretty sharp re: traffic signal installations.

This is exactly why the MUTCD doesn't allow them.
Where do you see this prohibition?  Reading Section 4D.06, paragraph 06, it seems like the green/yellow bi-modal arrows are allowed.  NJ would have stopped using them for new installations if the 2009 Manual prohibited them.

I can appreciate SignBridge's point, though -- there might have been a loading issue on the mast arms using 5-section vs. 4-section heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PM
I doubt that it was a loading issue. Plenty of doghouses are used on these mast arms elsewhere including Bucks County along Lincoln Hwy and Street Road. My guess is that it's just cheaper to do it with 4 sections than 5.

And I agree that sec. 4D-06-06 does seem to permit New Jersey's practice, if I'm understanding it correctly. Some of these standards in the Manual can be hard to interpret. 

And yes I assume N.J. would not still be using them if they were prohibited, but you never know. New York DOT and Nassau County have some flashing strobes in their red traffic lights and I don't believe that's permitted. And Massachusetts has some flashing green lights, which is not authorized in the Manual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
Huh. I could have sworn I read somewhere they were prohibited.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SidS1045 on June 23, 2012, 11:02:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PMNew York DOT and Nassau County have some flashing strobes in their red traffic lights and I don't believe that's permitted.

As does Westchester County.  The red signals on the Saw Mill River Parkway at Readers Digest Road have strobe tubes across them.

Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PMAnd Massachusetts has some flashing green lights, which is not authorized in the Manual.

Flashing greens in Massachusetts pre-date the MUTCD by decades, although they're not covered in the current driver's manual, and the section of the state's MUTCD supplement on flashing lights (7-9.5) doesn't even mention them.  There are a few left, however.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on June 23, 2012, 11:22:22 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 23, 2012, 11:02:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PMNew York DOT and Nassau County have some flashing strobes in their red traffic lights and I don't believe that's permitted.

As does Westchester County.  The red signals on the Saw Mill River Parkway at Readers Digest Road have strobe tubes across them.

I've noticed all of New York has a lot of strobe signals. The signals at the south end of the Adirondack Northway have strobes, as well as Northway exit 8 have them amongst others in the Capital Area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Central Avenue on June 25, 2012, 06:59:42 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
Huh. I could have sworn I read somewhere they were prohibited.

Perhaps you were thinking of dual-mode flashing and steady yellow arrows in a FYA assembly? As I understand it, the MUTCD requires separate steady and flashing yellow arrow segments for those for the reason you mentioned before; the "jump" gives drivers a better visual indication than the light simply changing from steady to flashing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on June 25, 2012, 08:32:37 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 23, 2012, 11:02:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PMNew York DOT and Nassau County have some flashing strobes in their red traffic lights and I don't believe that's permitted.

As does Westchester County.  The red signals on the Saw Mill River Parkway at Readers Digest Road have strobe tubes across them.

Quote from: SignBridge on June 23, 2012, 08:54:53 PMAnd Massachusetts has some flashing green lights, which is not authorized in the Manual.

Flashing greens in Massachusetts pre-date the MUTCD by decades, although they're not covered in the current driver's manual, and the section of the state's MUTCD supplement on flashing lights (7-9.5) doesn't even mention them.  There are a few left, however.
Morrissey Blvd., for example.

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
Huh. I could have sworn I read somewhere they were prohibited.
You shouldn't swear.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 25, 2012, 11:23:04 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 23, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
Huh. I could have sworn I read somewhere they were prohibited.
You shouldn't swear.
[/quote]

Oh. Fuck.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 02:12:57 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 23, 2012, 11:02:13 PMFlashing greens in Massachusetts pre-date the MUTCD by decades, although they're not covered in the current driver's manual, and the section of the state's MUTCD supplement on flashing lights (7-9.5) doesn't even mention them.  There are a few left, however.
Salem still has some old pedestrian-activated traffic signals that go into a steady red and yellow mode to signify that pedestrians can cross the street (instead of using separate pedestrian (WALK/DONT WALK) signals).  Some other Greater Boston communities may still have similar signals around as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jwolfer on June 27, 2012, 03:59:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 01, 2012, 08:50:16 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6799126368/in/photostream/  http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6945237857/in/photostream/     http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6799126238/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6945237857/in/photostream/


Pictures of an ugly signal assembly in Orlando, FL on US 17, 92, & 441. :pan:

Hideous!  we have one like that in Jax on Monument Road and Trednick Pkwy just west of the 295 interchange
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
IIRC, a flashing green means proceed but expect the light to change; usually after a pedestrian pushes a button.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 27, 2012, 04:52:05 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
IIRC, a flashing green means proceed but expect the light to change; usually after a pedestrian pushes a button.

The way I learned it in Drivers' Ed in Mass a couple decades (plus a couple years) back is that flashing green means "subject to change"....if the 10-year-old on the corner wants to see the car coming down the street stand on end, he will push the pedestrian button at just the right time to make the light change red.  So yes, the same as you say--expect it to change and be ready for it.

I could swear I remember at least one flashing green in Delaware on US 13 some years back....that was definitely not a pedestrian-actuated light, so I don't know what was special about it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on June 27, 2012, 05:04:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
IIRC, a flashing green means proceed but expect the light to change; usually after a pedestrian pushes a button.
Isn't flashing green also used in some Canadian provinces?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on June 27, 2012, 08:05:07 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 02:12:57 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 23, 2012, 11:02:13 PMFlashing greens in Massachusetts pre-date the MUTCD by decades, although they're not covered in the current driver's manual, and the section of the state's MUTCD supplement on flashing lights (7-9.5) doesn't even mention them.  There are a few left, however.
Salem still has some old pedestrian-activated traffic signals that go into a steady red and yellow mode to signify that pedestrians can cross the street (instead of using separate pedestrian (WALK/DONT WALK) signals).  Some other Greater Boston communities may still have similar signals around as well.
Boston itself still has them on Charles St. north of the Commons. Re: flashing green, it has nothing to do with "expect to stop" in common usage. My understanding of it was, this is a location where people may cross, but unless you see people, assume it stays green. That may differ from the legal language, but it's how people treat it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on June 27, 2012, 08:38:40 PM
Quote from: signalman on June 27, 2012, 05:04:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
IIRC, a flashing green means proceed but expect the light to change; usually after a pedestrian pushes a button.
Isn't flashing green also used in some Canadian provinces?
It is, or at least used to be, protected left turn; basically a green left arrow. The light went steady a few seconds before oncoming traffic got their green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 27, 2012, 09:29:55 PM
I can't believe there are so many misconceptions about the Massachusetts flashing green. It indicates a traffic signal that is operated by pre-emption, usually either a pedestrian cross-walk, or in front of a fire-station where it is operated when the fire-trucks are leaving or backing in. It will not cycle the way a normal traffic light does. Stays flashing-green until manually activated. Hope this clears up the confusion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 27, 2012, 10:39:27 PM
That's what happens when you use a non-standard traffic control device...people get misconceptions about it!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on June 28, 2012, 12:24:29 AM
Massachusetts is FULL of flashing greens. Most of the North Shore towns still have them (Salem, Beverly, Swampscott, Lynn), and some prior Googling and experience driving by them almost daily has taught me that flashing green indicates a non-activated pedestrian signal. What bothers me though is that the side street will have a flashing red AND a stop sign, indicating that the signal only applies to pedestrians. When a pedestrian activates the crossing, the light then changes to steady yellow and then steady red for both directions before reverting back to flashing green and red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on June 28, 2012, 03:20:16 AM
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on June 27, 2012, 08:38:40 PM
Quote from: signalman on June 27, 2012, 05:04:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 27, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2012, 03:12:04 PM
what does flashing green mean in Massachusetts?

in Mexico, it is "light is about to turn yellow".  there, they have a long flashing green phase, and a yellow of a second or two.  the total amount is comparable to a US yellow interval.
IIRC, a flashing green means proceed but expect the light to change; usually after a pedestrian pushes a button.
Isn't flashing green also used in some Canadian provinces?
It is, or at least used to be, protected left turn; basically a green left arrow. The light went steady a few seconds before oncoming traffic got their green.

Oh, ok.  Thank you for clarifying.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on June 28, 2012, 05:37:57 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 27, 2012, 09:29:55 PM
I can't believe there are so many misconceptions about the Massachusetts flashing green. It indicates a traffic signal that is operated by pre-emption, usually either a pedestrian cross-walk, or in front of a fire-station where it is operated when the fire-trucks are leaving or backing in. It will not cycle the way a normal traffic light does. Stays flashing-green until manually activated. Hope this clears up the confusion.

Why not use a regular green? Or a flashing yellow? Down here we use regular lights for pedestrian signals and flashing yellow for emergency signals, with the flashing yellow on the bottom in place of green. Does the flashing green add any information to the driver that a steady green doesn't?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 08:40:30 AM
Quote from: realjd on June 28, 2012, 05:37:57 AMWhy not use a regular green? Or a flashing yellow?
Funny you should say that.  One traffic signal in Downtown Marblehead, MA went from a flashing yellow to a flashing green about a decade ago.  It's the pedestrain-activated signal located at the intersection of Pleasant & School Streets.; Pleasant having the yellow-to-green, School St. has a flashing red.

Quote from: PurdueBill on June 27, 2012, 04:52:05 PMThe way I learned it in Drivers' Ed in Mass a couple decades (plus a couple years) back is that flashing green means "subject to change"
I took my Mass. Driver's Ed. class back in 1982 and the wording was indeed the same.

Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 08:05:07 PMRe: flashing green, it has nothing to do with "expect to stop" in common usage. My understanding of it was, this is a location where people may cross, but unless you see people, assume it stays green. That may differ from the legal language, but it's how people treat it.
Steve, the expect to stop or subject to change regarding flashing greens (sounds like a nudist environmental group) language is straight from the Massachusetts Driver's Manual... at least the one from the 70s & 80s that PurdueBill and I read when we were learning how to drive.  However, you are correct in most drivers' real world interpretation of it.

Keep in mind, that back in the 70s/80s; MA had a lot more flashing green signals around than today.  Most of them, with the exception of the above-mentioned Pleasant St. signal, were originally erected in the 50s & 60s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 08:40:30 AM
Quote from: realjd on June 28, 2012, 05:37:57 AMWhy not use a regular green? Or a flashing yellow?
Funny you should say that.  One traffic signal in Downtown Marblehead, MA went from a flashing yellow to a flashing green about a decade ago.  It's the pedestrain-activated signal located at the intersection of Pleasant & School Streets.; Pleasant having the yellow-to-green, School St. has a flashing red.

Quote from: PurdueBill on June 27, 2012, 04:52:05 PMThe way I learned it in Drivers' Ed in Mass a couple decades (plus a couple years) back is that flashing green means "subject to change"
I took my Mass. Driver's Ed. class back in 1982 and the wording was indeed the same.

Quote from: Steve on June 27, 2012, 08:05:07 PMRe: flashing green, it has nothing to do with "expect to stop" in common usage. My understanding of it was, this is a location where people may cross, but unless you see people, assume it stays green. That may differ from the legal language, but it's how people treat it.
Steve, the expect to stop or subject to change regarding flashing greens (sounds like a nudist environmental group) language is straight from the Massachusetts Driver's Manual... at least the one from the 70s & 80s that PurdueBill and I read when we were learning how to drive.  However, you are correct in most drivers' real world interpretation of it.

Keep in mind, that back in the 70s/80s; MA had a lot more flashing green signals around than today.  Most of them, with the exception of the above-mentioned Pleasant St. signal, were originally erected in the 50s & 60s.

Also common at intersections where there is a flashing green for the main road is that the side street usually has a flashing red in the bottom of the signal (that is, the signal is red, yellow, red from top to bottom).  In the absence of pedestrian signals, the pedestrian actuation of the lights would result in the lights going from flashing bottom color all ways, to yellow all ways, to red all ways, then red-and-yellow all ways, which means WALK in all directions.  Again, this was particular to Mass and is disappearing slowly--but is still very common in places including the North Shore.  I think that even Peabody had some on streets near Salem (like Margin Street). 

I should be sure to clarify that the "subject to change" meaning pertained to pedestrians--if there were no people in sight, then it was likely that the flashing green would stay so.  However, it was always possible for someone to come out of nowhere and push the button and get an instant signal change, perhaps unless the signal had changed very recently and the controller had provisions for a minimum time between cycles.

While many flashing green signals are quite old equipment, there are many out there that are newer signals that were carbon-copy replacements of old ones (like the Margin St. Peabody ones at the Salem line).  I am surprised that they are allowed to stay as flashing green like that, but maybe there isn't any specific language about it that prohibits them being replaced in-kind like that.

I still think that when they were coming up with the meanings of flashing lights, the flashing green would have been more suitable than flashing yellow for some purposes.  As it is, flashing green is basically wasted, and flashing yellow winds up having different meanings when found as a signal at an intersection vs. as a standalone flashing yellow accompanying a sign (prepare to stop when flashing, urgent message when flashing, etc.).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on June 28, 2012, 04:39:09 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 27, 2012, 04:52:05 PM
The way I learned it in Drivers' Ed in Mass a couple decades (plus a couple years) back is that flashing green means "subject to change"
Heh, that statement brought back a funny high school memory.  When I took Drivers Ed in California a couple of decades ago, we were discussing traffic lights and one of the comments the teacher made was if we see a flashing green light, that means we were smoking crack.  He goes on to say we should *never* see a flashing green light... EVER! (except in Massachusetts)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 28, 2012, 05:06:28 PM
I have seen lights in Fort Lauderdale and in the State of Delaware where flashing red appears at left turn signals meaning that if the way is clear you can go.  Otherwise, if not the signal timer will expire on the opposing side and turn a steady red (as the signal is always green on the other side when flashing red on yours). 

Glens Falls, NY used to use them at one intersection north of NY 254 on US 9 for the side road there.   It was a regular intersection that never had a steady red on the side road, and was always flashing as this really just was a typical stop street. It was just with a traffic light that kicked in if there was too much traffic on US 9 after a motorist waited to cross it indefinetley here.  I did not see it last week when I was there, so it must be one of the many added working signals along US 9 as traffic counts increased over the decades ( we are talking about back in the 70s when I saw this) and a full signal is now needed there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PM
I still think that when they were coming up with the meanings of flashing lights, the flashing green would have been more suitable than flashing yellow for some purposes.  As it is, flashing green is basically wasted, and flashing yellow winds up having different meanings when found as a signal at an intersection vs. as a standalone flashing yellow accompanying a sign (prepare to stop when flashing, urgent message when flashing, etc.).

Agreed.  The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Yet the flashing green light isn't used, nor are combinations (e.g. steady green ball with flashing yellow ball).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 07:01:24 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PMWhile many flashing green signals are quite old equipment, there are many out there that are newer signals that were carbon-copy replacements of old ones (like the Margin St. Peabody ones at the Salem line).  I am surprised that they are allowed to stay as flashing green like that, but maybe there isn't any specific language about it that prohibits them being replaced in-kind like that.
That's probably because only the signal-heads were replaced but not the control box.  My guess is that if the control box is replaced, then the signals have to be updated to modern operating standards.

Quote from: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PM
Also common at intersections where there is a flashing green for the main road is that the side street usually has a flashing red in the bottom of the signal (that is, the signal is red, yellow, red from top to bottom).
Red with yellow both in the middle and bottom is also a common sight for pedestrian-activated signals at intersections for the major roadway (the minor intersecting road had red-yellow-red).  The bottom signals, regardless of lens color would be the flashing signal.

Several of Marblehead's traffic signals featured the above (including the Pleasant/School Street signal) until a decade or two ago.  Two of them changed to a more conventional red-yellow-green operations.  To my knowledge, Marblehead never had the steady red & yellow operations for pedestrian crossings (en lieu of a WALK signal).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.

I was taught in driver's ed that a green light means 'proceed with caution'.  Case in point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 28, 2012, 09:38:51 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F90LII.jpg&hash=ef22263dbac4a82000bca11c3f0d8fb9067d8559)
Perhaps someone reacted violently to being confused by a flashing green light?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 10:32:57 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2012, 07:01:24 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PMWhile many flashing green signals are quite old equipment, there are many out there that are newer signals that were carbon-copy replacements of old ones (like the Margin St. Peabody ones at the Salem line).  I am surprised that they are allowed to stay as flashing green like that, but maybe there isn't any specific language about it that prohibits them being replaced in-kind like that.
That's probably because only the signal-heads were replaced but not the control box.  My guess is that if the control box is replaced, then the signals have to be updated to modern operating standards.

Quote from: PurdueBill on June 28, 2012, 12:59:58 PM
Also common at intersections where there is a flashing green for the main road is that the side street usually has a flashing red in the bottom of the signal (that is, the signal is red, yellow, red from top to bottom).
Red with yellow both in the middle and bottom is also a common sight for pedestrian-activated signals at intersections for the major roadway (the minor intersecting road had red-yellow-red).  The bottom signals, regardless of lens color would be the flashing signal.

Several of Marblehead's traffic signals featured the above (including the Pleasant/School Street signal) until a decade or two ago.  Two of them changed to a more conventional red-yellow-green operations.  To my knowledge, Marblehead never had the steady red & yellow operations for pedestrian crossings (en lieu of a WALK signal).

Yep, the red-yellow-yellow is also common at fire stations as well as some pedestrian ones.  Near my old home in Peabody at the Y-intersection of Lowell St. and Johnson St. was a fun combination of flashers and regular R-Y-G lights.  Westbound, bottom yellow flashers.  On the opposite sides of those, for eastbound Johnson St. ending at Lowell St, red bottom flashers. (http://goo.gl/maps/Txv8)  West of there on Lowell St. for both directions, R-Y-G signals with Walk signals, one newer (a replacement for an old one) and one original and old, (http://goo.gl/maps/6emL) with an additional signal for the exit from the fire station (http://goo.gl/maps/uIVi); the fire station can change the signals at the intersection to go all red and the eastbound Lowell St. signal to also go red while westbound Lowell St. stays green to clear traffic.  Finally, on Johnson St. (no street view), regular R-Y-G for a crosswalk, pedestrian-actuated with Walk signals--both old like the other older signals, and painted green for some years now for whatever reason.  All of this is because of the nearby elementary school on Johnson St., the convenience store in the middle of the Y, the fire station across Lowell St. from the store, and the public library branch next door to the fire station.  It's a busy area for pedestrians and vehicles alike.  The variety of signal change possibilities is quite interesting, as is the variety of arrangements (R-Y-Y, R-Y-R, and R-Y-G all together).

I would agree that for sure the controller box on Margin St. is old and thus the new signal heads are just doing the same as the older ones and like you say, if that is updated, flashing green is gone.  Interesting thing about the flashing greens and bottom reds there--check out this street view, making sure to turn 180 degrees to face the other way across the street. (http://goo.gl/maps/S4Vv)  Yes, those are bottom red flashers for a crosswalk!  Push the button to get red and yellow all ways to cross.  (The next time I'm in that area, I'm going to have to get good video of those in action.  They can't live forever and need to be documented.)

I remember back when the area around Peabody Square was redone in the late 80s/early 90s that for a period of time, the side street across from the main Peabody fire station and next to City Hall had two signal heads facing it at its intersection with Lowell St. that were tied into the fire station signals and were first installed Red-Red-Yellow, with the middle red flashing in normal operation.  Fortunately that was eventually fixed. (http://goo.gl/maps/gtfY)

I must say, being a born-there and trained-there Boston Driver, I was ready to see almost anything!  Woe to the tourists who encounter these crazy things and have never seen anything even close before!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jwags on June 28, 2012, 10:59:07 PM
Here in Wisconsin our horizontally mounted signals have the arrows between the solid yellow and the green.  It typically goes from left to right R-Y-YA-GA-G

Here's a pic: http://goo.gl/maps/Xn44
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 28, 2012, 11:12:21 PM
The only fire station stoplight I have seen is in Del City. It's a two section light, red 16" and yellow 12". The yellow flashes. It looks ancient...anyone want to guess the vintage?

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=SE+15th+and+Sunnylane+Del+City+OK&hl=en&ll=35.449711,-97.437422&spn=0.007202,0.016469&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=56.59387,134.912109&hnear=SE+15th+St+%26+S+Sunnylane+Rd,+Del+City,+Oklahoma,+73115&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=35.449706,-97.437294&panoid=aPvSkU32wz2gF5nxHKgl2Q&cbp=12,102.68,,0,2.76
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on June 29, 2012, 12:47:47 AM
Quote from: J-Wags on June 28, 2012, 10:59:07 PM
Here in Wisconsin our horizontally mounted signals have the arrows between the solid yellow and the green.  It typically goes from left to right R-Y-YA-GA-G

Here's a pic: http://goo.gl/maps/Xn44

Except if the arrows are for a right turn, then it's R-Y-G-YA-GA, just as Figure 4D-18 of the MUTCD depicts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jwags on June 29, 2012, 01:01:06 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 29, 2012, 12:47:47 AM
Quote from: J-Wags on June 28, 2012, 10:59:07 PM
Here in Wisconsin our horizontally mounted signals have the arrows between the solid yellow and the green.  It typically goes from left to right R-Y-YA-GA-G

Here's a pic: http://goo.gl/maps/Xn44

Except if the arrows are for a right turn, then it's R-Y-G-YA-GA, just as Figure 4D-18 of the MUTCD depicts.

That configuration is at the next signal southbound.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on June 29, 2012, 08:46:10 AM
PurdueBill, next time you're in the North Shore; you might want to check out the signals at the Abbott Public Library in Marblehead (along Pleasant St., after the MA 114/129 jct.) for some odd signalhead arrangements.  The signal's a combination of a pedestrain signal w/supplemental heads likely used for when fire trucks from the nearby station depart.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr_Northside on June 29, 2012, 02:00:24 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.

Here in PA, it's taught that flashing yellow means treat like green, except proceed with more caution.
An arrow means your turn movement is protected (you don't have to yield)

Logically, a Flashing Yellow should then be treated just like a solid green arrow... except you proceed with more caution.
* "proceed with more caution" should not mean automatically expecting to yield.  You expect oncoming traffic to still yield / stop for you

However, it is my understanding that if you turn left at a FYA without yielding to approaching oncoming traffic, bad things might happen... even though you had an arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 29, 2012, 08:06:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.

I was taught in driver's ed that a green light means 'proceed with caution'.  Case in point.


The distinction is made between "permitted to enter the intersection" (on steady green) versus "permitted to cautiously enter the intersection" (on flashing yellow) in the MUTCD.


Quote from: Mr_Northside on June 29, 2012, 02:00:24 PM
Here in PA, it's taught that flashing yellow means treat like green, except proceed with more caution.
An arrow means your turn movement is protected (you don't have to yield)

Logically, a Flashing Yellow should then be treated just like a solid green arrow... except you proceed with more caution.
* "proceed with more caution" should not mean automatically expecting to yield.  You expect oncoming traffic to still yield / stop for you

However, it is my understanding that if you turn left at a FYA without yielding to approaching oncoming traffic, bad things might happen... even though you had an arrow.

A green arrow means your turn movement is protected and you do not have to yield, but this doesn't extend to other arrow colors.

Flashing yellow does not mean that you should expect oncoming traffic to yield to you. Similarly, making a permissive left turn on a circular green does not automatically mean the opposing traffic will yield to your left turn maneuver.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 29, 2012, 09:14:47 PM
Scott, that fire station signal in Del City might be from the 1970's. It's almost identical to the one in front of my neighborhood fire station , erected in 1976. BTW, those lens sizes are 12-inch and 8-inch. Similar signals built today are usually 3-section with (from top-to-bottom) a 12-inch red, 12-inch yellow for the change interval, and 8-inch yellow for the normal flashing mode.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 29, 2012, 09:51:01 PM
Ah, 12/8. I dunno why I thought it was 16/12...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 29, 2012, 10:29:56 PM
(Chuckle!) Maybe you thinking of letter sizes on the BGS's?!  :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 30, 2012, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 29, 2012, 08:06:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.

I was taught in driver's ed that a green light means 'proceed with caution'.  Case in point.


The distinction is made between "permitted to enter the intersection" (on steady green) versus "permitted to cautiously enter the intersection" (on flashing yellow) in the MUTCD.

This is sort of confirming my assertion that the meaning of a flashing yellow is ambiguous.  I really don't think we should be expecting people to read the MUTCD in order to know what the difference is between two colors of stoplights in certain circumstances (the difference between a solid green ball and a flashing yellow ball is not the same as the difference between a solid green arrow and a flashing yellow arrow)–especially when phases like flashing green and most color combinations aren't being used at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 30, 2012, 11:06:23 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 30, 2012, 01:43:58 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 29, 2012, 08:06:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 28, 2012, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 28, 2012, 05:27:18 PM
The flashing yellow light is very ambiguous.  Does it mean "It's a good idea to slow down", "You are required to slow down", "Cross traffic has a flashing red light so you're good to go", "Yield", ......

Try "proceed with caution". Works for any instance of flashing yellow at a signal, whether FYA or red/yellow flash mode.

I was taught in driver's ed that a green light means 'proceed with caution'.  Case in point.

The distinction is made between "permitted to enter the intersection" (on steady green) versus "permitted to cautiously enter the intersection" (on flashing yellow) in the MUTCD.

This is sort of confirming my assertion that the meaning of a flashing yellow is ambiguous.  I really don't think we should be expecting people to read the MUTCD in order to know what the difference is between two colors of stoplights in certain circumstances (the difference between a solid green ball and a flashing yellow ball is not the same as the difference between a solid green arrow and a flashing yellow arrow)–especially when phases like flashing green and most color combinations aren't being used at all.

I'm still trying to understand what about the flashing yellow is ambiguous, and how green is interpreted as "proceed with caution"...

The difference between a solid circular green & flashing circular yellow versus a solid green arrow and flashing yellow arrow is not all that different. A flashing yellow, regardless of circular or arrow, is that you are permitted to enter the intersection cautiously to proceed through, yielding if necessary to any other traffic legally in the intersection. The flashing yellow arrow allows you to make that movement, after yielding if necessary; the flashing circular yellow lets you go straight through or turn, after yielding if necessary. If anything, the meaning of a permissive left turn on circular green is the most ambiguous, which is one of the reasons for development of the FYA in the first place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 01, 2012, 04:22:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 30, 2012, 11:06:23 PM
The difference between a solid circular green & flashing circular yellow versus a solid green arrow and flashing yellow arrow is not all that different.

I'd have to disagree.  There's no real difference between a solid curricular ("ball") green & a flashing yellow ball.  However the difference between expecting to not have to yield to oncoming traffic (SGA) and having to yield (FYA) is a pretty noticeable difference.

QuoteA flashing yellow, regardless of circular or arrow, is that you are permitted to enter the intersection cautiously to proceed through, yielding if necessary to any other traffic legally in the intersection. The flashing yellow arrow allows you to make that movement, after yielding if necessary; the flashing circular yellow lets you go straight through or turn, after yielding if necessary.

A flashing yellow ball sounds right for that.  It's the addition of the arrow that might make it "ambiguous" - (Though I don't want to speak for the other poster who was using that term)

QuoteIf anything, the meaning of a permissive left turn on circular green is the most ambiguous, which is one of the reasons for development of the FYA in the first place.

I guess that's what irks me about this "issue".  Maybe it's just a sign of how dumb most of the general motoring public is.  There are plenty of simple traffic signals that don't have any arrows at all. Just "circulars", and most people get that the absence of an arrow means you yield to oncoming traffic.  In general, you always have to yield to oncoming traffic.  Not just at signals, but in general.  A 4-way stop (at a 4-way intersection), of course is an exception where you can turn left when it's your "turn"... 
Another exception is at a signal that has arrows, which indicate you have the right-of-way to turn, because they're arrows!

I guess if they wanted to replace the doghouse, I wouldn't raise a stink (on a roads message board) if they just had a F-Y-[ball (or "circular")], instead of an arrow.

Having to yield to oncoming traffic when you have an arrow (even a yellow one that is flashing) just seems very oxymoronic to me.

/rant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 02, 2012, 06:51:23 AM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 01, 2012, 04:22:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 30, 2012, 11:06:23 PM
The difference between a solid circular green & flashing circular yellow versus a solid green arrow and flashing yellow arrow is not all that different.

I'd have to disagree.  There's no real difference between a solid curricular ("ball") green & a flashing yellow ball.  However the difference between expecting to not have to yield to oncoming traffic (SGA) and having to yield (FYA) is a pretty noticeable difference.

QuoteA flashing yellow, regardless of circular or arrow, is that you are permitted to enter the intersection cautiously to proceed through, yielding if necessary to any other traffic legally in the intersection. The flashing yellow arrow allows you to make that movement, after yielding if necessary; the flashing circular yellow lets you go straight through or turn, after yielding if necessary.

A flashing yellow ball sounds right for that.  It's the addition of the arrow that might make it "ambiguous" - (Though I don't want to speak for the other poster who was using that term)

QuoteIf anything, the meaning of a permissive left turn on circular green is the most ambiguous, which is one of the reasons for development of the FYA in the first place.

I guess that's what irks me about this "issue".  Maybe it's just a sign of how dumb most of the general motoring public is.  There are plenty of simple traffic signals that don't have any arrows at all. Just "circulars", and most people get that the absence of an arrow means you yield to oncoming traffic.  In general, you always have to yield to oncoming traffic.  Not just at signals, but in general.  A 4-way stop (at a 4-way intersection), of course is an exception where you can turn left when it's your "turn"... 
Another exception is at a signal that has arrows, which indicate you have the right-of-way to turn, because they're arrows!

I guess if they wanted to replace the doghouse, I wouldn't raise a stink (on a roads message board) if they just had a F-Y-[ball (or "circular")], instead of an arrow.

Having to yield to oncoming traffic when you have an arrow (even a yellow one that is flashing) just seems very oxymoronic to me.

/rant.

What I'm getting from this interpretation is the thought that the presence of an arrow signal assigns right of way. That is not the case, and where I'm guessing the ambiguity comes from. An arrow signal is designed to control certain movements heading in the direction of the arrow, but doesn't assign right of way any more than a signal with circular indications. (I will concede the point that a green arrow does provide a protected movement, but that is separate from right of way).

The flaw I see in your argument is that "most people get that the absence of an arrow means you yield to oncoming traffic". The study that led to the adoption of the FYA design showed that many drivers found a circular green over their left turn lane to be ambiguous and often interpreted it as a "go" when they should yield first--remember, many people drive with the notion that "green means go". This is what led to the 2009 MUTCD adopting the stance that no circular indications should appear over a left lane or for dedicated left turn signal heads, instead favoring FYA. Testing showed FYA to be more intuitively understood by drivers, and would generate more "fail safe" responses when not understood.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on July 02, 2012, 08:29:32 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 02, 2012, 06:51:23 AM
An arrow signal is designed to control certain movements heading in the direction of the arrow, but doesn't assign right of way any more than a signal with circular indications. (I will concede the point that a green arrow does provide a protected movement, but that is separate from right of way).

As the case with a red arrow. You aren't permitted to turn left with a left red arrow indication.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Central Avenue on July 02, 2012, 12:59:02 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 01, 2012, 04:22:37 PM
I guess if they wanted to replace the doghouse, I wouldn't raise a stink (on a roads message board) if they just had a F-Y-[ball (or "circular")], instead of an arrow.

That's been done, actually. It's called Dallas phasing. I think this photo (by fellow forumgoer US 71) demonstrates the problem with this setup pretty well:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.staticflickr.com%2F4047%2F4292968965_412a54c2e5_z.jpg&hash=ef4b48c6c59aaac45e406c13223ffda58c084cf9)

Yes, most people, if they take the time to think it through, will arrive at the correct conclusion--that a green ball indicates a permissive left turn. But in reality, people don't drive that way--they see the lights, and make an automatic, split-second decision about what the "right" thing to do is. With this setup, too many people saw that the other two lanes were being held by red, and automatically assumed the green over exclusively the left lane meant it was a protected turn.

Ironically, if this setup were more common, this would probably be much less of an issue, because people would have become accustomed to the correct meanings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on July 02, 2012, 01:05:09 PM
I'm assuming, in that photo, oncoming traffic has green to go straight and a protected left?

I've seen that scenario only a handful of times in my life - and each time, it had the small informative sign.

would a flashing yellow arrow be appropriate in this context?  I've only seen flashing yellow paired with green for the forward directions, never with red. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on July 02, 2012, 01:17:02 PM
as for flashing yellow ball, I've always seen it paired with flashing red ball, and generally at night.  I've interpreted it as "yellow has right of way over red ... unless red is apparently drunk, doing 60mph in downtown Casper, WY at 4am, and paying no attention whatsoever to signals, in which case just let him burn out on his own time, not yours".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr_Northside on July 02, 2012, 02:48:05 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 02, 2012, 08:29:32 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 02, 2012, 06:51:23 AM
An arrow signal is designed to control certain movements heading in the direction of the arrow, but doesn't assign right of way any more than a signal with circular indications. (I will concede the point that a green arrow does provide a protected movement, but that is separate from right of way).

As the case with a red arrow. You aren't permitted to turn left with a left red arrow indication.

Except that really has nothing to do with the arrow aspect and everything to do with the RED aspect.  Yielding is not an issues when you can't "go".

Quote from: Central Avenue on July 02, 2012, 12:59:02 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 01, 2012, 04:22:37 PM
I guess if they wanted to replace the doghouse, I wouldn't raise a stink (on a roads message board) if they just had a F-Y-[ball (or "circular")], instead of an arrow.

That's been done, actually. It's called Dallas phasing. I think this photo (by fellow forumgoer US 71) demonstrates the problem with this setup pretty well:

That wasn't what I was referring to.  I was just saying to switch the arrow in a FYA to a "ball".  This appears to just be a standard vertical doghouse with some really wacky timing/phasing.  I don't know that I've seen a situation like that, ever.  And it seems that swapping a FYA for that V-doghouse and keeping the timing, it would still seem wacky.

QuoteYes, most people, if they take the time to think it through, will arrive at the correct conclusion--that a green ball indicates a permissive left turn. But in reality, people don't drive that way--they see the lights, and make an automatic, split-second decision about what the "right" thing to do is. With this setup, too many people saw that the other two lanes were being held by red, and automatically assumed the green over exclusively the left lane meant it was a protected turn.

I guess that's what grinds my gears about it.  It seems like it should be simple enough to inherently know that you always yield to oncoming traffic, unless an arrow "protects" you from oncoming traffic.  Which is why I personally hate the notion of using an arrow for a yield situation.

I would also assume that states that have been using these have adapted their drivers ed manuals to account for this....

And don't get me wrong, as long as traffic moves efficiently and safely, that's what really counts in the end....  Like I said, for some reason these things just bug me.  (Though beyond a couple of minutes typing, I don't actually dwell on it that much)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 03, 2012, 05:55:23 AM
Quote from: Central Avenue on July 02, 2012, 12:59:02 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on July 01, 2012, 04:22:37 PM
I guess if they wanted to replace the doghouse, I wouldn't raise a stink (on a roads message board) if they just had a F-Y-[ball (or "circular")], instead of an arrow.

That's been done, actually. It's called Dallas phasing. I think this photo (by fellow forumgoer US 71) demonstrates the problem with this setup pretty well:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.staticflickr.com%2F4047%2F4292968965_412a54c2e5_z.jpg&hash=ef4b48c6c59aaac45e406c13223ffda58c084cf9)

Yes, most people, if they take the time to think it through, will arrive at the correct conclusion--that a green ball indicates a permissive left turn. But in reality, people don't drive that way--they see the lights, and make an automatic, split-second decision about what the "right" thing to do is. With this setup, too many people saw that the other two lanes were being held by red, and automatically assumed the green over exclusively the left lane meant it was a protected turn.

Ironically, if this setup were more common, this would probably be much less of an issue, because people would have become accustomed to the correct meanings.

Yes, this photo shows an application of Dallas Phasing. The error with this installation is that the circular green on the left turn signal is not shielded or louvered in any way from the adjacent thru lanes (nor does it use a programmed visibility head). This leads to an even more ambiguous situation, in that there are conflicting indications on adjacent signal heads. The setup also uses the standard sign, instead of the modified sign "Left turn signal / yield on green [circular green symbol]", which was highly recommended where this type of phasing was in use.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 02, 2012, 01:05:09 PM
I'm assuming, in that photo, oncoming traffic has green to go straight and a protected left?

I've seen that scenario only a handful of times in my life - and each time, it had the small informative sign.

would a flashing yellow arrow be appropriate in this context?  I've only seen flashing yellow paired with green for the forward directions, never with red. 

Jake, you've got the interpretation correct. Oncoming traffic has a straight ahead and a protected left.

This situation was quite common in some areas of Texas (Dallas, obviously). It was becoming increasingly common in the Las Vegas area over the last several years with at least 20 installations that I am aware of. The whole purpose behind Dallas Phasing was to enable lead-lag protected left turns (thus enabling better signal timing progression) while retaining protected/permitted display for off-peak hours.

This application would not be allowed under current MUTCD rules--it would be replaced by a flashing yellow arrow, and is an ideal situation for an FYA to be used. At the instant the photo was taken, the left turn signal would have a flashing yellow arrow displayed instead of the circular green. In the typical left turn FYA setup, the flashing yellow arrow is tied to the opposing through movement--thus, it can appear when the adjacent through movement is red still allowing the left turn traffic to yield to oncoming traffic to make the turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Central Avenue on July 03, 2012, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 03, 2012, 05:55:23 AM
The error with this installation is that the circular green on the left turn signal is not shielded or louvered in any way from the adjacent thru lanes

...How can you tell? It looks like the camera is looking at the left turn signal straight-on...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on July 03, 2012, 08:55:01 AM
Quote from: Central Avenue on July 03, 2012, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 03, 2012, 05:55:23 AM
The error with this installation is that the circular green on the left turn signal is not shielded or louvered in any way from the adjacent thru lanes

...How can you tell? It looks like the camera is looking at the left turn signal straight-on...

It is hard to see in the photo, but the left turn signal assembly appears to be louvered. A larger version of the photo (http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/194888_3909310743661_443230229_o.jpg) shows more detail.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on July 03, 2012, 09:23:26 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 03, 2012, 08:55:01 AM
Quote from: Central Avenue on July 03, 2012, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 03, 2012, 05:55:23 AM
The error with this installation is that the circular green on the left turn signal is not shielded or louvered in any way from the adjacent thru lanes

...How can you tell? It looks like the camera is looking at the left turn signal straight-on...

It is hard to see in the photo, but the left turn signal assembly appears to be louvered. A larger version of the photo (http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/194888_3909310743661_443230229_o.jpg) shows more detail.

It has vertical louvers (I had to pull up my original). Most signals now have horizontal louvers, I believe. I'll have to make another trip up there to verify.

As far as FYA, Fayetteville, AR has thus far refused to install them. I asked Gridlock Guru about this, but I don't remember the city's reasoning (and GG's column has been discontinued)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on July 03, 2012, 11:36:48 PM
I forgot that I had taken video in May of a flashing green in action on Eastern Ave in Malden, Mass. 

Here is the flashing green on Eastern Ave (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10101619841002578), and here is the bottom flashing red on the side street (https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10101619855263998).

Note that Street View shows a pole-mounted signal for the side street that is gone now (http://goo.gl/maps/dEY4).  Also, these are somewhat modern signals but still flashing green--most flashing green ones in Mass are older than these, or at least their controllers are old.  Also there are separate Walk signals, unlike many flashing green locations where red-and-yellow indications stand in for Walk signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 04, 2012, 04:14:28 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on July 03, 2012, 08:55:01 AM
Quote from: Central Avenue on July 03, 2012, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 03, 2012, 05:55:23 AM
The error with this installation is that the circular green on the left turn signal is not shielded or louvered in any way from the adjacent thru lanes

...How can you tell? It looks like the camera is looking at the left turn signal straight-on...

It is hard to see in the photo, but the left turn signal assembly appears to be louvered. A larger version of the photo (http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/194888_3909310743661_443230229_o.jpg) shows more detail.

It definitely didn't look louvered before, but I see it now on the larger version. I stand corrected. But the point about conflicting signal indications still remains.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on July 05, 2012, 04:42:21 PM
Quote from: Central Avenue on July 02, 2012, 12:59:02 PMThat's been done, actually. It's called Dallas phasing. I think this photo (by fellow forumgoer US 71) demonstrates the problem with this setup pretty well:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.staticflickr.com%2F4047%2F4292968965_412a54c2e5_z.jpg&hash=ef4b48c6c59aaac45e406c13223ffda58c084cf9)

Yes, most people, if they take the time to think it through, will arrive at the correct conclusion--that a green ball indicates a permissive left turn. But in reality, people don't drive that way--they see the lights, and make an automatic, split-second decision about what the "right" thing to do is. With this setup, too many people saw that the other two lanes were being held by red, and automatically assumed the green over exclusively the left lane meant it was a protected turn.

Ironically, if this setup were more common, this would probably be much less of an issue, because people would have become accustomed to the correct meanings.
That long signal-head setup was tried along MA 114 in Peabody, Massachusetts back in 1973 at the Andover St./Pulaski St./Central St./Endicott St. intersection.  Two long signal-heads, mounted on a mast-arm, faced eastbound 114/Andover St. traffic and originally sported only upright and right-turn green arrows below the circular green (which was centered).

The center-green would only light up when left-turns onto Pulaski St./114 East became available in the signal cycle; there was a supplemental ground-mount signal that would had a left-green arrow on the median island.

When left turns were not allowed (so that westbound Central St. traffic can move), the long signal-heads would only display the straight and right green arrows.  The supplemental signal-head, simply displayed a red light (red arrows were decades away).  Note: this phase too place prior to the left-turn movement onto Pulaski phase.

Apparently, after 8 to 10 years, either Peabody or the MassDPW changed the bottom lens of the left-most long signal-head to a left-green arrow and reprogramed the signal so that the center-located green light would no longer light up.  The "NO LEFT TURN" phase now just featured just 3 lenses (2 straight, 1 right-turn) lit on the mast-arm heads instead of 4 (originally 2 straight, 2 right-turn).  The LEFT TURN ALLOWED phase featured 4 lenses (2 straight, 1 left-turn, 1 right-turn) lit on the mast-arm heads.

These 1973-era signals were replaced just a few years ago with a more conventional & modern arrangement; plus, to the delight of many motorists, had the Left-Turn phase onto Pulaski St./114 Eastbound take place on the first green as opposed to later.  The old phase caused many traffic back-ups along Andover St./114 Eastbound for decades.

Note: the nearby signals along MA 114 at the Pulaski St./Gardner St./Pound Ln./Buxton Ln. intersection are also of the same 1973 vintage as the previous signals of the other intersection; they're still presently there but never sported a vertically-stacked 5-lens signal-heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 28, 2012, 10:44:59 AM
I just saw something unusual in Kissimmee, FL.   Lately the State of Florida has been installing more mast arm signal assemblies than the traditional span wire using the concrete strain poles that other states using those have either metal or wooden type of poles.   However, currently in Kissimmee, FL at the intersection of Vineland Road and Poinciana Boulevard where there has been a mast arm signal assembly for years is now being replaced with the traditional Florida span wires among concrete strain poles.

I think that is odd considering elsewhere the wires are being replaced with mast arms and many new signals are mast arms from instalation. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: doorknob60 on August 11, 2012, 04:09:35 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 02, 2012, 01:05:09 PM
I'm assuming, in that photo, oncoming traffic has green to go straight and a protected left?

I've seen that scenario only a handful of times in my life - and each time, it had the small informative sign.

would a flashing yellow arrow be appropriate in this context?  I've only seen flashing yellow paired with green for the forward directions, never with red.

If I saw that photo in real life, I'll admit I'd be confused at first, but probably figure it out in time. A flashing yellow arrow would work better there in my opinion, and I've seen plenty of times a flashing left turn arrow with red forward movements here in Bend, so it works fine that way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 14, 2012, 10:23:09 PM
Friend of mine posted this on FB yesterday...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ash3%2F561907_10151113898152996_752771498_n.jpg&hash=ba64c807c6452c2e4c59f67defd0ec5f4f12d616)

Any idea where this is at?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on August 14, 2012, 10:30:34 PM
Could that be Prypiat, perhaps?

Edited to say: No. Turns out the lights there used a black housing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on August 15, 2012, 01:57:30 AM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 14, 2012, 10:23:09 PM
Friend of mine posted this on FB yesterday...
<img snip>
Any idea where this is at?

I saw this on Reddit a few months ago. It's at an abandoned children's safety village in Ottawa. Here's a street view that shows it:
http://goo.gl/maps/3orfb
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on August 15, 2012, 07:43:23 AM
^ I was going to guess somewhere in Canada based on the traffic signal head design.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on August 18, 2012, 06:05:27 PM
The elusive double yellow ball. US 301 in Petersburg, VA:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-snc7%2Fc56.0.608.405%2F305012_4403444725511_2118702671_n.jpg&hash=fba55c687bc03fbe56d97c53eef40d3c94a12ab4)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on August 19, 2012, 08:17:36 AM
^I assume the green section is a green ball and green arrow on the left?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on August 19, 2012, 08:48:19 AM
^ The green arrow is on the right, but yes, it's correct. The yellow ball on the right is actually pretty recent; it was an arrow earlier this year.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on August 19, 2012, 09:28:45 AM
Ugh!  I meant right arrow.   :banghead:  Of course it's a right turn signal, it's on the right side of the mast arm.  However, it is interesting that it was changed from a yellow arrow to a yellow ball.  I wonder what prompted the change. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on August 19, 2012, 08:11:12 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 19, 2012, 10:20:08 AM
Seems wrong for both yellows to be on at the same time. If both the green arrow and the green ball are being terminated the normal display would be just a single yellow ball.
Not unless it was a 4-head doghouse with only one yellow. Yes, it should be a yellow arrow above and not a ball, but you can't skip it and go to a single ball if the head's there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on August 19, 2012, 10:03:02 PM
Completely unrelated to the above double-yellow ball, I discovered a signal in Massachusetts today that featured both a flashing yellow ball and steady green arrow... at the same time. Over through lanes.

It was at the entrance to a large office complex, and, since it is the weekend right now, I presume that this indication basically means that you can proceed as if it were a flashing yellow, but there's a 99.99999% chance you won't encounter any opposing movements so don't bother slowing down. If my camera battery weren't dead I would have snapped a pic, but I believe it was somewhere along a multilane portion of MA 62 west of Burlington.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 20, 2012, 03:26:13 PM
Steve, thank-you...........Yes I stand corrected about the 2 yellows. Today I observed 2 different 5-stacks in my area. And in both cases where the green-ball and turn-arrow are terminated together, both the yellow-ball and yellow-arrow are displayed together. I can't believe I didn't know that........... I've deleted my previous post.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on August 20, 2012, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 19, 2012, 10:03:02 PM
Completely unrelated to the above double-yellow ball, I discovered a signal in Massachusetts today that featured both a flashing yellow ball and steady green arrow... at the same time. Over through lanes.

It was at the entrance to a large office complex, and, since it is the weekend right now, I presume that this indication basically means that you can proceed as if it were a flashing yellow, but there's a 99.99999% chance you won't encounter any opposing movements so don't bother slowing down. If my camera battery weren't dead I would have snapped a pic, but I believe it was somewhere along a multilane portion of MA 62 west of Burlington.
Eh, drive around Massachusetts long enough and after seeing red balls with green through arrows, red and green balls simultaneously, flashing and solid indications simultaneously... you just get numb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on September 14, 2012, 06:28:09 AM
As I'm typing this, a construction crew is squaring off a milled area to be repaved in front of a stoplight on my street.  They have a bulldozer to help, and it was in the same position for a few minutes over the sensor loops for the stoplight in two of the three lanes (all one way, one is open).  When a line of cars came to the light, it took about 2-3 minutes for it to change to green.  I thought they damaged the loops since I've never seen it red for that long.  If a sensor loop detects something over it for an extended period of time, will it ignore the approach?

EDIT: I went back outside and saw one person drive into the coned off area (they're waiting for the asphalt), stop, then turn.  Everyone else followed, treating it as a stop sign.  As a bonus, an out of town taxi driver turned the wrong way onto my street and both one of the workers and myself went to help him get going the right way.  I walked down and pushed the crosswalk button and it turned green after about 20 seconds.  I thought that might have reset the controller, but it didn't.  I was heading back inside to call the DPW, but I saw a city SUV pull up.  I went over to talk to him, but I waited a bit longer before I did, and then pushed the button and it turned green again.  I went to talk to the guy to let him know what happened, and they were looking at a spot on the ground, so I'm guessing they damaged the sensor loops.  As another bonus, I told him I was a roadgeek and asked him if he knew what the MUTCD was.  He said yes, and I said I have a physical copy and he chuckled.

EDIT 2: I looked again, and it seems to be working normally.  Since it's past 7:00 now, I'm guessing that it might be on a different timing schedule.

While I'm talking about this light, I should post what I wanted to about it forever ago:
Has anyone here seen a stoplight have an extremely short green phase?  In the middle of the night, this light has a one second green phase for my street (which is the minor crossing) every 2 minutes or so, unless it detects traffic.  The yellow phase is the minimum 3 seconds, which ends up being longer than the green!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 14, 2012, 09:43:07 AM
Quote from: Michael on September 14, 2012, 06:28:09 AM

While I'm talking about this light, I should post what I wanted to about it forever ago:
Has anyone here seen a stoplight have an extremely short green phase?  In the middle of the night, this light has a one second green phase for my street (which is the minor crossing) every 2 minutes or so, unless it detects traffic.  The yellow phase is the minimum 3 seconds, which ends up being longer than the green!

NJ 29 and an office complex's parking lot in NJ, where I drop someone off in a carpool many mornings.  I call it a token green.  Since very few people are exiting in the morning, when there is a car(s) waiting to leave, there's about a 2 second green.  1 car gets thru on the green, another 2 cars can get thru on the yellow.  Anyone after that (extreme rare) either waits about 5 minutes, or runs the just-turned red light .This only occurs from about 6am - 9am. During the other 21 hours, the light operates with a more normal green cycle leaving the office complex.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2012, 07:33:49 PM
Quote from: Michael on September 14, 2012, 06:28:09 AM
If a sensor loop detects something over it for an extended period of time, will it ignore the approach?
This typically happens with video, but it can happen with loops too. The video fuzzy logic looks for changes in the pattern. If it detects a change that doesn't move after 3 (ish) cycles, it turns the change into background and assumes it's permanent. (Could be a new tree on the corner, snowbank on the sidewalk, who knows?) If loop detectors are set up with advanced logic, they could look at changes in induction over time rather than strictly compared to a baseline.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 14, 2012, 11:13:04 PM
Quote from: Steve on September 14, 2012, 07:33:49 PM
Quote from: Michael on September 14, 2012, 06:28:09 AM
If a sensor loop detects something over it for an extended period of time, will it ignore the approach?
This typically happens with video, but it can happen with loops too. The video fuzzy logic looks for changes in the pattern. If it detects a change that doesn't move after 3 (ish) cycles, it turns the change into background and assumes it's permanent. (Could be a new tree on the corner, snowbank on the sidewalk, who knows?) If loop detectors are set up with advanced logic, they could look at changes in induction over time rather than strictly compared to a baseline.
The flip side of this: if there is a loss of detection capability (i.e. the loop gets cut), the controller often registers it as a constant call for service and usually runs that phase to the maximum green setting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on September 16, 2012, 03:13:57 AM
Quote from: roadfro on September 14, 2012, 11:13:04 PM
Quote from: Steve on September 14, 2012, 07:33:49 PM
Quote from: Michael on September 14, 2012, 06:28:09 AM
If a sensor loop detects something over it for an extended period of time, will it ignore the approach?
This typically happens with video, but it can happen with loops too. The video fuzzy logic looks for changes in the pattern. If it detects a change that doesn't move after 3 (ish) cycles, it turns the change into background and assumes it's permanent. (Could be a new tree on the corner, snowbank on the sidewalk, who knows?) If loop detectors are set up with advanced logic, they could look at changes in induction over time rather than strictly compared to a baseline.
The flip side of this: if there is a loss of detection capability (i.e. the loop gets cut), the controller often registers it as a constant call for service and usually runs that phase to the maximum green setting.
It's not so much "registering as a constant call" as "defaulting to maximum recall." When the system knows there's a problem and it won't be able to detect traffic, it switches to default and notifies central command (if there is any).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 03, 2012, 03:06:47 PM
Does anyone know why with all the modern technology and inventions, why detector loops are so slow in response in certain situations?  I noticed that when I leave my subdivision on to the highway that has our main street and the arterial where there is a another automobile on the other road already activating the detector and his light begins the change process AFTER I come to a full stop at the stop bar, I have to wait another light turn.  In other words the signal completely ignored me even though I was there before the cycle began setting.  I can see if I activated my detector loop when the signal was already set in motion for me to have to wait, but not when I have arrived at the stop bar a second or two before the light set itself up for his signal to turn a green arrow.

I thought this was a rare case, but today I was screwed out of a protected left turn arrow at another intersection near my job.  In this case I had already arrived at the stop bar only one second before the light on the side road began to turn yellow.  I would think that the computer would already figured out that I am there as things can happen at the speed of light when it comes to electronics, and even if you arrive at the intersection when the cycle already started, it should be able to reconfigure in less than a second.

Are they designing signals to be slow or stupid instead of following the God of technology like we all do each day?  That seems too old fashioned for me and I find it hard to believe the slow response.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 03, 2012, 04:49:52 PM
There is more to this than meets the eye. Signals are programmed to respond to a variety of different circumstances and criteria, that's not always obvious to us drivers. I believe some are also synchronized with other signals along the main route, so it may be doing what it does for reasons not readily apparent to us frustrated drivers who just miss the arrow. I often share your frustration.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 03, 2012, 07:12:15 PM
I've seen programming where it waits a few moments to see if you do a right turn on red so it does not need to change the signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on October 03, 2012, 08:10:55 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on October 03, 2012, 07:12:15 PM
I've seen programming where it waits a few moments to see if you do a right turn on red so it does not need to change the signal

That would be an example of non-locking vs. locking memory.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on October 03, 2012, 08:45:45 PM
QuoteI thought this was a rare case, but today I was screwed out of a protected left turn arrow at another intersection near my job.  In this case I had already arrived at the stop bar only one second before the light on the side road began to turn yellow.  I would think that the computer would already figured out that I am there as things can happen at the speed of light when it comes to electronics, and even if you arrive at the intersection when the cycle already started, it should be able to reconfigure in less than a second.

Here's an example where this situation could occur.  If an inductive loop left-turn detector is getting clipped by opposing traffic a delay will often be inputted into the controller.  A 3 second delay on the left-turn detector will help prevent a call being placed into the controller when the left-lane gets clipped.  However, the solution to the clipping problem creates the scenario you just described. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on October 04, 2012, 02:13:26 AM
This happens all the time on SH-9 in Norman. There's a left turn bay going eastbound that literally goes nowhere (it leads to a cell phone tower). Sometimes eastbound traffic will clip the detector loop, causing westbound traffic to get held up for no reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on October 04, 2012, 09:03:53 AM
Here are the different detection setups:

Locking detector w/no delay. The instant a vehicles passes over the detection zone a call is placed in the controller until the call has been serviced regardless if the vehicle that placed the call has left the detection zone.

Locking detector w/delay. A locking call is placed into the controller only if a vehicle is continuously detected beyond a preset value (the delay value).

Non-locking detector w/no delay.  The instant a vehicle passes over the detection zone a call is placed in the controller.  When the vehicle leaves, the call drops.  With this setup a vehicle is serviced only if they are detected during the controller's "decision point"  to switch phases.

Non-locking detector w/delay.  Same as non-locking detector w/no delay, but the non-locking call is placed into the controller only if a vehicle is continuously detected beyond a preset value.  The call is dropped the moment the vehicle leaves the detection zone.

A locking detector w/no delay would most likely be used at a dedicated thru-lane or protected left-turn lane detector (where clipping isn't a problem).   The benefit of this setup is that it's the least likely to miss or skip a legitimate vehicle call.  The disadvantage of this setup is that it's the most likely to lead to false calls (I.E. clipping vehicles, right turners who have already left the intersection).

A non-locking detector w/delay would most likely be used for a dedicated right turn lane where right turns on red are permitted.  The benefit of this setup is that it's the least likely to lead to false calls.  The disadvantage is it's the most likely setup to miss or skip a legitimate vehicle call. 

In the end, efficient signal operation is often sacrificed to service the lowest common denominator driver.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: theline on October 04, 2012, 01:39:41 PM
Great explanation! I've often wondered. Thanks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 04, 2012, 04:18:26 PM
Right, thanks Tradephoric; very interesting info.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2012, 04:01:01 PM
Are we roadgeeks the only ones who report malfunctioning signals to the road agencies?  The signal at Orange Blossom Trail and LaQuinta Drive has been shortchanging NB vehicles on OBT when a SB motorist turns left onto EB LaQuinta it does not turn green at all, but turns green a second time on LaQuinta Drive causing long waits for NB OBT.

You figure some blowhard would report this problem after 6 months of happening.  Thousands of cars and trucks pass through this everyday and not one is saying anything!  No wonder why the world is in trouble.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 09, 2012, 04:23:57 PM
The answer to your original question may be "yes".  Example: A signal in my neighborhood at the intersection of a 4-lane county road and the driveway to an office bldg. on one side and a courthouse parking lot on the opposite side. Normal operation is continuous green for the county road unless activated by a vehicle coming out of either driveway driving over what I believe is a no delay/locking loop detector.

A couple of times in the last 10 years it's malfunctioned and activated repeatedly even when no car drives over the detectors, causing the signal to change periodically for no reason. The local police have a shift-change point in one parking lot and must pass thru this intersection 20 times a day, and do you think they report the problem? No!

After a week of this malfunction I finally called it in to the county traffic dept. and a service-man arrived 2 hours later and made an adjustment that corrected the problem. So yes, I guess only us roadgeeks notice or care enough to call these things in.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2012, 10:32:05 AM
When I talk to other people about roads, most people incorrectly mention the agency that they believe is in charge of the the roadway.  In most cases, people believe the county is in charge of what are actually state roadways.

Even when I was at a township council meeting, I wanted them to push the state to do something about a specific traffic light.  Because the traffic light was at the end of ramps to a state limited access highway and the intersecting road was a county road, they insisted the light was county jurisdiction.  While I politely informed them any which way I could that it's actually a state light, they would only pursue my issue with the county.

BTW...nothing ever got done.  I wonder why!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 10, 2012, 05:12:40 PM
Scary isn't it?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on October 10, 2012, 08:03:05 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2012, 10:32:05 AM
Even when I was at a township council meeting, I wanted them to push the state to do something about a specific traffic light.  Because the traffic light was at the end of ramps to a state limited access highway and the intersecting road was a county road, they insisted the light was county jurisdiction.  While I politely informed them any which way I could that it's actually a state light, they would only pursue my issue with the county.

BTW...nothing ever got done.  I wonder why!

I've dealt with that kind of thing and nothing ever got corrected....this intersection at an interchange on I-76/77 (http://goo.gl/maps/v4t7G) has the evidently wacky Yield sign that faces traffic that just came through a signal either by left turn from Wolf Ledges or straight through on the frontage road, with traffic from the right that also has a signal.  The Yield sign is silly facing the way it is.  (People with a green light on the frontage road going straight through see a yield sign too.  Yield to what?  I was not the only one to inquire to ODOT about it and they insisted that despite the ramps being ODOT territory (despite the city being responsible for regular maintenance issues), the city owns the intersection (evident by the Akron city signals) and there is nothing they could do about the sign, even though they agreed with me that the sign was nonsense.  Finally the sign was knocked down and for a time put back up facing the traffic turning right onto the ramp, but it was soon "corrected" to face the way you see in Street View, with a bright orange "ODOT" marking next to a orange spray-painted circle around the base of the new post.  I wonder what that means?  ODOT wanted the sign put back that way?  ODOT is coming to replace or remove it?  Who knows.

The city also had erected totally stupid No Turn On Red signs facing traffic turning right onto the ramp, which was incredibly dumb--that acted as a reverse ramp meter, bunching traffic together artificially to come down the already-dangerous ramp instead of more spaced out like they would have been without the No Turn On Red.  The city's reasoning, challenged in the local paper even, was that No Turn On Red increased safety by avoiding conflicts at the intersection.  Maybe some of the conflicts that caused accidents were caused by traffic getting simultaneous green lights and yield signs while interacting with other trafffic?  (that is, see just above.)  Sigh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 10, 2012, 09:01:53 PM
Is somebody ever going to realize that too many traffic signals, not only cause hardship on the roads, but also create safety concerns as well.  When you have to much stop and go it can cause rage in some motorists and other issues.  Plus when you have two traffic lights too close to one antother, a gridlock situation can occur.

A perfect example of two signals that are close together that has gridlock at one intersection is John Young Parkway at LB McLeod Road, and the other less than 1/5 mile north of that intersection at JYP and Clear Way.  The former is a major intersection between two Orlando arteries, but the latter is a street that does not have much traffic and should be a right in and right out, but city officials made a deal with the nearby neighborhood to have a signal for residents to enter and leave their subdivision with ease.  The real thing that gets me is that there was another signal on LB McLeod for the other road leading in and out of the same neighborhood that was removed so this here signal went up in its place.  The previous signal was in a better and safer location and was far enough away from the big intersection to create gridlock conditions.

Orlando, FL is notorious for erecting traffic signals and putting them up everywhere!  There is just too much development going on clogging up all the main roads. However, there is a better solution to this.  They just cannot keep adding lights to every cross road, business driveway, or apartment complex.  There is just too many of them and with Orange County, FL not timing traffic signals the way they should be, adds to this mess.

I lived in New Jersey for over 20 years and NJDOT would not allow too many signals close to each other on major highways.  If one intersection is too dangerous that has low traffic counts like Clear Way in Orlando being too close to another major intersection, a riro would be implimented for sure and the other light (if they were foolish enough to make a deal with local residents in a small subdivision) would have been kept. 

Then there is the Wal Mart Neighborhood signal on Orange Blossom Trail that was bought and paid for by Wal Mart as their contribution to the city to help traffic flow on OBT that is making that artery a nightmare in reality! Plus, where its at is not at a major crossing or legitimate street, but two driveways meeting head to head with one of them serving an apartment complex that has people driving in and out of it 24/7.  One of the things we have problems with is apartments because they seem to attract the rift raff (if any of you live in one of these no offense to you as I may someday live there as well someday as it is very hard to pay for a house) as there seem to be more drug arrests and other domestic desputes in those dwellings then private homes according to police and what you see on the evening news.  That puts more motorists out there in additon to Wal Mart and other shoppers that patronize local businesses there.

OBT is a major highway that does not need more obstructions.  In fact years ago it was a rural highway making travel between Kissimmee and Orlando easy and within 20-25 minuets.  Now, it can take 45-60 or even more depending on traffic.

I think its time to review other alternatives to making roads more accesible and easier flowing.  Make new developers pay a hefty impact fee for the extra traffic they add to the roads and damage they do to the roadways.  In New Jersey on US 1 in North and South Brunswicks, all developers had to add an extra lane to US 1 to even build their establishments in front of their properties.  This way when NJDOT widens the highway at a later date, some of the work is already performed.  Traffic lights are good, but even KSDOT even has a article on their website's Q & A about the dangers traffic signals can also create.  I see the dangers everyday.  Also, hire compitent people to time the signals!  Orlando sucks with their timings especially on Orange Blossom Trail.  I am glad they do not run US 202 in Readington, NJ where NJDOT elimated a high accident intersection with a riro as the crossroads are in a ravine where a signal would create more accidents then prevent them there due to very limited sight distance, or else there would be a traffic signal at Pleasant Hill Road and US 202 if they did.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 10, 2012, 09:55:40 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 10, 2012, 09:01:53 PMOrlando

QuoteOrlando, FL

QuoteOrlando

QuoteOrlando
I'm beginning to see the problem...

QuoteOrlando sucks
yep!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on October 10, 2012, 10:31:47 PM
Oh no, it can't be Orlando, just the apartments and their "rift raff"!

PS: the Turnpike to I-4 gets you from Kissimmee to Orlando.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 12, 2012, 03:41:13 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 10, 2012, 10:31:47 PM
Oh no, it can't be Orlando, just the apartments and their "rift raff"!

PS: the Turnpike to I-4 gets you from Kissimmee to Orlando.
Yeah it does, but some of us locals cannot use it.  From where I am located the FL Turnpike is out of the way.  Anyone who lives in the Southchase and Hunters Creek area are right between the middle of two interchanges that you can get on to bypass everything.  Then you have the shunpikers who love to complain anyway, even if they have access to the toll road.  I will use the Turnpike sometimes to go from OBT to Millenia or use it to go from my work to Kissimmee, but others I know do not even make it an option.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on October 12, 2012, 11:06:44 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 12, 2012, 03:41:13 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 10, 2012, 10:31:47 PM
Oh no, it can't be Orlando, just the apartments and their "rift raff"!

PS: the Turnpike to I-4 gets you from Kissimmee to Orlando.
Yeah it does, but some of us locals cannot use it.  From where I am located the FL Turnpike is out of the way.  Anyone who lives in the Southchase and Hunters Creek area are right between the middle of two interchanges that you can get on to bypass everything.  Then you have the shunpikers who love to complain anyway, even if they have access to the toll road.  I will use the Turnpike sometimes to go from OBT to Millenia or use it to go from my work to Kissimmee, but others I know do not even make it an option.

Back when I lived in Orlando, I was hardly in the OBT area, but the few times I ventured into that part of town, I made it a point to use the parallel John Young Pkwy as much as possible over OBT. Sure, JYP had lots of traffic, too, but there are definitely not as many businesses/storefronts and traffic signals on JYP. And there are lots of connecting roads between JYP and OBT. This made my travels in that area a lot more bearable.

If I remember correctly, FTE or maybe OOCEA wanted to build SR 529, which would roughly parallel already-existing SR 527, though I'm not sure how extensive SR 529 would have been, or how convenient it would have made getting from Kissimmee to Orlando or vice versa.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on October 12, 2012, 11:49:41 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on October 12, 2012, 11:06:44 PM
If I remember correctly, FTE or maybe OOCEA wanted to build SR 529, which would roughly parallel already-existing SR 527, though I'm not sure how extensive SR 529 would have been, or how convenient it would have made getting from Kissimmee to Orlando or vice versa.
SR 529 would have been only north of SR 528, where SR 527 has relatively few lights. To the south, the Turnpike makes it redundant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 14, 2012, 03:10:43 PM
My original post on this was that the County of Orange and the City of Orlando are getting overkill with traffic signals.  Sure we have traffic counts that are high due to sprawl, but many intersections could easily be RIRO and you, NE 2, should know yourself that you have to stop too many times to get from one end of Orlando to another.  I also wager, that every time you get nailed at a traffic signal you probably complain out loud, especially when you have to wait a long time for it to turn green when few vehicles are using the cross street.

You know that Orlando is one of the worst in signal timings in the nation.  The signal at the intersection of  OBT and Oakridge, that treats both roadways the same, is definetly timed wrong!  At 8AM you have three light changes to wait for going NB on OBT, when there is far less traffic on Oakridge Road at the time and furthermore Oakridge traffic, if you hit the light right, does not have to wait at all!  Now its been a while, but things may have changed, but I doubt it.  My friend, who works for the county, told me that both roads have to be treated equally as they both are the same.  I do not think so as OBT  has much more volume than Oakridge.  Remember, OBT is a highway and Oakridge is not, even though it a main drag OBT wins out.  Also, when the signal malfunctions to flash mode, did you know that it flashes as a four way red?  One night I was driving down OBT and the light was flashing.  I could not believe that it was red on OBT!  Other signals like Lancaster Road, American Boulevard, and even Holden Avenue flash yellow for OBT if in that particular mode.  Of course you are definetley aware that it is much easier to cross Sand Lake Road on OBT than it is Oakridge Road!  It does not take a genius to see that Sand Lake Road has hundreds of times more traffic than Oakridge does, and you only have to wait one or NO light changes to cross Sandlake.

Orange County does not look at the big picture, but listens too much to local neighborhoods and eventually gives in to their demands.  Heck with the native Floridians who were there first or you guys now have to make sacrifices and not have your expressways anymore as each subdivision and developer has to have his own traffic light. 

I lived in New Jersey, where we did things much different on the same issues.  If two roads were a block apart and one was a major thoroughfare while the other was a small traffic side street, only one would get a light and if the lightly traveled street had issues that warranted a signal, then a RIRO would be created for it!  There are much better solutions and I think we need to start exploring them.  If not we will be like NYC with a light on almost every block.  One thing though, NYC can time their lights better and with old analogue equipment.  Remember, there is no such thing as a detector loop in NY, and all lights are on timers as well.  I have made more signals on 10th Avenue in Manhattan than on OBT or JYP in a place that has more people and cars than we do!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: amroad17 on October 15, 2012, 05:56:34 AM
I remember driving in Manhattan and going down Broadway from the GWB to 19th ST.  I would stop every 10-12 blocks from 178th to 98th then I could get to Times Square without stopping from 98th because of the way NYC does the traffic lights.  Leaving, I would go up Amsterdam and, while sitting at a stop light, would watch the next 10-15 lights change to green at the same time.  Every city in their urban/downtown area should follow this synchonization instead of having a light change to green and two blocks later stop at the next light because of sensors instead of timers.  I always found it better to drive in Manhattan than to drive on the Cross-Bronx or the Brooklyn-Queens.  There may be much traffic (aggressive, sometimes) but it beats a stop-and-go on a freeway/expressway that, mentally, you are thinking "Why aren't I moving on this freeway?  I should be moving!"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on October 15, 2012, 11:46:40 AM
When I was a kid, I remember my father taking us into the city on a Sunday for a day-trip.  I think we went down to Grand Central on Park Avenue and did the loop-around there.  From there we waited for a fresh green light and went 100-something blocks with green lights on the timers at 35mph or so, until we exited to cross over into the Bronx.

I have no idea if they still have all the lights timed like that or not, but at least it existed circa 1985 :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 15, 2012, 04:28:45 PM
NYC's signal timing goes all the way back to the 1960's when they changed from 2-color to 3-color signals. They had a legendary smart traffic engineer/Commissioner back then named Henry Barnes who started it all. And it's not just in Manhattan. I've had similar experiences driving the length of Queens Blvd. where I've gotten as many as 9 greens in a row before hitting a red light. Unfortunately the opposite is also true. If you hit it wrong, you end up stopping for a red light at every corner for a while. I remember my Dad commenting on that when the system began back in the 1960's.

BTW, I'm surprised to hear that NYC has no loop detectors. Roadman, are you sure about that? The entire city runs on timed signals? 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 15, 2012, 04:48:59 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on October 15, 2012, 11:46:40 AM
When I was a kid, I remember my father taking us into the city on a Sunday for a day-trip.  I think we went down to Grand Central on Park Avenue and did the loop-around there.  From there we waited for a fresh green light and went 100-something blocks with green lights on the timers at 35mph or so, until we exited to cross over into the Bronx.

I have no idea if they still have all the lights timed like that or not, but at least it existed circa 1985 :)

the last time I caught a green wave like that was in 2003 or so in Brooklyn.  at least 20-30 lights before we reached our intended destination.

other times I've driven in the city, I have not taken a single boulevard for a long distance, instead choosing to explore various side streets.  I do recall a run down Queens Blvd in 2008 for about 6-7 greens before it was my time to turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: iwishiwascanadian on October 16, 2012, 01:28:02 PM
I remember going down Columbus Avenue for around 20 blocks without stopping, I never thought that I would experience a free-flow of traffic volume in Manhattan!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SidS1045 on October 16, 2012, 10:53:19 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 15, 2012, 04:28:45 PM
NYC's signal timing goes all the way back to the 1960's when they changed from 2-color to 3-color signals.

This conversion was still ongoing when I lived in Manhattan briefly in the 1970s.  (I used to work nights and the noise of the equipment woke me up out of a sound sleep promptly at 8AM.)  Supposedly there are still a few two-color signals left in some outlying areas of the city.

The way it was explained to me:  The city speed limit is 30mph unless otherwise posted.  The signals on the (approximately) north-south one-way avenues in Manhattan are set to sequence for a vehicle traveling at 28mph.  If you maintain that speed, you'll make every light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: SidS1045 on October 16, 2012, 10:53:19 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 15, 2012, 04:28:45 PM
NYC's signal timing goes all the way back to the 1960's when they changed from 2-color to 3-color signals.

This conversion was still ongoing when I lived in Manhattan briefly in the 1970s.  (I used to work nights and the noise of the equipment woke me up out of a sound sleep promptly at 8AM.)  Supposedly there are still a few two-color signals left in some outlying areas of the city.

....

I recall there being some two-color signals in Far Rockaway; the one that most readily comes to mind was where Seagirt Boulevard passes under the elevated A train structure and crosses Rockaway Freeway. My father's mother lived in the "Wavecrest Gardens" apartments at the intersection of Seagirt and Crest Road (though her unit overlooked Watjean Court and Fernside Place) and we used to take Beach Channel Drive to Seagirt Boulevard to go visit. I have not been there since she died (except in conjunction with the funeral Mass) and I see on Google Street View that there are now three-color signals at that particular intersection. I know they've been trying to make Rockaway Freeway less dangerous and I wonder if the traffic signal replacement might be part of that under the theory that the yellow light is needed for people blasting down Rockaway Freeway. I remember people always went WAY too fast on there.... (indeed after the first few trips when our grandmother moved out there, our father refused to use that road anymore and opted for Beach Channel Drive instead because it felt safer to him).

Funny thing is that for as long as I can remember (going back to the 1970s) the two traffic lights in Breezy Point were always three-color signals. From a practical standpoint I'd think that a private neighborhood would be one of the last ones to have the lights replaced, even if Rockaway Point Boulevard is a public road.



The guy who would probably know how many two-color signals are left, and where they are, is the webmaster of http://www.forgotten-ny.com.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 12:07:31 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on October 16, 2012, 10:53:19 PM
The way it was explained to me:  The city speed limit is 30mph unless otherwise posted.  The signals on the (approximately) north-south one-way avenues in Manhattan are set to sequence for a vehicle traveling at 28mph.  If you maintain that speed, you'll make every light.

in Klamath Falls, OR, the speed limit on the downtown main drag (business US-97/OR-39) is 25.  at each intersection, there is a sign that says "lights timed for 23 mph".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 04:31:13 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 12:07:31 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on October 16, 2012, 10:53:19 PM
The way it was explained to me:  The city speed limit is 30mph unless otherwise posted.  The signals on the (approximately) north-south one-way avenues in Manhattan are set to sequence for a vehicle traveling at 28mph.  If you maintain that speed, you'll make every light.

in Klamath Falls, OR, the speed limit on the downtown main drag (business US-97/OR-39) is 25.  at each intersection, there is a sign that says "lights timed for 23 mph".

I've seen similar signs in many places, usually a white-on-green sign that says "Signals Set for [xy] MPH."

There's an unusual twist on the signals being set for a specific speed on Taylor Run Parkway in Alexandria, Virginia (http://goo.gl/maps/zWQ57). That's a Street View link; the item of interest is the yellow sign to the right that says "Signals Turn Red When Speeding." The light in question can be seen if you move ahead a short distance; it's an annoying mid-block light that presumably they'd say is intended to ease pedestrian access to the park on the east side of the street but is almost certainly there to discourage cut-through traffic and speeding. First time I went through there I saw the yellow sign and said, "OK, whatever," and kept going at 30 mph in the 25-mph zone. Bam, the light turned red. Tried exceeding 25 two more times and the light turned every time. When I went 25 mph, it stayed green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 04:34:08 PM
30 in a 25 isn't even all that dangerous!

I looked at the road on Street View and it looks like the correct speed limit is either 25 or 30.  to enforce the speed limit like that is asinine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 05:22:22 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 04:34:08 PM
30 in a 25 isn't even all that dangerous!

I looked at the road on Street View and it looks like the correct speed limit is either 25 or 30.  to enforce the speed limit like that is asinine.

It's 25. If you go back a short distance before the yellow sign to which I was referring, you'll see the Speed Limit 25 sign mounted on one of the telephone poles on the same side of the street.

This discussion is giving me the idea of driving down that street with my Valentine One turned on to try to find out what the signal uses to determine your speed–though I'd first have to make another pass through to ensure there's no cop around, as it's illegal to use a radar detector in Virginia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 05:27:54 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 05:22:22 PM

It's 25. If you go back a short distance before the yellow sign to which I was referring, you'll see the Speed Limit 25 sign mounted on one of the telephone poles on the same side of the street.


it is.  I meant that, from the perspective of what the road looks like, I wouldn't raise an eyebrow if it were signed 30.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 05:39:55 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 05:27:54 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 17, 2012, 05:22:22 PM

It's 25. If you go back a short distance before the yellow sign to which I was referring, you'll see the Speed Limit 25 sign mounted on one of the telephone poles on the same side of the street.


it is.  I meant that, from the perspective of what the road looks like, I wouldn't raise an eyebrow if it were signed 30.

Ah, I misunderstood your meaning.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 06:08:01 PM
indeed, I was driving some very similar residential streets today as part of avoiding a busy arterial, and the roads were almost all 30, with a few 35s where it opened up a bit, and a handful of 25s which were all (as far as I can tell) near schools and playgrounds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 22, 2012, 02:14:39 PM
An example (three blocks from my house) of why I think all intersections should have post-mounted signals in addition to whatever overhead signals there are:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fedgemoor.png&hash=ac1d3eb571a166bd57b1acb50d1f42eebdf858f5)

Is the light red or green?  Who knows!  Imagine sitting in a line of vehicles at a red light, and you're twelfth in line.  With that many cars having made it through a green light, there's a really good chance it'll turn red before you get there.  You might be able to see the red just before getting to the intersection (as the truck clears your line of vision), but the driver of the pickup in front of you won't see it until he's already made it to the stop line.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2012, 02:25:44 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 22, 2012, 02:14:39 PM
An example (three blocks from my house) of why I think all intersections should have post-mounted signals in addition to whatever overhead signals there are:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fedgemoor.png&hash=ac1d3eb571a166bd57b1acb50d1f42eebdf858f5)

Is the light red or green?  Who knows!  Imagine sitting in a line of vehicles at a red light, and you're twelfth in line.  With that many cars having made it through a green light, there's a really good chance it'll turn red before you get there.  You might be able to see the red just before getting to the intersection (as the truck clears your line of vision), but the driver of the pickup in front of you won't see it until he's already made it to the stop line.
That is what I experience in Florida.  Unfortunately, the MUTCD does allow this.  Only CA and NJ, and IL seem to post pole mounted signal heads.  In New Jersey, if there is no side mounted heads, usually the left side signal is placed on the backside of the opposing signal head over the opposite travel lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
You can add Colorado and Wisconsin to that list also. And that photo certainly does make the case.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on November 22, 2012, 06:45:39 PM
Massachusetts also almost always posts both pole-mounted and overhead signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 07:14:27 PM
That was true on older Massachusetts signals. But I've noticed some new installations in Boston suburbs where they just have the typical 2 overhead signals on the standard tubular mast-arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 22, 2012, 07:32:50 PM
Minnesota also places signals on the pole supporting the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: iwishiwascanadian on November 22, 2012, 11:16:09 PM
It's also done in Maryland, specifically on SHA maintained roads. It's not everywhere but it is quite common to see, especially throughout state routes in Baltimore County. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 23, 2012, 01:17:01 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2012, 02:25:44 PM
Only CA and NJ, and IL seem to post pole mounted signal heads.  In New Jersey, if there is no side mounted heads, usually the left side signal is placed on the backside of the opposing signal head over the opposite travel lane.

Nevada religiously uses far side post mount signal heads at all new signal installations for the through and left turn movements (this is also typical for most installations after the late 80s, at least in the Vegas area).

The Vegas area will also use an additional left turn signal head on the backside of opposing mast arm and a near side pole mount for through vehicles at wide intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on November 23, 2012, 07:39:55 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 07:14:27 PM
That was true on older Massachusetts signals. But I've noticed some new installations in Boston suburbs where they just have the typical 2 overhead signals on the standard tubular mast-arm.

The difference there might be whether they're town- or state-posted signals. I've found all kinds of oddities among town-posted signals, but state seem to be fairly uniform.

Note though that by saying "fairly uniform", I mean "most of the time, but not all the time. I recognize that there are counterexamples but have noticed this as a general trend."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 24, 2012, 01:25:35 PM
Kansas is similarly usually good about this.  In fact, the next light to the west has post-mounted signals in addition to the overheads.  Usually just doesn't cut it for me, though, when it comes to stoplight visibility.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 08, 2012, 04:56:26 PM
Just last night, I saw a red light that was flickering quickly–not just pulsing in strength, but on-off-on-off-on-off, about as fast as you can say 'on-off-on-off-on-off'.  Kinda funny lookin'.
(Douglas & Woodlawn here in Wichita)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on December 09, 2012, 10:21:20 AM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2012, 04:56:26 PM
Just last night, I saw a red light that was flickering quickly–not just pulsing in strength, but on-off-on-off-on-off, about as fast as you can say 'on-off-on-off-on-off'.  Kinda funny lookin'.
(Douglas & Woodlawn here in Wichita)
Noticed the same with a green light yesterday. I wonder if that's a downside to LEDs or if it's just something about improper specs/installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 11, 2012, 02:27:26 PM
Does anyone know for sure what tends to cause this?  Last time I drove through the light, it was still flickering like that, and I should probably report it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 11, 2012, 04:00:45 PM
I've seen that flickering once or twice also; don't know what causes it. Like many supposed cure-alls, LED traffic lights created a new set of problems, such as snow accumulating on the lenses, due to the lack of heat. We think we're so friggin' smart; bet they didn't think of that ahead of time........
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on December 17, 2012, 02:07:08 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
You can add Colorado and Wisconsin to that list also. And that photo certainly does make the case.

In Colorado, it's somewhat sporadic outside of Denver Metro & Fort Collins/Loveland. Newer lights (I'd say since the early 90s) in Colorado Springs seem to have them on the far right poles, and, from what I've seen, Pueblo and Grand Junction are starting to add them to their newest lights. In rural areas, it seems to be hit-or-miss, with the poles getting them on most of the newer ones.

Denver and Aurora seem to be religious in that they add pole-mounted lights on both the right and left (with left-turn signals on the left-pole ones where appropriate), and have done so for quite some time (30 years? in Aurora, much longer in Denver).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 17, 2012, 04:25:40 PM
Yes, I remember travelling thru the south suburbs of Denver several years ago and noting they used more signal heads than California does even. Especially in the Highlands Ranch/Lone Tree area. One over every lane and one on the far right and left poles. Very interesting!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SidS1045 on December 18, 2012, 08:56:58 AM
Quote from: kphoger on December 11, 2012, 02:27:26 PM
Does anyone know for sure what tends to cause this?  Last time I drove through the light, it was still flickering like that, and I should probably report it.

I'd bet it's a failing power supply.  The ones they use for LED traffic signals are very cheap and tend to generate a lot of radio noise, particularly in the AM band.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 18, 2012, 02:10:27 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on December 17, 2012, 02:07:08 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
You can add Colorado and Wisconsin to that list also. And that photo certainly does make the case.

In Colorado, it's somewhat sporadic outside of Denver Metro & Fort Collins/Loveland. Newer lights (I'd say since the early 90s) in Colorado Springs seem to have them on the far right poles, and, from what I've seen, Pueblo and Grand Junction are starting to add them to their newest lights. In rural areas, it seems to be hit-or-miss, with the poles getting them on most of the newer ones.

Denver and Aurora seem to be religious in that they add pole-mounted lights on both the right and left (with left-turn signals on the left-pole ones where appropriate), and have done so for quite some time (30 years? in Aurora, much longer in Denver).

About 95% of the traffic lights in Grand Junction have side/pole-mounted lights at said intersections.

And Denver has been doing it for decade because many secondary-road intersections still only have a single 4-way overhead light in the intersection (and ugly ones at that  :eyebrow:).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on December 18, 2012, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on December 17, 2012, 02:07:08 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
You can add Colorado and Wisconsin to that list also. And that photo certainly does make the case.

In Colorado, it's somewhat sporadic outside of Denver Metro & Fort Collins/Loveland. Newer lights (I'd say since the early 90s) in Colorado Springs seem to have them on the far right poles, and, from what I've seen, Pueblo and Grand Junction are starting to add them to their newest lights. In rural areas, it seems to be hit-or-miss, with the poles getting them on most of the newer ones.

Denver and Aurora seem to be religious in that they add pole-mounted lights on both the right and left (with left-turn signals on the left-pole ones where appropriate), and have done so for quite some time (30 years? in Aurora, much longer in Denver).
The standard city of Pueblo design, similar to CDOT, has had side and mast arm lights for long before I've lived here (10 years). Many of the signal installations, from the condition of their paint, I would estimate to be over 20 years old. About the only signals that don't have the pole-mounted light are the rare spanwire lights, which are mostly still found at pedestrian crossings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 18, 2012, 07:15:02 PM
Hey I was wondering about the sided mounted signals in Philadelphia.  I know we just talked about Colorado, but the talk of side mounted signal heads made me think of an interesting situation along Ben Franklin Parkway.

I was in Philadelphia last June and noticed that along the Ben Franklin Parkway that ALL signals on this particular roadway are side mounted where some of the crossroads do have the standard overhead signals.

I was reading about the Parkway's history how it was designed different from the Philadelphia street grid as all streets are either N-S or E-W where the Ben Franklin Parkway runs NW - SE.  It is also in a straight line from the City Hall to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and offers great views at both ends of the two gorgeous buildings.

I am to assume that having the signal heads on the side has to do with the views of the buildings at each end?  Although, having normal signal head assemblies will not block the view of the Art Museum's stairs that grace the NW end of the road.  Also, the City Hall tower is very tall to be seen above all the signals as well.  Most signal heads are even new, from what I have seen, which would warrant it to be of latest standards, so it must be for a specific reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on December 18, 2012, 07:27:06 PM
I wouldn't be surprised - this is the city which features the curse of Billy Penn!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Billy_Penn
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: iwishiwascanadian on December 18, 2012, 08:13:11 PM
The side-mounted signals aren't just common to the Ben Franklin Parkway, they're everywhere in North Philadelphia around Temple's campus with the exceptions of Ridge, Girard and Broad.  Most of the streets are really narrow so having overhead mounted lights are overkill. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 18, 2012, 11:33:14 PM
Quote from: iwishiwascanadian on December 18, 2012, 08:13:11 PM
The side-mounted signals aren't just common to the Ben Franklin Parkway, they're everywhere in North Philadelphia around Temple's campus with the exceptions of Ridge, Girard and Broad.  Most of the streets are really narrow so having overhead mounted lights are overkill. 
Ben Franklin Parkway is one of the widest streets in Philly other than Roosevelt Boulevard.  So width is not an issue here.  Also, at BFP and Arch Street, Arch has mast arms while BFP has side mounted all newer signals.

I know about some streets where the wider main drag has mast arms and the side street has side mounted especially along Broad Street.  Some parts of NJ and even a few places in Florida have them that way.   California is big on them at three way intersections where the low mounted signals can be directly in front of a motorist on the terminating street.  Also, San Francisco is  mostly side mounted and is rare for the typical California mast arm to be seen anywhere in that city.

Growing up in New Jersey I was always fascinated with  the side mounted signals and sort of miss them as they are extremely rare here in Florida.  Wisconsin, I am saddened to see, the side mounted along with the one overhead trombone mounted horizontal heads are being replaced with standard vertical and mono tube mast arms.  As much as I like all types of signals, I thought that was the Dairy State's signature having the horizontal overheads with side mounted at all there signalized intersections.

After reading about the Ben Franklin Parkway in Wikipedia, I kind of get the feel that it is done on purpose for effect.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2012, 09:34:16 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 18, 2012, 07:27:06 PM
I wouldn't be surprised - this is the city which features the curse of Billy Penn!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Billy_Penn
I don't think I've heard about that curse since the Phillies won in '08!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2012, 10:10:06 AM
Here's an oddity near me...two county roads in Woodbury, NJ: Red Bank Ave at Evergreen Ave. 

http://goo.gl/maps/A1Myd

There's a separate right turn area here, with it's own horizontial traffic light; the only signal head in the entire county that's horizontial that I am aware of. 

And the question is...why? When the light is red, it's simply a red ball (not a right red arrow). And there's no 'No Turn On Red' sign here.  So there's really no reason whatsoever for the additional traffic light.  On the opposite side of the roadway, the same right turn setup exists without the additional light. It simply has a 'Yield' sign, which is the much more prudent option for a right turn channel as this one.

The intersection is otherwise a standard 4 way intersection with a traffic light that simply has 2 phases - no advanced left turn arrows; no one-sided phases. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 19, 2012, 02:49:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2012, 10:10:06 AM
Here's an oddity near me...two county roads in Woodbury, NJ: Red Bank Ave at Evergreen Ave. 

http://goo.gl/maps/A1Myd

There's a separate right turn area here, with it's own horizontial traffic light; the only signal head in the entire county that's horizontial that I am aware of. 

And the question is...why? When the light is red, it's simply a red ball (not a right red arrow). And there's no 'No Turn On Red' sign here.  So there's really no reason whatsoever for the additional traffic light.  On the opposite side of the roadway, the same right turn setup exists without the additional light. It simply has a 'Yield' sign, which is the much more prudent option for a right turn channel as this one.

The intersection is otherwise a standard 4 way intersection with a traffic light that simply has 2 phases - no advanced left turn arrows; no one-sided phases. 

New Jersey is known for mixing and matching.  Probably it had a standard vertical signal assembly there, but it either failed inspection or got struck by a car or something.  The only parts that were available was a trombone mast arm, and it does the job.  True, being that right turns on red are allowed, it should have a yield sign and no signals.  That is an oddity.

I have seen the reverse, in Plainfield, NJ along West Front Street where three signal heads were horizontally mounted and the fourth one was vertical on a truss arm.  Plainfield back in the 80's had all horizontal traffic lights within its city limits just like Newark used to have as well.  I am not aware if Plainfield still uses horizontal mounts exclusively anymore, as Newark is switching to vertical as that city always liked the horizontal trombone assmemblies and I thought would never go vertical.  Anyway, being Plainfield liked at the time to have its way, it had to be that a typical New Jersey vertical signal was only available for imediate replacement for whatever reason it had to remove the original pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2012, 03:49:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 18, 2012, 07:15:02 PMI was in Philadelphia last June and noticed that along the Ben Franklin Parkway that ALL signals on this particular roadway are side mounted where some of the crossroads do have the standard overhead signals.

I was reading about the Parkway's history how it was designed different from the Philadelphia street grid as all streets are either N-S or E-W where the Ben Franklin Parkway runs NW - SE.  It is also in a straight line from the City Hall to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and offers great views at both ends of the two gorgeous buildings.

I am to assume that having the signal heads on the side has to do with the views of the buildings at each end?  Although, having normal signal head assemblies will not block the view of the Art Museum's stairs that grace the NW end of the road.  Also, the City Hall tower is very tall to be seen above all the signals as well.  Most signal heads are even new, from what I have seen, which would warrant it to be of latest standards, so it must be for a specific reason.
The side-mounted signals along the BFP, despite its width were likely chosen for aesthetic reasons.   IIRC, the Parkway's recent upgrades were a joint effort between the Philadelphia Streets Department and the Center City District; the latter group's responsible for the retro-styled street lamps that grace along a fair amount of major streets in Center City.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: theline on December 19, 2012, 09:36:46 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 19, 2012, 02:49:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 19, 2012, 10:10:06 AM
Here's an oddity near me...two county roads in Woodbury, NJ: Red Bank Ave at Evergreen Ave. 

http://goo.gl/maps/A1Myd

There's a separate right turn area here, with it's own horizontial traffic light; the only signal head in the entire county that's horizontial that I am aware of. 

And the question is...why? When the light is red, it's simply a red ball (not a right red arrow). And there's no 'No Turn On Red' sign here.  So there's really no reason whatsoever for the additional traffic light.  On the opposite side of the roadway, the same right turn setup exists without the additional light. It simply has a 'Yield' sign, which is the much more prudent option for a right turn channel as this one.

The intersection is otherwise a standard 4 way intersection with a traffic light that simply has 2 phases - no advanced left turn arrows; no one-sided phases. 

New Jersey is known for mixing and matching.  Probably it had a standard vertical signal assembly there, but it either failed inspection or got struck by a car or something.  The only parts that were available was a trombone mast arm, and it does the job.  True, being that right turns on red are allowed, it should have a yield sign and no signals.  That is an oddity.

I have seen the reverse, in Plainfield, NJ along West Front Street where three signal heads were horizontally mounted and the fourth one was vertical on a truss arm.  Plainfield back in the 80's had all horizontal traffic lights within its city limits just like Newark used to have as well.  I am not aware if Plainfield still uses horizontal mounts exclusively anymore, as Newark is switching to vertical as that city always liked the horizontal trombone assmemblies and I thought would never go vertical.  Anyway, being Plainfield liked at the time to have its way, it had to be that a typical New Jersey vertical signal was only available for imediate replacement for whatever reason it had to remove the original pole.

I presume the light is there because of the crosswalk. If a pedestrian has pushed the button, we want to make sure drivers stop for him. A yield sign might not do the job. I've seen similar configurations elsewhere. That doesn't explain why it's horizontal, but roadman's reasoning about that is as good as any.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Takumi on December 21, 2012, 03:00:10 PM
I think left turns must yield here. (Prime candidate for a FYA?)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-prn1%2Fs600x600%2F71612_10200121517781941_521382495_n.jpg&hash=8e186edb60c7cece64d9281b193a68221d097cdf)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 22, 2012, 02:01:37 PM
I just conducted my own study of driving across the area I live in.  I drove John Young Parkway Northbound from the Hunters Creek area to near Lockhart (OBT and JYP) and passed through 36 signalized intersections.  20 of the signals were green with the other 16 of the red ones, 2 of them were 2 signal waits and one was a three light wait.

The time was Saturday from 1 PM to 2 PM.  I do not know if this is good traveling or not in an urban area just before Christmas.  Just to show you how hectic to drive the Orlando area on a major thorofare.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on December 23, 2012, 11:48:08 PM
There are some really old side-mounted signals in downtown Seattle, mostly around the Pioneer Square area. I'm guessing from the 40s?

I've also seen them in downtown Decatur, AL.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on December 23, 2012, 11:54:46 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 18, 2012, 02:10:27 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on December 17, 2012, 02:07:08 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 22, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
You can add Colorado and Wisconsin to that list also. And that photo certainly does make the case.

In Colorado, it's somewhat sporadic outside of Denver Metro & Fort Collins/Loveland. Newer lights (I'd say since the early 90s) in Colorado Springs seem to have them on the far right poles, and, from what I've seen, Pueblo and Grand Junction are starting to add them to their newest lights. In rural areas, it seems to be hit-or-miss, with the poles getting them on most of the newer ones.

Denver and Aurora seem to be religious in that they add pole-mounted lights on both the right and left (with left-turn signals on the left-pole ones where appropriate), and have done so for quite some time (30 years? in Aurora, much longer in Denver).

About 95% of the traffic lights in Grand Junction have side/pole-mounted lights at said intersections.

And Denver has been doing it for decade because many secondary-road intersections still only have a single 4-way overhead light in the intersection (and ugly ones at that  :eyebrow:).

Those used to be a lot more prevalent on all streets, but I hardly see them on major streets now, except for the ones along Stapleton Rd (the I-70 frontage roads) at Dahlia, Holly, & Monaco. And on the SPUI on Evans over Santa Fe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on December 24, 2012, 12:40:22 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 22, 2012, 02:01:37 PM
I just conducted my own study of driving across the area I live in.  I drove John Young Parkway Northbound from the Hunters Creek area to near Lockhart (OBT and JYP) and passed through 36 signalized intersections.  20 of the signals were green with the other 16 of the red ones, 2 of them were 2 signal waits and one was a three light wait.

The time was Saturday from 1 PM to 2 PM.  I do not know if this is good traveling or not in an urban area just before Christmas.  Just to show you how hectic to drive the Orlando area on a major thorofare.

Drove down Dixie/Telegraph in Metro Detroit on Sunday afternoon...  twenty miles passing thru 42 traffic signals and came to basically one hard stop (first signal after turning onto Telegraph) and a few soft stops.


The signals along the boulevard section of Telegraph are running 80 second cycles so if you do happened to get stopped you only have a 40 second wait (since they are all 2-phased signals and Telegraph gets at least 50% of the split).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: WichitaRoads on January 10, 2013, 12:51:23 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2012, 01:24:37 PM
Heck, who needs two?

Here is GMSV during road construction; through traffic has only a signal head, which is solid green full-time.
Wichita, KS:

There's another in Wichita, much older, at K-15 (Southeast Blvd) and Wassal - http://goo.gl/maps/8zzRF

ICTRds
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: WichitaRoads on January 10, 2013, 12:54:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2012, 04:56:26 PM
Just last night, I saw a red light that was flickering quickly–not just pulsing in strength, but on-off-on-off-on-off, about as fast as you can say 'on-off-on-off-on-off'.  Kinda funny lookin'.
(Douglas & Woodlawn here in Wichita)

I live a few blocks from this... it was still doing it until about a week or so ago...

ICTRds
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman1071 on January 13, 2013, 12:45:17 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on August 14, 2012, 10:23:09 PM
Friend of mine posted this on FB yesterday...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ash3%2F561907_10151113898152996_752771498_n.jpg&hash=ba64c807c6452c2e4c59f67defd0ec5f4f12d616)

Any idea where this is at?

Looks Like a Toronto Installation
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Road Hog on January 15, 2013, 01:21:18 PM
Texas is the only place I've noticed this. But I've seen traffic lights with what amounts to a 40-watt bulb mounted on the side that go on and off in tandem with the red lights.

What is the purpose of this? Are they supposed to enhance the visual of the red? Or are they for alerting cross traffic a green is forthcoming? Or is it a pedestrian deal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 15, 2013, 01:31:18 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on January 15, 2013, 01:21:18 PM
Texas is the only place I've noticed this. But I've seen traffic lights with what amounts to a 40-watt bulb mounted on the side that go on and off in tandem with the red lights.

What is the purpose of this? Are they supposed to enhance the visual of the red? Or are they for alerting cross traffic a green is forthcoming? Or is it a pedestrian deal?

they exist in either Florida or Alabama as well.  (can't remember which.)  Alex calls them "rat lights" and says their purpose is to let a police officer know when a light is red, so that he can catch violators without having a direct view of the red light itself.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 01:37:06 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on January 15, 2013, 01:21:18 PM
Texas is the only place I've noticed this. But I've seen traffic lights with what amounts to a 40-watt bulb mounted on the side that go on and off in tandem with the red lights.

What is the purpose of this? Are they supposed to enhance the visual of the red? Or are they for alerting cross traffic a green is forthcoming? Or is it a pedestrian deal?

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/techsum/fhwasa09005/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 15, 2013, 01:31:18 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on January 15, 2013, 01:21:18 PM
Texas is the only place I've noticed this. But I've seen traffic lights with what amounts to a 40-watt bulb mounted on the side that go on and off in tandem with the red lights.

What is the purpose of this? Are they supposed to enhance the visual of the red? Or are they for alerting cross traffic a green is forthcoming? Or is it a pedestrian deal?

they exist in either Florida or Alabama as well.  (can't remember which.)  Alex calls them "rat lights" and says their purpose is to let a police officer know when a light is red, so that he can catch violators without having a direct view of the red light itself.

They're for idiots who claim to be cops, IMHO.  Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.  Somehow, around here, they figure out which direction is red without any silly "rat lights".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 15, 2013, 02:56:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM

They're for idiots who claim to be cops, IMHO.  Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.  Somehow, around here, they figure out which direction is red without any silly "rat lights".

generally speaking, I cannot look at an intersection and tell you exactly which lights are red.

specifically, I cannot tell you which light is green, and happens to have no traffic.

but, then again, signal phasings get really tricky around here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.
There's a definite legal difference between an educated guess and a near certainty.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:02:05 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.
There's a definite legal difference between an educated guess and a near certainty.

Um, at most intersections (4-way), if one street is green, the other street must obviously be red.  I'd say that's pretty damn certain.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 03:09:08 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:02:05 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.
There's a definite legal difference between an educated guess and a near certainty.

Um, at most intersections (4-way), if one street is green, the other street must obviously be red.  I'd say that's pretty damn certain.

Unless the light's malfunctioning. The rat light is directly connected to the red and thus has much less (if any) reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:11:54 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 03:09:08 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:02:05 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.
There's a definite legal difference between an educated guess and a near certainty.

Um, at most intersections (4-way), if one street is green, the other street must obviously be red.  I'd say that's pretty damn certain.

Unless the light's malfunctioning. The rat light is directly connected to the red and thus has much less (if any) reasonable doubt.

If the signal is malfunctioning, you've got bigger problems than the need for a so-called "rat light".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 15, 2013, 03:13:48 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:02:05 PM

Um, at most intersections (4-way), if one street is green, the other street must obviously be red.  I'd say that's pretty damn certain.

what if the police officer is sitting at a branch which is red?  then how does he know which of the other branches is green?  assume a non-intuitive sequence between the various turning and straight phases.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kacie Jane on January 15, 2013, 10:10:53 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:02:05 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 15, 2013, 02:57:50 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:32:13 PM
Any fool, IMHO, can figure out when the light is red for a particular direction at a signal without these lights.
There's a definite legal difference between an educated guess and a near certainty.

Um, at most intersections (4-way), if one street is green, the other street must obviously be red.  I'd say that's pretty damn certain.

Keep in mind that most red light runners don't blow through a light that's been red for a while.  They run it just as it's turning red, possibly before cross traffic gets their green.  So in order to ticket them, the cop needs to be able to tell exactly when the light turned red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 16, 2013, 11:12:17 AM
Which begs the question:  If cross traffic hasn't even received a green light yet, then why ticket the offender at all?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 16, 2013, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 16, 2013, 11:12:17 AM
Which begs the question:  If cross traffic hasn't even received a green light yet, then why ticket the offender at all?

if it were made legal to enter an intersection when no one has green, then people would enter intersections in such situations, figuring they could get away with it.  and when they couldn't (because the opposing traffic had just, indeed, received green), the result is not a ticket, but a collision.

it's best to keep the "can I get away with it?" decision point several seconds before the danger point, which is how it is now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on February 03, 2013, 01:13:12 AM
Additionally, it can get kind of difficult to figure out a timing sequence when you have lots of things like left and right turn arrows, pedestrian phases, signal actuation, etc. going on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on March 02, 2013, 06:41:09 PM
I just stumbled on this modern 12-8-8 signal for the Fairport Lift Bridge over the Erie Canal in Fairport, NY:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.historicbridges.org%2Fnewyork%2Ffairportmain%2Ffairportmain01.jpg&hash=2d8dcf09a3871901bf207a4077910ee21268c882)
Credit: HistoricBridges.org (http://www.historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/photos.php?bridgebrowser=newyork/fairportmain/&gallerynum=1&gallerysize=1)

I didn't think 12-8-8's were made anymore, plus this one looks like it had LEDs in it.  Click the image to enlarge it, and look at the green ball on the right side.  It looks like there's some LEDs that aren't working.

As for the bridge itself, it's really neat.  It crosses the canal at an angle, and the road deck is on an incline.  Here's (http://www.historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=newyork/fairportmain/) the HistoricBridges.org page for the bridge.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on March 03, 2013, 09:16:53 AM
Quote from: Michael on March 02, 2013, 06:41:09 PM
I just stumbled on this modern 12-8-8 signal for the Fairport Lift Bridge over the Erie Canal in Fairport, NY:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.historicbridges.org%2Fnewyork%2Ffairportmain%2Ffairportmain01.jpg&hash=2d8dcf09a3871901bf207a4077910ee21268c882)
Credit: HistoricBridges.org (http://www.historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/photos.php?bridgebrowser=newyork/fairportmain/&gallerynum=1&gallerysize=1)

I didn't think 12-8-8's were made anymore, plus this one looks like it had LEDs in it.  Click the image to enlarge it, and look at the green ball on the right side.  It looks like there's some LEDs that aren't working.

As for the bridge itself, it's really neat.  It crosses the canal at an angle, and the road deck is on an incline.  Here's (http://www.historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=newyork/fairportmain/) the HistoricBridges.org page for the bridge.

A few of the lift bridge signals for the Erie Canal between Lockport and Albion have 12-8-8 signals, some older. Most have seem to been replaced with newer 12-12-12. 

Here's a new 12-8-8 in Albion, NY http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.24861,-78.193688&spn=0.004165,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=43.248694,-78.19368&panoid=3qosjcTSABawsteFWZPMGQ&cbp=12,355.87,,0,-1.6

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 04, 2013, 08:53:29 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 16, 2013, 11:12:17 AM
Which begs the question:  If cross traffic hasn't even received a green light yet, then why ticket the offender at all?

So you're OK with motorists crossing into an intersection just after a light turns red, along with motorists entering an intersection just before the light turns green.  Interesting.  Experiment with that for a while and let us know how it goes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 04, 2013, 06:12:15 PM
Yeah, what jeffandnicole said. And yes, let us know how it works out for you..........
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 05, 2013, 07:10:24 PM
Other than the obviously dangerous (and not suggested by me) starting before your light turns green, what would be the conflicting traffic movement?  Lots of people don't stop before turning right when their light has just turned red, before cross traffic gets their green, and it "works out" perfectly well.  Unless you mean getting a ticket, which is precisely what brought it up in the first place.  I do it with some frequency, and it "works out" just great, thank you for asking.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on March 06, 2013, 10:24:45 AM
Quote from: Michael on March 02, 2013, 06:41:09 PMI didn't think 12-8-8's were made anymore
While I was in Salem, OR a couple years ago; I saw some newer 12-8-8s around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 06, 2013, 07:40:09 PM
I never understood the use of the 12-8-8 configuration. If the location needed a 12-inch signal, then just use 12-inch for the whole signal head. Why go half-way?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on March 07, 2013, 08:35:35 AM
 I didn't think 12-8-8's were made anymore, plus this one looks like it had LEDs in it.  Click the image to enlarge it, and look at the green ball on the right side.  It looks like there's some LEDs that aren't working.[/quote]

VDOT put up new 12-8-8's maybe 7 years ago at two interesections in Woodbridge, VA.... the intersections of US-1 with Featherstone Rd and with Woodside Dr. Oddly, the ones at Woodside Dr were replaced with new mast arms a couple years later. The ones at Featherstone remain. The 12-8-8's face traffic on Featherstone Rd. Ironically, the signals there prior to the replacement (on the same span wire) were full size 12-inch signal (old Peek / Crouse-Hinds signals from the 70s/80s).

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Woodbridge,+VA&hl=en&ll=38.636886,-77.26927&spn=0.011481,0.022724&sll=38.744659,-77.487094&sspn=0.091712,0.181789&oq=woodb&hnear=Woodbridge,+Prince+William,+Virginia&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.636772,-77.26937&panoid=Jzmm8p1Y8BbHIaYTq55Jqw&cbp=12,13.26,,0,6.37 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Woodbridge,+VA&hl=en&ll=38.636886,-77.26927&spn=0.011481,0.022724&sll=38.744659,-77.487094&sspn=0.091712,0.181789&oq=woodb&hnear=Woodbridge,+Prince+William,+Virginia&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.636772,-77.26937&panoid=Jzmm8p1Y8BbHIaYTq55Jqw&cbp=12,13.26,,0,6.37)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on March 07, 2013, 01:09:13 PM
While I haven't seen any new 12-8-8 signals installed in the S.F. Bay Area lately, some cities are retrofitting their older 12-8-8 signals with LED lights.  All new installations I've seen are either 12-12-12 or 8-8-8 signal heads.  FWIW, California used to use 8-8-12 for left-turn signals but that practice was discontinued when we switched to an all-arrow signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on March 07, 2013, 01:48:08 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 06, 2013, 07:40:09 PM
I never understood the use of the 12-8-8 configuration. If the location needed a 12-inch signal, then just use 12-inch for the whole signal head. Why go half-way?
Guess on my part, but the 12-8-8 setup likely predates most if not all-12 setups. 

Back then, the reasoning for red signal head having the larger head was due to it was considered more important for motorists to see a red signal from a greater distance than a green or yellow signal.

It's worth noting that some communities went w/a 12-12-8 setup.  Peabody, MA being one of them and still has a few signals that feature this setup to this day.  The rationale for the larger yellow (along with the red) was likely for more distant viewing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 07, 2013, 02:43:47 PM
From what I've seen, 12-8-8 signals are still being installed in Ontario.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on March 11, 2013, 07:11:10 PM
http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.0125,-78.879615&spn=0.004181,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=43.012404,-78.879637&panoid=AuYWs39Jl5DCPENtJ8m-dg&cbp=12,2.67,,0,2.15

Fairly new (w/in last 5 years) using 12-8-8 for the primary signals and 8-8-8 for secondaries
Tonawanda, NY

http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.021914,-78.877974&spn=0.003961,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=43.02201,-78.877937&panoid=Q_Ja6l1VyzM7L7JJV_D0nA&cbp=12,19.44,,0,-30.43

Older 12-8-8 after crossing over the Erie Canal in North Tonawanda, NY

http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.032455,-78.876461&spn=0.00396,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=43.032597,-78.876462&panoid=A9EgOPUK2wcCHAQC1KO2-w&cbp=12,173.53,,0,-5.21 North Tonawanda, NY
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 13, 2013, 12:28:36 AM
Here is an intersection in Lorain County/N. Ridgeville, OH with an "antique" 12-8-8-8! 

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.38312,-82.058086&spn=0.000258,0.153637&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&z=13&layer=c&cbll=41.383113,-82.058345&panoid=_s1-XmEYd-QvDMm-Lt_5nw&cbp=12,250.2,,0,8.56
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on March 13, 2013, 02:32:26 AM
^8 inch arrows to boot!  Great find
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 13, 2013, 10:12:59 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 13, 2013, 02:32:26 AM
^8 inch arrows to boot!  Great find

Lorain County in general is a haven for old traffic lights and roadways (Especially Northern Lorain County: Amherst/Lorain/Elyria).  It's a poorer county in general and it's hard for the county and the local municipalities to upgrade and/or replace their 40-50 year old signals -- good for us geeks, though!!!

In fact, if you look at that google maps photo, you'll notice that there is only one signal for thru traffic in each direction, so if a light burns out, it can instantly screw up the traffic going in the direction of the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2013, 12:45:42 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 13, 2013, 10:12:59 PM
Lorain County in general is a haven for old traffic lights and roadways (Especially Northern Lorain County: Amherst/Lorain/Elyria).  It's a poorer county in general and it's hard for the county and the local municipalities to upgrade and/or replace their 40-50 year old signals -- good for us geeks, though!!!


Cincy is the same way.  lots of old signals there, as well as old signs.  a poster here named jjakucyk has made some great discoveries in that area: cutouts, state-named shields, and fancy art-deco traffic lights that date back to the 30s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 15, 2013, 10:31:59 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 12, 2012, 02:20:25 PM
I would like to know how NYC in Rockaway Beach, NY is allowed to operate amber less signals and only have two colors: red and green.  Both together are used to warn motorists of the change when the green time is up.  I have a photo of the red and green both on at the same time back in 03 along the beach where they are still used unless it was modified since then.  Plus, how does the signal work in flash mode?  It must only be a four way stop flashing red on all signals, or does like Boston does and flashes the green at some intersections on the dominate roadway instead of the yellow.

Sadly, they're long gone.

A handful of survivors remained in service on Shore Front Pkwy. until 2006 or so. Three-section (red, amber, and green) traffic signals now control the entire length. I vaguely remember those two-section traffic signals from the Rockaways; however, I remember the survivors from mainly Ozone Park in Queens. Quite a handful were still in service on mainly one segment of Liberty Avenue (under the el) in the early to mid 2000s. The last survivor was removed on that segment of Liberty Avenue in 2007, which was not quite long ago.

What's interesting to mention, too, is that some of these were equipped with L.E.D. module inserts in the early 2000s. Most of the old traffic signals were untouched, while newly installed (then) two-section traffic signals from Eagle Mark 4 were installed with them. It was rather interesting to see these.


With regards to flash mode, it is likely (in my opinion) that they were simply dark in that particular mode of operation. I think someone might have mentioned that to me at one time or another.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on March 16, 2013, 01:33:50 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 13, 2013, 12:28:36 AM
Here is an intersection in Lorain County/N. Ridgeville, OH with an "antique" 12-8-8-8! 

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.38312,-82.058086&spn=0.000258,0.153637&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&z=13&layer=c&cbll=41.383113,-82.058345&panoid=_s1-XmEYd-QvDMm-Lt_5nw&cbp=12,250.2,,0,8.56

Nice find. Sign next to primary also says "opposong traffic moves on your light" - never seen that

"http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.382991,-82.058773&spn=0.068134,0.154324&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&layer=c&cbll=41.383038,-82.058592&panoid=GlI6wF3SeWufQ29KuuZRvw&cbp=12,161.9,,0,-21.37&z=13
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 16, 2013, 01:48:39 PM
That's be
Quote from: NYhwyfan on March 16, 2013, 01:33:50 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 13, 2013, 12:28:36 AM
Here is an intersection in Lorain County/N. Ridgeville, OH with an "antique" 12-8-8-8! 

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.38312,-82.058086&spn=0.000258,0.153637&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&z=13&layer=c&cbll=41.383113,-82.058345&panoid=_s1-XmEYd-QvDMm-Lt_5nw&cbp=12,250.2,,0,8.56

Nice find. Sign next to primary also says "opposong traffic moves on your light" - never seen that

"http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.382991,-82.058773&spn=0.068134,0.154324&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&layer=c&cbll=41.383038,-82.058592&panoid=GlI6wF3SeWufQ29KuuZRvw&cbp=12,161.9,,0,-21.37&z=13

That's because there are a few intersections in N. Ridgeville where the side roads at the intersection do not line up across from each other so some of those intesections will have separate green signals. 

Glad to see that they finally tore down the huge mostly-abandoned shopping center that sat empty for most of it's 50+ year history.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on March 17, 2013, 01:07:05 PM
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=google+maps+elyria+oh&ll=41.377775,-82.076068&spn=0.016262,0.038581&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&gl=us&t=m&layer=c&cbll=41.377817,-82.075967&panoid=QYMMeeTS1iQyolhFJ_9Eaw&cbp=12,253.48,,0,-6.31&z=15

Intersection down the road from the above
12-8-12 left turn signal along with 12-8-8 thru signals
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 21, 2013, 09:34:38 AM
Here is something unusual that I discovered while cruising through GSV.  Three mast arms on one signal pole.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Newark,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.733584,-74.164249&spn=0.003016,0.005686&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=7.213306,11.645508&oq=newark&t=h&hnear=Newark,+Essex,+New+Jersey&z=17&layer=c&cbll=40.733656,-74.164303&panoid=zRW_mSRAu17U6ATj0l5kPQ&cbp=12,129.44,,0,0

You just do not see something like this everyday.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on March 24, 2013, 10:11:42 PM
Quote from: PennDOTFan on March 07, 2013, 02:43:47 PM
From what I've seen, 12-8-8 signals are still being installed in Ontario.

Baton Rouge has a few on Bus 61/190
http://goo.gl/maps/rUCWc

I got some photos, but they didn't come out well :(
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 25, 2013, 01:40:26 AM
A span-wire set-up in New York City is uncommon, and only a handful are in existence. Below, are three signalized from the borough of Staten Island in the city. Each one uses a span-wire set-up.

Richmond Avenue and Arthur Kill Road. Mainly 12" Eagle Alusig traffic signals here. Note that the use of a doghouse (far left) is here. There's another one in use, but it cannot be viewed in this picture. A doghouse set-up is a signal configuration that is uncommon as well in the city of New York, and only a handful are in useful service. Picture from Bing Maps.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSpanwire_zps2e3bfb9a.png&hash=b5f5aa64de5ec2fdc82fe253487a20aa34e89ab7)

Second set-up. At Drumgoole Road West and Richmond Avenue. Made up of 12-8-8 Eagle Alusig and Automatic Signal/L.F.E. traffic signals. Picture from Bing Maps.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSpanwire2_zps2071e003.png&hash=046672f5e0f7bafc401d837067a499dabf7a1d9d)

Drumgoole Road W. and Arthur Kill Road. Made up of mainly 12-8-8 Eagle Alusig traffic signals here as well. Picture from Bing Maps.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSpanwire1_zps3df7859b.png&hash=d5deea5d939095a674b6104a6e53d8265a621542)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on March 25, 2013, 12:20:50 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8236%2F8590004178_3bee7a8a34_c_d.jpg&hash=8abf33f89a6e2b73617e79063c7cadbce830088e)

I found this is Meadville, MS a couple weeks ago, but is only in Flash mode. Another one, a few blocks down, is still in full service.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on March 25, 2013, 09:38:27 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on March 25, 2013, 01:40:26 AM
A span-wire set-up in New York City is uncommon

QuoteBelow, are three signalized from the borough of Staten Island
Are there any in the ACTUAL city? Like, the boroughs that matter?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 25, 2013, 11:25:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on March 25, 2013, 09:38:27 PM
Are there any in the ACTUAL city? Like, the boroughs that matter?

When I mention New York City, I generally refer to all of the five boroughs that make up the city. So, Staten Island does matter to me.

With regards to Manhattan, to my knowledge, the set-up does not exist there. On Staten Island, there are a total of four that I am aware of. I do not have a picture of the fourth one at the moment. Aside from that borough, there are a handful (I can't remember the exact number off the top of my head) that exist in Queens. They're at John F. Kennedy Int'l Airport.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on March 26, 2013, 03:16:47 AM
I could have sworn that I saw a spanwire installation in Brooklyn.  Not sure where in Brooklyn it was, but it looked to be an old installation.  This was probably 10 years ago or so when I saw it.  It may have since been replaced.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 26, 2013, 03:53:22 AM
Quote from: signalman on March 26, 2013, 03:16:47 AM
I could have sworn that I saw a spanwire installation in Brooklyn.  Not sure where in Brooklyn it was, but it looked to be an old installation.  This was probably 10 years ago or so when I saw it.  It may have since been replaced.

Aside from what I mentioned in my previous comment, I am sure there are some others scattered throughout the five boroughs of the city.

What I forgot to mention, too, is that there a couple that exist on one segment of Jamaica Avenue (under the el) in Queens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on March 26, 2013, 06:34:34 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on March 25, 2013, 11:25:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on March 25, 2013, 09:38:27 PM
Are there any in the ACTUAL city? Like, the boroughs that matter?

When I mention New York City, I generally refer to all of the five boroughs that make up the city. So, Staten Island does matter to me.

With regards to Manhattan, to my knowledge, the set-up does not exist there. On Staten Island, there are a total of four that I am aware of. I do not have a picture of the fourth one at the moment. Aside from that borough, there are a handful (I can't remember the exact number off the top of my head) that exist in Queens. They're at John F. Kennedy Int'l Airport.
JFK is under Port Authority jurisdiction, so they make their own rules.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 26, 2013, 06:43:58 PM
Quote from: Steve on March 26, 2013, 06:34:34 PM
JFK is under Port Authority jurisdiction, so they make their own rules.

Even so, if I recall correctly, J.F.K. falls within the borough of Queens, since it is not located outside of New York City.

I understand your point, though, which you are correct. Although the P.A. operates them, I would consider them part of New York City in my humble opinion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 12, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Question about what the MUTCD considers to be an 'overhead assembly?'  I was noticing that in NYC there are places where signal heads are side mounted on a pole, but at the same height that the mast arm would be attached thus making it the same distance from the ground as those on arms or span wires.

Places like Fifth Avenue in Midtown, you will see two high mounted signal heads (or did see) on the corners to replace some of the old bracket type mast arms that graced that particular street for years.  I was wondering if the MUTCD allows for that being it is overhead, but at the same time it is not overhead?

Then also how is NYC allowed to have only one signal head per intersection on Park Avenue between 46th and 56th Streets, as these signals were erected in modern times after the MUTCD required a minimum of two straight through assemblies?  I was reading in Wikipedia, that the underground Metro North Tunnel prevents standard signals to be allowed, hence the tall mast pole in the median that supports the four way signal heads.  That I do not believe, as the tunnel continues beyond 56th Street where normal (or at least for NYC) installations occur, even if it were true would the FHWA make an acception?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 12, 2013, 05:15:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 12, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Question about what the MUTCD considers to be an 'overhead assembly?'  I was noticing that in NYC there are places where signal heads are side mounted on a pole, but at the same height that the mast arm would be attached thus making it the same distance from the ground as those on arms or span wires.

Places like Fifth Avenue in Midtown, you will see two high mounted signal heads (or did see) on the corners to replace some of the old bracket type mast arms that graced that particular street for years.  I was wondering if the MUTCD allows for that being it is overhead, but at the same time it is not overhead?

That kind of set-up is common to see throughout the five boroughs (not only in Manhattan), mind you. If you were the first motorist at a signalized intersection that uses this set-up, chances are you would not see the suspended traffic signal above you (that depends on where it is placed). Instead of straining your neck to view it, you'd rely on that traffic signal ahead of you. Improves visibility, really. My knowledge about New York City and its relation to the M.U.T.C.D. is limited, but I would assume it is appropriate to use (if necessary).

Also, truck traffic in New York City could be hectic at times, so the likely reason that most are highly elevated is that the city doesn't want them to be clipped by large vehicles that make turns at corners. Back in the old days, when two-section (red and green) traffic signals were the norm throughout New York City, many that were attached to pedestals had short visors attached to them, and they were generally pretty close to corners at intersections. The one side that faced the curb generally had only one pair. This prevented them from being clipped. Early three-section traffic signals in the city used them as well, but they are no longer in use nowadays.


Quote from: roadman65 on April 12, 2013, 09:40:05 AMThen also how is NYC allowed to have only one signal head per intersection on Park Avenue between 46th and 56th Streets, as these signals were erected in modern times after the MUTCD required a minimum of two straight through assemblies?  I was reading in Wikipedia, that the underground Metro North Tunnel prevents standard signals to be allowed, hence the tall mast pole in the median that supports the four way signal heads.  That I do not believe, as the tunnel continues beyond 56th Street where normal (or at least for NYC) installations occur, even if it were true would the FHWA make an acception?


Actually, the city fought with the train system for many years, since the city's original intention was to standardize them on that particular segment. The fear was that the mast-arm/guy wire set-up would interfere with the tunnels below ground, since I recall this set-up is placed fairly deep below street level. It was not until in recent years, though, that the city and Metro North finally came to an agreement. With that said, the intersections were standardized, and the original traffic signals are long gone. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 13, 2013, 12:22:56 PM
Actually, I think the mounted high side signals are a real help and come to think of it, I now remember seeing them in Dallas, TX.  I hope the MUTCD does consider them to be the same as those over the intersection.

New Jersey  even has a few places that use them for Left Turn Signals as well as supplementary signals attached where the mast arm extends in many places. 

I do not see though why deep tunnels would create a problem above for mast arms, especially when the rest of Park Avenue has them over the same tunnels?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 13, 2013, 04:59:30 PM
I don't believe the MUTCD considers a pole-mounted signal head as overhead, even if placed at the same height as an overhead signal. The key is overhead signals are in front of the driver (typically centered over the lane the signal controls).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 13, 2013, 09:57:04 PM
I always liked this pedestrian signal from the Brazilian company Peterco. New York City installed it in the late 1980s. It was similar to the 16" Winko-Matic VI 2L AG pedestrian signal that was in use at the time, but that had a different louver.

An interesting characteristic about this one in particular is that each signal indication appeared quite bright in the middle, in which the incandescent light bulb was located. This was normally noticeable at night.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F128125757_zps56431b67.jpg&hash=059be8ec189ccad4764b22c11d97632eb04cac8c) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/128125757_zps56431b67.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F128125758_zps03b3df7c.jpg&hash=2543cc37f256b5ae53acf7791e9933d35262be00) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/128125758_zps03b3df7c.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cpzilliacus on April 14, 2013, 11:31:45 AM
There are 12-8-8's along Va. 120 (Glebe Road) in Arlington County, Va.  12-8-8's were once pretty common in Northern Virginia, but most of them are now gone.  The intersection of Va. 120 (South Glebe Road) at West Glebe Road (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=south+glebe+road+%26+west+glebe+road,+arlington+county,+va&hl=en&sll=38.851941,-77.084198&sspn=0.037365,0.077162&t=h&hnear=S+Glebe+Rd+%26+W+Glebe+Rd,+Arlington,+Virginia+22206&z=16) (which runs south of South Glebe Road into the City of Alexandria) and Four Mile Run Drive has had 12-8-8's for a long time, but they  are almost done, as new mastarms with all-12's have been installed but not yet hooked-up.

Southbound Va. 120 (the Pizza Hut in the distance is in Alexandria):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2FCPZ%2FDSC01783Web.jpg&hash=3b9cf72764031ce6b39c291a9cbd13e054f83ccb)

Southbound or eastbound Four Mile Run Drive:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2FCPZ%2FDSC01787Web.jpg&hash=cc7641d74a391f34062daed8566b5d6b39aca18e)

Westbound West Glebe Road:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2FCPZ%2FDSC01791Web.jpg&hash=be040c40ce1bddf6ad6e4f3127ae8bcd40750e08)

Northbound Va. 120:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2FCPZ%2FDSC01793Web.jpg&hash=3a48395c0a9dad79201736f595ee29aa56e39629)

EDIT: Added hyperlink and made a few corrections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cpzilliacus on April 14, 2013, 11:37:05 AM
But on Va. 120 (North Glebe Road) at Carlin Springs Road (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=north+glebe+road+%26+north+carlin+springs+road,+arlington+county,+va&hl=en&sll=38.844128,-77.077212&sspn=0.009342,0.01929&t=h&hnear=N+Glebe+Rd+%26+N+Carlin+Springs+Rd,+Arlington,+Virginia+22203&z=16) these 12-8-8's will apparently be there for a while yet:

Northbound Va. 120:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDSC01799Web.jpg&hash=c75fa3c4c98789ba533c7994b44f55af3c8f0f77)

Eastbound Carlin Springs Road:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDSC01781Web.jpg&hash=5f585e641a63fe8caa721b159f5b8cef9918932d)

EDIT: Added hyperlink.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on April 14, 2013, 01:55:08 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi699.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv358%2FMdcastleman%2FIMG_2284.jpg&hash=7414e69812470f11eb14572703d637c669dc6700) (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/Mdcastleman/media/IMG_2284.jpg.html)(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi699.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv358%2FMdcastleman%2FIMG_2282.jpg&hash=472b832f2539723d828461a28c917218454bbe76) (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/Mdcastleman/media/IMG_2282.jpg.html)
Two different Eagleluxes in Minneapolis, long fin and short fins.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi699.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv358%2FMdcastleman%2FIMG_1038.jpg&hash=f18428b9275f7d4c4d5356baa09187bf77358901) (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/Mdcastleman/media/IMG_1038.jpg.html)
(Repost) Deactivated installation on old Route 6 in Wilton, IA. There are 4 way setups on kittycorner stretches of the intersection. The heads (Eagle "Durasigs) were made no earlier than the early 1970s, and these look to be newer, so they were replaced well after I-80 was built.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi699.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv358%2FMdcastleman%2FIMG_1898.jpg&hash=f7cf82b63eddd3d7e1998a84cf268630322ea635) (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/Mdcastleman/media/IMG_1898.jpg.html)
Old GE 4-way in Cleveland, TN. GE sold their traffic signal business to Econolite in the 1950s
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on April 14, 2013, 03:30:07 PM
Some 12-8-12s in Lorain County, OH (Elyria):

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=elyria+oh&hl=en&ll=41.378771,-82.117111&spn=0.001107,0.00327&sll=41.4423,-82.18532&sspn=0.004456,0.013078&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.378579,-82.117119&panoid=Ah4D8kW3owjdWwGLpAV6DA&cbp=12,169.31,,0,-3.99

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=elyria+oh&hl=en&ll=41.367626,-82.101721&spn=0.001107,0.00327&sll=41.4423,-82.18532&sspn=0.004456,0.013078&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.367626,-82.101721&panoid=QAjFaLUoZCunErF6jGmlAg&cbp=12,77.67,,0,-7.38

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=elyria+oh&hl=en&ll=41.374848,-82.086148&spn=0.001107,0.00327&sll=41.4423,-82.18532&sspn=0.004456,0.013078&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.37492,-82.08588&panoid=EzYR2Ix05sgxraKwq-icNQ&cbp=12,246.48,,0,-18.98

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=elyria+oh&hl=en&ll=41.377497,-82.077012&spn=0.001107,0.00327&sll=41.4423,-82.18532&sspn=0.004456,0.013078&hnear=Elyria,+Lorain,+Ohio&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.377568,-82.076778&panoid=WWafyvbOo6Yuyu1uf88iaw&cbp=12,86.6,,0,-6.5
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 14, 2013, 08:52:04 PM
A Ruleta suspended from a classic "wheelie" set-up. Brooklyn, New York. 1963. Courtesy of Brooklyn Historical Archives.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FV197441969_zps01f3390e.jpg&hash=ca5f66f3975a0839228ca0373788e984d37ec9df) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/V197441969_zps01f3390e.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 16, 2013, 11:56:11 PM
My 16" Winko-Matic model VI 2L AG pedestrian signal. To keep up with the New York City motif, I decided to repaint it. Its original color was dark hunter green, and it saw service somewhere in New York state. The color that I used for this pedestrian signal was Caterpillar Yellow, and it is the closest to the original shade of yellow that was used in New York City. The city was introduced to the VI 2L AG in the early 1980s. I remember it well (before the L.E.D. conversion).


(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F644684_559814114049400_335995231_n_zpscf7d8ed4.jpg&hash=cb03b7bce4f046fbfacfb2be7780d0effde91221) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/644684_559814114049400_335995231_n_zpscf7d8ed4.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F3654_559813977382747_81413081_n_zpsa0eeef65.jpg&hash=66aea952ff229e993c46003e5d2d9b07e4581d8c) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/3654_559813977382747_81413081_n_zpsa0eeef65.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F12372_559814117382733_1277997788_n_zps1600d92c.jpg&hash=f038d12320325526150384fbcdf02b40107df356) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/12372_559814117382733_1277997788_n_zps1600d92c.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F12507_559814140716064_1474213553_n_zps47a190ba.jpg&hash=4c477a7728caa2795a7a393f1a848cb9b25bb9b9) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/12507_559814140716064_1474213553_n_zps47a190ba.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Billy F 1988 on April 17, 2013, 01:11:43 AM
Holy crap that thing's huge! Most pedestrian signals aren't this big in Missoula! They're big up close, but nothing like this hunker. What are the approximate dimensions of this? It certainly looks like half the size of a 64" big screen LCD TV.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 17, 2013, 01:33:43 AM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on April 17, 2013, 01:11:43 AM
Holy crap that thing's huge! Most pedestrian signals aren't this big in Missoula! They're big up close, but nothing like this hunker. What are the approximate dimensions of this? It certainly looks like half the size of a 64" big screen LCD TV.

It is actually a 16" pedestrian signal. 16" by 16". It is not too large. Yes, it appears small from a driver's point of view; however, it appears rather big in appearance up-close, of course.

New York City has been using 16" pedestrian signals for years, and there are several signal equipment companies that manufacture them. Winko-Matic used to manufacture neon pedestrian signals, and at least two models were in use in the city. One of them (first generation) was rather bulky, not to mention heavy. It was like a monster. Below, is an example. From 1955.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FCorbis-U1280825INP_zpse22e2e39.jpg&hash=25a56631338316bd5074e3e141511c0993c2079d) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/Corbis-U1280825INP_zpse22e2e39.jpg.html)

I sometimes wonder how people handled them when they installed these pedestrian signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on April 18, 2013, 04:39:00 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on April 14, 2013, 11:37:05 AM
But on Va. 120 (North Glebe Road) at Carlin Springs Road (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=north+glebe+road+%26+north+carlin+springs+road,+arlington+county,+va&hl=en&sll=38.844128,-77.077212&sspn=0.009342,0.01929&t=h&hnear=N+Glebe+Rd+%26+N+Carlin+Springs+Rd,+Arlington,+Virginia+22203&z=16) these 12-8-8's will apparently be there for a while yet:

Northbound Va. 120:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDSC01799Web.jpg&hash=c75fa3c4c98789ba533c7994b44f55af3c8f0f77)

Eastbound Carlin Springs Road:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDSC01781Web.jpg&hash=5f585e641a63fe8caa721b159f5b8cef9918932d)

EDIT: Added hyperlink.

Those streetlights look very Chinese.  I have never seen any LED streetlights like those on the west coast.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cpzilliacus on April 18, 2013, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on April 18, 2013, 04:39:00 AM
Those streetlights look very Chinese.  I have never seen any LED streetlights like those on the west coast.

They are LEDs.  I've seen them in Arlington County, Va. and at least one place in the District of Columbia (on northbound D.C. 295 north of Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 22, 2013, 10:06:27 AM
Are U turns exempt from waiting for the left turn signals at such intersections in many areas?  Lately, I see many motorists making u turns without waiting for the green arrows to appear in the area I live in Florida.

One such motorist gave me a scare, when I seen his vehicle make a u turn the same way I was heading when I made a RTOR at a local intersection.  I caught an object out of my side view, which was his car just feet away from mine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 22, 2013, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 22, 2013, 10:06:27 AM
Are U turns exempt from waiting for the left turn signals at such intersections in many areas?  Lately, I see many motorists making u turns without waiting for the green arrows to appear in the area I live in Florida.

rules are the same as for left turns.  if there isn't a red arrow, then it is a permissive turn and he may make it as long as he yields to oncoming traffic.

QuoteOne such motorist gave me a scare, when I seen his vehicle make a u turn the same way I was heading when I made a RTOR at a local intersection.  I caught an object out of my side view, which was his car just feet away from mine.

in that situation, unless you had a green right arrow, he had right of way.  he has to yield to oncoming traffic, but not traffic which has a red light.  traffic at the red light has to yield to all traffic before making a right turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Compulov on April 22, 2013, 12:12:52 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/bdbLY (http://goo.gl/maps/bdbLY)

I'm posting this here because I've always found this particular signal to be neat. The mast that it's on doesn't reach the center of the intersection (even if you don't factor in the offset double-yellow, of course) and it just looks old(er?). I wonder if maybe 413 was narrower at one point, and they widened the road, but reused the same mast. The side mounted lights look like they were added much later on, too. There's lots of old (probably 70s or older vintage) masts in and around Levittown (especially on US-13), though I think they're going away now that they're going to be doing construction on 13.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 23, 2013, 02:00:27 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 22, 2013, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 22, 2013, 10:06:27 AM
Are U turns exempt from waiting for the left turn signals at such intersections in many areas?  Lately, I see many motorists making u turns without waiting for the green arrows to appear in the area I live in Florida.

rules are the same as for left turns.  if there isn't a red arrow, then it is a permissive turn and he may make it as long as he yields to oncoming traffic.

QuoteOne such motorist gave me a scare, when I seen his vehicle make a u turn the same way I was heading when I made a RTOR at a local intersection.  I caught an object out of my side view, which was his car just feet away from mine.

in that situation, unless you had a green right arrow, he had right of way.  he has to yield to oncoming traffic, but not traffic which has a red light.  traffic at the red light has to yield to all traffic before making a right turn.
If the rules are the same for u turns as left turns then he would be in the wrong.  Who when making a RTOR, expects someone to be making a u turn.  Usually you look left.

Plus, he broke the law and not I.  RTOR is legal over running a red light which is 100 percent illegal! I know that u turns are required to yield to right turns when a green arrow takes place, but that is when the light is green or permissive.  Even if a person in my situation got cited for an accident, still the other driver can also be cited for failing to obey a traffic control device.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 02:13:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2013, 02:00:27 PMWho when making a RTOR, expects someone to be making a u turn.
people who know how to drive.

QuoteUsually you look left.
and straight.  oncoming traffic making a left turn may have the protected arrow.  and right, because u-turning traffic may have the right of way - permissive or protected.

and behind you because generally you look at your surroundings. 

I don't want to share the road with unobservant kinds that think "who expects traffic from a less than common direction?" and blow off the idea wholesale?

QuoteRTOR is legal over running a red light which is 100 percent illegal!
you mean to say someone ran a red to make the U-turn?  I thought "without waiting for the green arrows to appear" meant that their direction of travel had a green ball.

I doubt anyone's starting to run red lights systematically. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 02:19:22 PM
Me mum often complains about people making U-turns on red. I guess it's a common thing in this area. (And frankly, compared to some things people do, it's not a very dangerous maneuver.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 02:13:42 PM
and straight.  oncoming traffic making a left turn may have the protected arrow.  and right, because u-turning traffic may have the right of way - permissive or protected.

I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 04:50:30 PM
Quote from: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 02:19:22 PM
Me mum often complains about people making U-turns on red. I guess it's a common thing in this area. (And frankly, compared to some things people do, it's not a very dangerous maneuver.)

if you can go from the innermost lane to the innermost lane, without actually intersecting the path of traffic perpendicular to you (most likely you're on a bicycle in this situation), then go for it. 

otherwise, it's fairly dangerous still, and I wouldn't recommend it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 04:51:44 PM
Quote from: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.

here I thought that the protected left, with a red arrow when there isn't a green arrow, are because generally there isn't enough visibility to be able to make a permitted left.

as for the "no turn" light-up signs, I've seen those mainly when there is a rail line, or for a completely different use, when there is heavy pedestrian traffic walking parallel to the green ball.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 05:07:15 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 04:51:44 PM
as for the "no turn" light-up signs, I've seen those mainly when there is a rail line, or for a completely different use, when there is heavy pedestrian traffic walking parallel to the green ball.
Unfortunately they're also used for hours-long turn restrictions in DC. So you could sit there expecting it to change.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on April 23, 2013, 05:25:54 PM
Quote from: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 05:07:15 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 04:51:44 PM
as for the "no turn" light-up signs, I've seen those mainly when there is a rail line, or for a completely different use, when there is heavy pedestrian traffic walking parallel to the green ball.
Unfortunately they're also used for hours-long turn restrictions in DC. So you could sit there expecting it to change.

DC put some of those up in part because of tourists relying blindly on sat-navs who'd sit there all day waiting to turn left. The light-up signs are a big improvement over the older stupid metal signs with small print listing the restricted times (invariably positioned on the far corner where it was hard to see/read).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 05:27:59 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 23, 2013, 05:25:54 PM
DC put some of those up in part because of tourists relying blindly on sat-navs who'd sit there all day waiting to turn left.
So they'll do it anyway if they're familiar with the ones that turn off after a few minutes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 05:54:22 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 04:51:44 PM
as for the "no turn" light-up signs, I've seen those mainly when there is a rail line, or for a completely different use, when there is heavy pedestrian traffic walking parallel to the green ball.

There are several of them on the Newtown Bypass. There's one in particular at the Lindenhurst Road intersection which I can't figure out. It's only ever active when the light is red. So, if you can't make a right turn whenever the light is red, then why bother having the light up sign? The intersection already has a green right arrow, so if you can safely make a right whenever you have a green ball or a green arrow, the NTOR being lit up is redundant. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to just put a fixed NTOR sign there? One possibility I haven't considered is whether they don't light it up after a certain hour. I very rarely drive up that way really late or really early.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.

They seriously have to put up signs to tell people not to turn left on a red light?  Ay ay ay...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on April 23, 2013, 06:16:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.

They seriously have to put up signs to tell people not to turn left on a red light?  Ay ay ay...
No, I think he's refering to no right turn from the side street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:17:29 PM
Quote from: signalman on April 23, 2013, 06:16:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.

They seriously have to put up signs to tell people not to turn left on a red light?  Ay ay ay...
No, I think he's refering to no right turn from the side street.

OK, thanks, that makes a lot more sense now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on April 23, 2013, 06:51:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:17:29 PM
Quote from: signalman on April 23, 2013, 06:16:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 03:26:48 PM
I've been noticing a number of intersections with protected lefts that are either full-time no turn on red or have one of those light up part time no turn on red signs. I'm assuming that's to avoid the situation entirely.

They seriously have to put up signs to tell people not to turn left on a red light?  Ay ay ay...
No, I think he's refering to no right turn from the side street.

OK, thanks, that makes a lot more sense now.
Glad to help, and I sincerely hope that's where he was going with his point. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Compulov on April 23, 2013, 07:46:22 PM
Quote from: signalman on April 23, 2013, 06:51:21 PM
Glad to help, and I sincerely hope that's where he was going with his point. 

It was... I was referring to no (right) turn on red during opposing traffic's protected left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:07:28 PM
Opposing traffic or cross traffic?
See, I'm confused again...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 23, 2013, 10:02:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:07:28 PM
Opposing traffic or cross traffic?
See, I'm confused again...

Opposing traffic, since there is a protected left turn movement.

Here in New Jersey, I am aware of a couple of signalized intersections in my county that have this movement. Additionally, a motorist on the main drag is allowed to make a right turn on red. Although if the protected left turn movement is activated, then a large sign on the opposing side of the main drag would show "NO TURN ON RED." Once the movement terminates, the message on the sign terminates as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 25, 2013, 01:21:09 AM
Classic two-section (red and green) "Mercury signal" at the corner of 5th Avenue and E. 10th Street. Manhattan, New York. 1963. Photograph taken by Kay Simmon Blumberg.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2Fkay-simmons-blumberg-lampost-and-traffic-light-fifth-avenue-and-tenth-street-photographs-silver-print-zoom_zps5022aa91.jpg&hash=d7a8eaa2799ce9580cf1eb56ff6bf827523409b6) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/kay-simmons-blumberg-lampost-and-traffic-light-fifth-avenue-and-tenth-street-photographs-silver-print-zoom_zps5022aa91.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on April 25, 2013, 10:58:23 AM
Any idea who the little statue on top is supposed to represent?  Given the downtown location, I wouldn't think it's Columbus.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 25, 2013, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: BamaZeus on April 25, 2013, 10:58:23 AM
Any idea who the little statue on top is supposed to represent?  Given the downtown location, I wouldn't think it's Columbus.

Statuette of the god Mercury. Thus, the common nickname "Mercury signal."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on April 26, 2013, 11:37:39 AM
Ahhhh, good deal.  I didn't know if Mercury was just the name of the manufacturing company or not, or if all those signals had equivalent statues on them.  It's a little before my time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 26, 2013, 07:49:56 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on April 26, 2013, 11:37:39 AM
Ahhhh, good deal.  I didn't know if Mercury was just the name of the manufacturing company or not, or if all those signals had equivalent statues on them.  It's a little before my time.

I was not alive to see them as well, but this particular traffic signal was designed by a gentleman by the name of Joseph H. Freelander. He also designed the original traffic control towers that were once on one segment of 5th Avenue from the early 1920s to late 1920s. Like the traffic control towers that Freelander designed, this new set-up was made of bronze as well. It was what actually replaced the traffic control tower in Manhattan, and, from what's known, approximately 104 were installed on one portion of 5th Avenue (from Washington Square to near Central Park). They existed from 1931 to 1964, and, after 1964, most were trashed by New York City's then traffic commissioner Henry Barnes, but some pieces were preserved.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 02, 2013, 02:45:20 PM
New type of assembly in Orlando, FL with FOUR signal heads due to the left turn flashing yellow signal head.  Usually you may find some four headed (and even five) with standard left turn signals, but with protected left turns it is rare for now.

This will, no doubt, be the norm for signals to come.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/8701681117/in/photostream/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 02, 2013, 03:04:30 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2013, 02:13:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2013, 02:00:27 PMWho when making a RTOR, expects someone to be making a u turn.
people who know how to drive.

QuoteUsually you look left.
and straight.  oncoming traffic making a left turn may have the protected arrow.  and right, because u-turning traffic may have the right of way - permissive or protected.

and behind you because generally you look at your surroundings. 

I don't want to share the road with unobservant kinds that think "who expects traffic from a less than common direction?" and blow off the idea wholesale?

QuoteRTOR is legal over running a red light which is 100 percent illegal!
you mean to say someone ran a red to make the U-turn?  I thought "without waiting for the green arrows to appear" meant that their direction of travel had a green ball.

I doubt anyone's starting to run red lights systematically. 
I am not saying that I do not expect cars from other directions to also cross the path of a RTOR, as I usually look three ways mostly.  I was pointing out at that moment I did not expect it.  In fact that was the first time it happened to me.

Also, running a red arrow is the same as running a red light.  Even if there is a green ball, the red arrow takes precedence over it.  Yeah, its one of those things, but technically he is in position for a ticket still.  Even if I was ruled for the cause of an accident (by the way over 33 years and none  for me except for two that the other drivers were at fault) that does not mean he is exempt from the illegal turn.

Even if you run a STOP sign and hit another car.  You will be cited for the offense of ignoring a traffic control device even if the accident is ruled caused by the guy you hit.  If he runs into you behind the front doors of your car, then in many cases the law considers the other driver at fault even though he had the ROW because that shows that he most definitely had time to stop or swerve out of the way.  Now if I ran the sign and hit the other vehicle in his front, the accident would be my fault and I would be cited myself for two occurences.

I am always careful when someone jumps a side road either a red light, stop sign, etc. as if I hit him in the back , I will be ruled at fault because evidence shows  that I had time to stop.  If you strike another vehicle in the front then, of course, you do not have time to stop.

There are ways indeed you could cause an accident to happen and be free of blame in some instances legally though how it sounds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Central Avenue on May 02, 2013, 04:16:54 PM
The Morse Road corridor in Columbus has some intersections where U-turns are permitted during the protected left phase. During Morse's protected left, the side streets get blank-out NO TURN ON RED signs.

I'm guessing this is because the engineers assume Columbus drivers won't be familiar with the "right turns on red yield to U-turns" rule, since U-turns are prohibited citywide except where posted otherwise.

Also, roadman65, there's been a slight miscommunication. In your initial post you didn't mention that the U-turner had a red arrow, so Jake assumed the intersection had a protected-permissive left turn. That's where the "green ball" confusion came from.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 02, 2013, 10:39:49 PM
Two-section traffic signal cluster from the Marbelite company on a Ruleta pedestal at E. 49th Street and Park Avenue. May, 1971. Manhattan, New York. This is a nice close-up, and I like the perspective as well.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FParkAvenue1971_zps514d030d.jpg&hash=d7de25c358c5ae452f42c84de740e3d885eb3a98) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/ParkAvenue1971_zps514d030d.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on May 03, 2013, 10:19:01 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on April 23, 2013, 10:02:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:07:28 PM
Opposing traffic or cross traffic?
See, I'm confused again...

Opposing traffic, since there is a protected left turn movement.

Here in New Jersey, I am aware of a couple of signalized intersections in my county that have this movement. Additionally, a motorist on the main drag is allowed to make a right turn on red. Although if the protected left turn movement is activated, then a large sign on the opposing side of the main drag would show "NO TURN ON RED." Once the movement terminates, the message on the sign terminates as well.

So the sign actually lights up the words "NO TURN ON RED"? Around here they use light up no right turn signs with red LEDs for the circle with the slash and white LEDs for the right arrow. I'll try to find a picture.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on May 03, 2013, 05:22:23 PM
What about bike signals?  :bigass:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4151%2F5083598331_c7ab1dbc54.jpg&hash=7f7875baa2c36fc83ada2d21d89c9bee8afa92b2)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 03, 2013, 10:02:45 PM
Quote from: realjd on May 03, 2013, 10:19:01 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on April 23, 2013, 10:02:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:07:28 PM
Opposing traffic or cross traffic?
See, I'm confused again...

Opposing traffic, since there is a protected left turn movement.

Here in New Jersey, I am aware of a couple of signalized intersections in my county that have this movement. Additionally, a motorist on the main drag is allowed to make a right turn on red. Although if the protected left turn movement is activated, then a large sign on the opposing side of the main drag would show "NO TURN ON RED." Once the movement terminates, the message on the sign terminates as well.

So the sign actually lights up the words "NO TURN ON RED"? Around here they use light up no right turn signs with red LEDs for the circle with the slash and white LEDs for the right arrow. I'll try to find a picture.

Pretty much so, but I do see the other display that you mentioned in your comment as well. Both are in use at various locations in N.J.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Billy F 1988 on May 03, 2013, 10:52:20 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on May 03, 2013, 05:22:23 PM
What about bike signals?  :bigass:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4151%2F5083598331_c7ab1dbc54.jpg&hash=7f7875baa2c36fc83ada2d21d89c9bee8afa92b2)

Those could prove useful in MT. More likely in places like Billings, Helena or Great Falls where there is more cycle traffic in those neighborhoods.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 04, 2013, 08:02:56 PM
Don't know what the law is in Washington State, but in New York, right-on-red-arrow is prohibited by law, though a sign is sometimes also displayed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kacie Jane on May 04, 2013, 08:18:56 PM
Right on red arrow is legal here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 04, 2013, 08:31:50 PM
V-e-r-y   i-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g...................
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on May 04, 2013, 10:15:51 PM
Furthermore, that image is in Portland, OR.  I believe it's also legal in Oregon unless otherwise specified.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 05, 2013, 12:02:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 04, 2013, 08:02:56 PM
Don't know what the law is in Washington State, but in New York, right-on-red-arrow is prohibited by law, though a sign is sometimes also displayed.

What I find interesting about some protected turn signals in New York state is that some are composed of four individual sections, and the fourth section (top) is a red ball that is unlit in normal operation. It only flashes when the signalized intersection is in flash mode. This set-up is commonly used for a protected left turn signal; however, such a set-up is used for a right turn signal as well.

I am aware of a couple (protected left turn signals) that exist in Suffern.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on May 06, 2013, 07:06:14 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 04, 2013, 08:02:56 PM
Don't know what the law is in Washington State, but in New York, right-on-red-arrow is prohibited by law, though a sign is sometimes also displayed.

Right on red arrow is legal in Illinois.  It takes a "No Turn On Red" sign to prohibit the movement.  Ditto for left on red arrow.  It takes a "Left Turn on Green Arrow" or "Left Turn Signal" sign to prohibit the movement.

The particular photo seems to have the "No Turn On Red" signage due to the existence of the bicycle lane with its own signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on May 06, 2013, 08:13:33 AM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on May 03, 2013, 05:22:23 PM
What about bike signals?  :bigass:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4151%2F5083598331_c7ab1dbc54.jpg&hash=7f7875baa2c36fc83ada2d21d89c9bee8afa92b2)

Isn't that a double negative when the NO TURN ON RED sign lights up?  :bigass:

It seems like the light up sign is redundant with the permanent NO TURN ON RED sign to the left of the right turn signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on May 06, 2013, 12:30:30 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 06, 2013, 08:13:33 AM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on May 03, 2013, 05:22:23 PM
What about bike signals?  :bigass:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4151%2F5083598331_c7ab1dbc54.jpg&hash=7f7875baa2c36fc83ada2d21d89c9bee8afa92b2)

Isn't that a double negative when the NO TURN ON RED sign lights up?  :bigass:

It seems like the light up sign is redundant with the permanent NO TURN ON RED sign to the left of the right turn signal.

If I pulled up to this intersection, I would see the permanent NTOR sign and assume that for both turn lanes -- regardless of what the light up says or doesn't say. 

If I were the municipality, I would change the permanent sign to read:

NO TURN ON RED
EXCEPT CURB LANE

which I have seen some municipalities use before.

When you throw in the dedicated bicycle lights, now you have a fustercluck of where/when can one turn right on red, and installing too many specific right turn/no turn on red signs will just cause even more confusion. 

The simplest thing I could think could work is a NTOR/ECL in place of the permanent sign, and replacing the 3-segment right turn signal & light up sign with a 4-segment flashing yellow arrow.  The FYA would only be activated when the bicyclists have their green phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 06, 2013, 03:36:36 PM
If I were on a bicycle, I would still turn right on red.  :ninja:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on May 06, 2013, 04:46:02 PM
But if you're on a bike on the sidewalk can you turn right on don't walk? :bigass:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on May 06, 2013, 05:43:11 PM
The variable no turn on red is for the right lane.

If the light is off, then it would be like this:  http://goo.gl/maps/PC7zu


I bike a lot in Seattle, and honestly, the bike infrastructure is at its birth.  It's illegal to bike on the sidewalk, but you can walk your bike.  I often dismount my bike in an intersection and use the crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 19, 2013, 03:08:13 PM
I found this (http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.041177,-76.171933&spn=0.001347,0.00284&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=43.041089,-76.171967&panoid=YrNlxZ55qrFXI3yTZQJlYw&cbp=12,246.24,,0,3.91) interesting signal setup in Syracuse last night.  I'm posting this because of the right-turn ramp having signal faces even though there's no conflicting movements.  Note the pole mounted signal face on the pole in the middle of the image, and another on the right side.  Since it's difficult to see the signals from above with Google's aerial imagery, here's (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r564z98nk2s3&lvl=19.44&dir=345.96&sty=o&form=LMLTCC) a link to Bing's Birds-Eye view.  I was wondering if other people around here had any thoughts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 19, 2013, 03:21:32 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 19, 2013, 03:08:13 PM
I found this (http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.041177,-76.171933&spn=0.001347,0.00284&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=43.041089,-76.171967&panoid=YrNlxZ55qrFXI3yTZQJlYw&cbp=12,246.24,,0,3.91) interesting signal setup in Syracuse last night.  I'm posting this because of the right-turn ramp having signal faces even though there's no conflicting movements.  Note the pole mounted signal face on the pole in the middle of the image, and another on the right side.  Since it's difficult to see the signals from above with Google's aerial imagery, here's (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r564z98nk2s3&lvl=19.44&dir=345.96&sty=o&form=LMLTCC) a link to Bing's Birds-Eye view.  I was wondering if other people around here had any thoughts.


If you take a closer look at that ramp set-up, there is a crosswalk present. With the crosswalk present is a pair of pedestrian signals as well. Seems to me that the pedestrian signals there are not actuated, so they're probably pre-timed.

I have seen similar signalized ramps in the past; however, the pedestrian signals present are actuated. With that said, the traffic signals rest on green unless a pedestrian pushes a nearby button to activate the "WALK" cycle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 20, 2013, 12:39:26 PM
That made me think of this one, for some reason.  It's a backward-facing stoplight on a one-way street.  Any idea what it's there for (there's already a ped signal)?

http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz (http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on May 20, 2013, 12:48:40 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2013, 12:39:26 PM
That made me think of this one, for some reason.  It's a backward-facing stoplight on a one-way street.  Any idea what it's there for (there's already a ped signal)?

http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz (http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz)

Could it have a been a two-way street at some time in the past? I remember back in 1995 when Bill Clinton ordered the Secret Service to close Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House in the days after the Oklahoma City bombing, H Street NW (which had been a two-way street) was changed to one-way eastbound, but the old westbound traffic lights remained in place for quite a few years afterwards (maybe in the hope that someday the road would be reopened?). Someone unfamiliar with the history would have been mystified by the lights facing the wrong way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: deathtopumpkins on May 20, 2013, 01:38:08 PM
I don't think that's the answer, based on the fact that there's only the one signal head stuck in the middle. I think it may be for the benefit of people trying to back out of those diagonal parking spaces, so they know when oncoming traffic has a green or not to help them find an opportunity to back out.
It may also be for something like street sweeping or snow plowing, where the sweeper/plow goes up the street the wrong way. There are a fair number of places around here that are plowed the wrong-way, usually with a caution sign at the beginning of the street.

Places do tend to leave up signage if changing a road to one-way though. Long before I even moved up here the town of Ipswich changed several streets to one-way, but left every single sign up for the opposite direction (stop signs, railroad crossing signs and gates, speed limit signs, etc.), and didn't even do that good of a job blacking out the old centerline.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 20, 2013, 02:16:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 20, 2013, 12:39:26 PM
That made me think of this one, for some reason.  It's a backward-facing stoplight on a one-way street.  Any idea what it's there for (there's already a ped signal)?

http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz (http://goo.gl/maps/NBkbz)

It may serve as an auxiliary signal for emergency vehicles, such as police vehicles, for example.

In various locations of Long Island, N.Y., one could find an individual traffic signal face a curb at an intersection. For the most part, it typically serves a pedestrian signal. Below, is an example of one from there.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Long+Island,+NY&hl=en&ll=40.724942,-73.722618&spn=0.002395,0.00567&sll=41.863137,-88.112347&sspn=0.009412,0.022681&oq=long+island&hnear=Long+Island&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=40.724908,-73.722735&panoid=oatUjwB7viELFQR8wgM2BA&cbp=12,77.96,,0,1.46
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 20, 2013, 03:13:02 PM
The one I linked to was like that back in the early 2000s, and the street had been one-way for a while (at least) before that.  Similar intersections in the area (such as here (http://goo.gl/maps/C5i35) and here (http://goo.gl/maps/3kyyE)) don't have that extra signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 20, 2013, 04:43:29 PM
It seems to me that it remains red 24/7, while the other traffic signals operate normally, since I traveled a couple of clicks on Google Map and observed the traffic pattern that was present.

That particular traffic signal must have a special function. Perhaps for emergency vehicles and pre-emption.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: sp_redelectric on May 20, 2013, 05:32:59 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 19, 2013, 03:08:13 PM
I found this (http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.041177,-76.171933&spn=0.001347,0.00284&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=43.041089,-76.171967&panoid=YrNlxZ55qrFXI3yTZQJlYw&cbp=12,246.24,,0,3.91) interesting signal setup in Syracuse last night.  I'm posting this because of the right-turn ramp having signal faces even though there's no conflicting movements.  Note the pole mounted signal face on the pole in the middle of the image, and another on the right side.  Since it's difficult to see the signals from above with Google's aerial imagery, here's (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r564z98nk2s3&lvl=19.44&dir=345.96&sty=o&form=LMLTCC) a link to Bing's Birds-Eye view.  I was wondering if other people around here had any thoughts.

If I go down the block a little ways, there's a brick garage building that looks like it could have been a fire station at one time.  It looks like it's a private business now...  In Salem, OR there is a traffic signal facing the wrong direction on a one-way street for the main station; however the fire station also has a dedicated lane in front of it so fire trucks can turn west on what would otherwise be a one-way eastbound street without conflicting with traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Central Avenue on June 03, 2013, 08:14:37 AM
I haven't managed to get a picture yet, since it's usually dark when I drive through, but...

Alum Creek Drive at Groveport Road in Obetz has a bizarre temporary setup for its left turn signals. Both directions are a protected-only left turn, but rather than use a three-section signal with red, yellow, and green arrows, they've used a 5-section doghouse with a tarp covering the yellow and green balls, alongside a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

It still functions as if it's a normal three-section signal, but it's very sloppy looking.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on June 03, 2013, 08:26:17 AM
Quote from: Central Avenue on June 03, 2013, 08:14:37 AM
I haven't managed to get a picture yet, since it's usually dark when I drive through, but...

Alum Creek Drive at Groveport Road in Obetz has a bizarre temporary setup for its left turn signals. Both directions are a protected-only left turn, but rather than use a three-section signal with red, yellow, and green arrows, they've used a 5-section doghouse with a tarp covering the yellow and green balls, alongside a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

It still functions as if it's a normal three-section signal, but it's very sloppy looking.

Maybe the final signal will use those doghouse signal heads somewhere at that intersection and they didn't want to bother ordering any additional signal heads that won't be used on the project? That is odd, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on June 03, 2013, 11:37:49 AM
A friend pointed out to me this old color video from 1939 NYC.  The video itself is great, perhaps minus the music which seems a little too "modern" to be in this video.  But, it has several great "finds" in it that could really go into several threads.

At :31 and :40 there are examples of the old-fashioned one-way sign.   Beginning at 1:04, several shots of the classic green and yellow city buses are included.

And, the kicker at 1:54 is a perfectly working 2-lamp traffic light in full color :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 03, 2013, 02:28:57 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on June 03, 2013, 11:37:49 AM
A friend pointed out to me this old color video from 1939 NYC.  The video itself is great, perhaps minus the music which seems a little too "modern" to be in this video.  But, it has several great "finds" in it that could really go into several threads.

At :31 and :40 there are examples of the old-fashioned one-way sign.   Beginning at 1:04, several shots of the classic green and yellow city buses are included.

And, the kicker at 1:54 is a perfectly working 2-lamp traffic light in full color :)

You didn't embed or link to any video.   :hmmm:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on June 03, 2013, 04:25:47 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 03, 2013, 02:28:57 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on June 03, 2013, 11:37:49 AM
A friend pointed out to me this old color video from 1939 NYC.  The video itself is great, perhaps minus the music which seems a little too "modern" to be in this video.  But, it has several great "finds" in it that could really go into several threads.

At :31 and :40 there are examples of the old-fashioned one-way sign.   Beginning at 1:04, several shots of the classic green and yellow city buses are included.

And, the kicker at 1:54 is a perfectly working 2-lamp traffic light in full color :)

You didn't embed or link to any video.   :hmmm:

This is the video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WgqRN40TXrE

Definitely a lot of vintage New York City signage in the video, such as the porcelain "humpback" street sign and "ONE WAY" arrow sign.

The two-section, "Mercury traffic signal" is definitely a classic, and the statuette of the god Mercury on top of it is a nice addition.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on June 04, 2013, 11:38:43 AM
Quote from: kphoger on June 03, 2013, 02:28:57 PM
Quote from: BamaZeus on June 03, 2013, 11:37:49 AM
A friend pointed out to me this old color video from 1939 NYC.  The video itself is great, perhaps minus the music which seems a little too "modern" to be in this video.  But, it has several great "finds" in it that could really go into several threads.

At :31 and :40 there are examples of the old-fashioned one-way sign.   Beginning at 1:04, several shots of the classic green and yellow city buses are included.

And, the kicker at 1:54 is a perfectly working 2-lamp traffic light in full color :)

You didn't embed or link to any video.   :hmmm:

Derp.  Silly me.  I think I got busy at work all of a sudden, then went back to the post an hour later and forgot to paste the link.   That is the correct video posted above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 27, 2013, 10:14:28 AM
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Elizabeth,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.665202,-74.214776&spn=0.002929,0.005284&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=eliza&t=h&hnear=Elizabeth,+Union,+New+Jersey&layer=c&cbll=40.665341,-74.214779&panoid=QsYHZjigOwJiWkvczmH1ig&cbp=12,81.56,,1,-7.5&z=18

Here is one that is common practice in New Jersey where in one direction the signal head is side mounted while in the other it is overhead.  Growing up in New Jersey as a kid I found this fascinating, but at the same time always wondered why this is done.  To me, having the side mounted signal head attached to the mast arm along with its counterpart would be more beneficial to the motorist.  I am guessing it has to do with the fact there are already two overhead signal heads already on two other mast arms behind the view of the link, but at least this one is mounted high.  I have seen many NJ intersections with signals have a  mostly have a low mounted head on the same pole where an overhead assembly exists for the opposite direction. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: codyg1985 on June 27, 2013, 10:15:59 AM
I love side-mounted signals that augment the overhead signals. It really helps when you are behind a 18 wheeler and it is hard to see the overhead signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 27, 2013, 10:43:59 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on June 27, 2013, 10:15:59 AM
I love side-mounted signals that augment the overhead signals. It really helps when you are behind a 18 wheeler and it is hard to see the overhead signals.
I wish Florida would use them, as very few states do have them.  I was wondering if that is the reason why NJDOT does this.  It did cross my mind that may be the reason, but not sure.  I hate it when behind even a small truck at two or three car lengths, when it blocks your view of the signal and once the truck in front of me ran the stoplight and had to screech to a stop to avoid running the light.  Now with cameras waiting for you to slip, I think seeing the signal heads well in advance are a must!  That is one thing about the feds that I cannot figure out and that is why signal heads are not mandatory to be spaced out for safety considering CA, NJ, IL, and few other states have had side mounted heads for years showing them that they work well for the good of the motoring public.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 11:36:43 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2012, 01:24:37 PM
Heck, who needs two?

Here is GMSV during road construction; through traffic has only a signal head, which is solid green full-time.
Wichita, KS:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fsignal.png&hash=7c832579882417aa28154f05ab4f8ea480b7636b)

Latest street view here (https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.681294,-97.244301&spn=0.001756,0.001725&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=37.681496,-97.244377&panoid=EQzlxWH-Y8212stWf0durQ&cbp=12,9.48,,0,-4.06), which shows the solid green ball for the through movement.

This website (http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/lturns.htm), which was shared in the "Is this interchange classified as a SPUI" suggests that this stoplight setup is prohibited my MUTCD (ref: Row 6 "Free-flow T Interection" and notes).  Is that right?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on July 11, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 11:36:43 AM
This website (http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/lturns.htm), which was shared in the "Is this interchange classified as a SPUI" suggests that this stoplight setup is prohibited my MUTCD (ref: Row 6 "Free-flow T Interection" and notes).  Is that right?

They do things like that regularly here in Florida at T intersections. I have no clue if it was recently banned. I hope not.

http://goo.gl/maps/cVu3C
http://goo.gl/maps/lpTBz

If you really want to talk about unusual signal uses, check out this intersection from Fort Myers that has a separate pair of signal heads for each lane:

http://goo.gl/maps/90TYk

EDIT: Fixed link for Fort Myers signal. The old link pointed in the wrong direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on July 11, 2013, 12:47:45 PM
Van Buren, AR
http://goo.gl/maps/wKEWd
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 12:54:41 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 11, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 11:36:43 AM
This website (http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/lturns.htm), which was shared in the "Is this interchange classified as a SPUI" suggests that this stoplight setup is prohibited my MUTCD (ref: Row 6 "Free-flow T Interection" and notes).  Is that right?

They do things like that regularly here in Florida at T intersections. I have no clue if it was recently banned. I hope not.

http://goo.gl/maps/cVu3C
http://goo.gl/maps/lpTBz

No, those are different.  They use arrows rather than green balls.  I think that's where the difference lies.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on July 11, 2013, 02:13:22 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 12:54:41 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 11, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 11, 2013, 11:36:43 AM
This website (http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/lturns.htm), which was shared in the "Is this interchange classified as a SPUI" suggests that this stoplight setup is prohibited my MUTCD (ref: Row 6 "Free-flow T Interection" and notes).  Is that right?

They do things like that regularly here in Florida at T intersections. I have no clue if it was recently banned. I hope not.

http://goo.gl/maps/cVu3C
http://goo.gl/maps/lpTBz

No, those are different.  They use arrows rather than green balls.  I think that's where the difference lies.

I just checked the MUTCD. The only approved signal head for a thru movement that never conflicts is a signal segment green arrow. Good call.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on July 12, 2013, 10:51:40 AM
Quote from: realjd on July 11, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
....

If you really want to talk about unusual signal uses, check out this intersection from Fort Myers that has a separate pair of signal heads for each lane:

http://goo.gl/maps/90TYk

EDIT: Fixed link for Fort Myers signal. The old link pointed in the wrong direction.

We pass through that one frequently when we visit our relatives down there (we usually stay at the beach and they live off Briarcliff Road). I've never been able to understand why that light was set up that way, especially given that the one on the right seems to operate on a different cycle from the others. Do you have any idea why it's like that? Even on our very first visit I quickly got in the habit of making sure to move left as I approach that light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 1995hoo on July 12, 2013, 11:42:39 AM
BTW, speaking about the green arrow lights for the thru lanes that never get a red, we have this slightly odd one on Commerce Street in Springfield, Virginia. What makes it odd is the doghouse signal for the left-turn lane onto the ramp to I-495. In theory, the doghouse should be unnecessary because there should never be a red light for the thru lane there–either the green left-turn arrow is on when someone trips the signal or it's not on–so the signal ought to be a dedicated signal for the left-turn lane. But because they wanted a permissive green, they used the doghouse style. This seems like a spot where a flashing yellow arrow would be a better solution.

http://goo.gl/maps/hhoOG
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 12, 2013, 05:53:50 PM
^^  In Wisconsin, the common practice is to still use a 3-section RYG signal head for the through lanes, even though the red indication will never be used and the yellow used only if it ever goes into flash mode.  So it stays on as a solid green circular ball for most/all the time.  For the lest turn-movement it is either a a 3-section arrow for left on green arrow only movement or a 5-section tower if it is a permitted/protected movement, again with the red and yellow being as previously said.  Not sure if they changed that part to a FYA for any new/reconstructed instillations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on July 12, 2013, 10:41:59 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 12, 2013, 10:51:40 AM
Quote from: realjd on July 11, 2013, 12:41:59 PM
....

If you really want to talk about unusual signal uses, check out this intersection from Fort Myers that has a separate pair of signal heads for each lane:

http://goo.gl/maps/90TYk

EDIT: Fixed link for Fort Myers signal. The old link pointed in the wrong direction.

We pass through that one frequently when we visit our relatives down there (we usually stay at the beach and they live off Briarcliff Road). I've never been able to understand why that light was set up that way, especially given that the one on the right seems to operate on a different cycle from the others. Do you have any idea why it's like that? Even on our very first visit I quickly got in the habit of making sure to move left as I approach that light.

The signal is set up that way to help with the merge on the bridge approach. Traffic gets absolutely horrendous during the tourist season.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on July 14, 2013, 05:08:08 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 12, 2013, 11:42:39 AM
BTW, speaking about the green arrow lights for the thru lanes that never get a red, we have this slightly odd one on Commerce Street in Springfield, Virginia. What makes it odd is the doghouse signal for the left-turn lane onto the ramp to I-495. In theory, the doghouse should be unnecessary because there should never be a red light for the thru lane there–either the green left-turn arrow is on when someone trips the signal or it's not on–so the signal ought to be a dedicated signal for the left-turn lane. But because they wanted a permissive green, they used the doghouse style. This seems like a spot where a flashing yellow arrow would be a better solution.

http://goo.gl/maps/hhoOG

Here is a similar situation just to the north in Annandale, VA -- http://goo.gl/maps/PGTjh -- a 4-light tower instead of a doghouse for protective/permissive. Not sure what the top light is in either the 4-light or 2-light signal. Presumably, both would be green all the time since traffic on Maple Place can only turn right on Annandale Rd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 14, 2013, 05:15:46 PM
Quote from: dfnva on July 14, 2013, 05:08:08 PM
sure what the top light is in either the 4-light or 2-light signal. Presumably, both would be green all the time since traffic on Maple Place can only turn right on Annandale Rd.

It appears to be a yellow signal for if/when the signals go into flash mode.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: xcellntbuy on July 15, 2013, 05:09:10 AM
Below is a link to an article on the front page of the July 15, 2013 edition of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on the latest standards to provide hurricane-resistance to span-wire traffic signals that still predominate in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, as well as other parts of Florida.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6351131.story
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on July 15, 2013, 08:43:24 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on July 15, 2013, 05:09:10 AM
Below is a link to an article on the front page of the July 15, 2013 edition of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on the latest standards to provide hurricane-resistance to span-wire traffic signals that still predominate in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, as well as other parts of Florida.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6351131.story

Very interesting. I do find it interesting that a wind and hurricane-prone state like Florida (as well as others in the Southeast) still install span-wire signals while here in Virginia, most new installations are mast arms, which, over the past 20 years, have replaced a great majority of older span wire installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on July 16, 2013, 02:33:06 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on July 15, 2013, 05:09:10 AM
Below is a link to an article on the front page of the July 15, 2013 edition of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on the latest standards to provide hurricane-resistance to span-wire traffic signals that still predominate in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, as well as other parts of Florida.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6351131.story

Here's a link to a copy of the article that isn't behind a paywall: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6417825.story
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 20, 2013, 03:50:21 AM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22306412@N07/9120682662/in/photostream/
This signal looks a little strange with the heads mounted in different positions on the mast arm.  Obviously the contractor was in a hurry and does not care about looks!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on July 26, 2013, 09:25:22 PM
This two-section (red and green) pedestrian signal from the Ruleta company still remains in existence in the city of New York. It is in Central Park, and it is likely the last of its kind there. I visited it in person last week.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15886_zpsf3518e42.jpg&hash=1b405af312247183e4c8780cd8fb534359858d70) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15886_zpsf3518e42.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15885_zps1ddb9925.jpg&hash=3d29a609cd80840c8953ca8ca65ad8e36604e3fd) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15885_zps1ddb9925.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15884_zpsff655f54.jpg&hash=dade9f80864bd7b850afd4294e39fb6817d2d50d) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15884_zpsff655f54.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15892_zps3933a274.jpg&hash=990c152d69e7df73c479393cba9ff1d26e3df26e) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15892_zps3933a274.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15891_zpscca91d1f.jpg&hash=4808f391d6699abbf12453f2be8ef14785bbd6b9) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15891_zpscca91d1f.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: brickbuilder711 on July 31, 2013, 04:03:23 AM
Quote from: realjd on July 16, 2013, 02:33:06 PM
Quote from: xcellntbuy on July 15, 2013, 05:09:10 AM
Below is a link to an article on the front page of the July 15, 2013 edition of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on the latest standards to provide hurricane-resistance to span-wire traffic signals that still predominate in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, as well as other parts of Florida.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6351131.story

Here's a link to a copy of the article that isn't behind a paywall: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/fl-traffic-signals-retrofit-hurricanes-20130709,0,6417825.story

Interesting find. Meanwhile along 8th street and Crandon Blvd in Miami according to Street View looks like Miami-Dade has already done this retrofit to those intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: froggie on August 01, 2013, 02:42:37 AM
Jumping in a bit late here...regarding overhead and side-mounted signals, I come from a state that does both extensively (Minnesota).  Really helps with visibility and agree that it should be emulated more across the country.

Regarding span-wire signals, it's not just Florida....the southeastern states as a general rule use span-wire signals as a standard...Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina....all states that fall in the "hurricane belt" as well.  Though Mississippi has *SLOWLY* started to come around to mast-arm signals, at least along the Gulf Coast and in a few cities (namely Hattiesburg....Meridian has long had mast-arm signals).  Presumably, span-wire is cheaper to install.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on September 29, 2013, 07:44:11 PM
I was wondering, is there any other state that uses this setup for left turn signals

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=33.71364,-78.899787&spn=0.000967,0.001206&t=h&z=20&vpsrc=6&cbll=33.713758,-78.89984&panoid=zK0BGuW0GZPWsPopsapRDQ&cbp=12,78.3,,2,-5&ei=XbhIUs-hJ9L_xQGV6YG4Cg&pw=2

South Carolina uses them extensively, and I've heard/seen them used in parts of Maryland and Texas. Any other place where they are used?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on September 30, 2013, 03:47:45 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on September 29, 2013, 07:44:11 PM
I was wondering, is there any other state that uses this setup for left turn signals

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=33.71364,-78.899787&spn=0.000967,0.001206&t=h&z=20&vpsrc=6&cbll=33.713758,-78.89984&panoid=zK0BGuW0GZPWsPopsapRDQ&cbp=12,78.3,,2,-5&ei=XbhIUs-hJ9L_xQGV6YG4Cg&pw=2

South Carolina uses them extensively, and I've heard/seen them used in parts of Maryland and Texas. Any other place where they are used?

Maryland's is more like http://goo.gl/maps/Z4y2P
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on September 30, 2013, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on September 29, 2013, 07:44:11 PM
I was wondering, is there any other state that uses this setup for left turn signals

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=33.71364,-78.899787&spn=0.000967,0.001206&t=h&z=20&vpsrc=6&cbll=33.713758,-78.89984&panoid=zK0BGuW0GZPWsPopsapRDQ&cbp=12,78.3,,2,-5&ei=XbhIUs-hJ9L_xQGV6YG4Cg&pw=2

South Carolina uses them extensively, and I've heard/seen them used in parts of Maryland and Texas. Any other place where they are used?

I've seen that once or twice in Louisiana along US 80.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman1071 on September 30, 2013, 02:22:50 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on July 26, 2013, 09:25:22 PM
This two-section (red and green) pedestrian signal from the Ruleta company still remains in existence in the city of New York. It is in Central Park, and it is likely the last of its kind there. I visited it in person last week.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15886_zpsf3518e42.jpg&hash=1b405af312247183e4c8780cd8fb534359858d70) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15886_zpsf3518e42.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15885_zps1ddb9925.jpg&hash=3d29a609cd80840c8953ca8ca65ad8e36604e3fd) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15885_zps1ddb9925.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15884_zpsff655f54.jpg&hash=dade9f80864bd7b850afd4294e39fb6817d2d50d) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15884_zpsff655f54.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15892_zps3933a274.jpg&hash=990c152d69e7df73c479393cba9ff1d26e3df26e) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15892_zps3933a274.jpg.html)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2FSDC15891_zpscca91d1f.jpg&hash=4808f391d6699abbf12453f2be8ef14785bbd6b9) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/SDC15891_zpscca91d1f.jpg.html)

You can also find these signals under the El along Liberty Avenue In Ozone Park East of Rockaway Blvd and at Liberty Avenue & 133rd Street.
Also along Shore Front Parkway In The Rockaway's (They may or may not be standing due to Sandy damage.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on September 30, 2013, 10:29:59 PM
Quote from: mapman1071 on September 30, 2013, 02:22:50 PM
You can also find these signals under the El along Liberty Avenue In Ozone Park East of Rockaway Blvd and at Liberty Avenue & 133rd Street.
Also along Shore Front Parkway In The Rockaway's (They may or may not be standing due to Sandy damage.)
Shore Front Pkwy. signals were gone years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: getemngo on October 01, 2013, 09:56:42 PM
Today I came across this at the end of an exit ramp and took a crappy cell phone photo (eastbound I-96 at exit 38, to be specific).

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0WEL6QEd3ic/Ukt4tRm6xDI/AAAAAAAAAFQ/6blgmfGzVtM/s800/traffic%2520light%25202.jpg)

There are indeed 4 lanes: a left turn lane, a left/thru lane, and two right turn lanes. It's a split phase signal 24 hours a day, so everything you see gets a green at the same time, then opposing traffic has a green. I'm pretty sure the sign on the right lights up with "NO TURN ON RED" when opposing traffic has a green - those pop up in Michigan from time to time.

So there's one signal for each lane, and all the turn movements are covered. I understand what they were trying for, but many things about it look incredibly... off.


Are any of these, or anything else, MUTCD violations?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 01, 2013, 10:56:38 PM
^^ The way you describe the intersection, the doghouse signal should be a 4-section signal instead - R-Y-G-GA.  No need for a redundant yellow arrow on a split phase. 

The part I am not clear on is whether the far left signal satisfies the 2-primary-signal requirement with the adjacent signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex4897 on October 02, 2013, 10:13:16 PM
How not to use a doghouse signal, by DelDOT.
DE 1 south offramp to DE 299.  I believe they meant to use an upside down T signal here, which'd be practically useless also considering nearly nobody is going to get off then get back on the freeway. (barring some disaster within the interchange or something)

https://maps.google.com/?ll=39.454728,-75.676924&spn=0.000954,0.002064&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.454728,-75.676924&panoid=zWqarsSk-RxUjuW-LEezdQ&cbp=12,163.82,,0,1.46 (https://maps.google.com/?ll=39.454728,-75.676924&spn=0.000954,0.002064&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.454728,-75.676924&panoid=zWqarsSk-RxUjuW-LEezdQ&cbp=12,163.82,,0,1.46)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on October 06, 2013, 03:29:13 AM
Quote from: mapman1071 on September 30, 2013, 02:22:50 PM
You can also find these signals under the El along Liberty Avenue In Ozone Park East of Rockaway Blvd and at Liberty Avenue & 133rd Street.
Also along Shore Front Parkway In The Rockaway's (They may or may not be standing due to Sandy damage.)


The last handful of survivors that were in existence in certain areas of Queens, such as Richmond Hill and the Rockaways, retired from useful service in the late 2000s. Around 2007 or so. What replaced them were mainly 8" three-section traffic signals from General Traffic Equipment, and the ones in the Far Rockaways didn't survive tropical storm Sandy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on October 07, 2013, 04:26:14 PM
Quote from: Big John on October 01, 2013, 10:56:38 PM
^^ The way you describe the intersection, the doghouse signal should be a 4-section signal instead - R-Y-G-GA.  No need for a redundant yellow arrow on a split phase. 

The part I am not clear on is whether the far left signal satisfies the 2-primary-signal requirement with the adjacent signal.

I agree that a four-section would have been sufficient, however maybe their reasoning was concern for signal height
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 07, 2013, 05:10:48 PM
Quote from: NYhwyfan on October 07, 2013, 04:26:14 PM
Quote from: Big John on October 01, 2013, 10:56:38 PM
^^ The way you describe the intersection, the doghouse signal should be a 4-section signal instead - R-Y-G-GA.  No need for a redundant yellow arrow on a split phase. 

The part I am not clear on is whether the far left signal satisfies the 2-primary-signal requirement with the adjacent signal.

I agree that a four-section would have been sufficient, however maybe their reasoning was concern for signal height
If clearance was a concern, a permissible signal arrangement can be an "inverted T" with a red on top, yellow in the middle, and the bottom row having 2 signal heads, a green left arrow and a green ball, with the bottom row being centered with the center of the red and yellow balls.

legal arrangements: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_11_longdesc.htm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 30, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Falling signal! https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jersey+City,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.716657,-74.151099&spn=0.001268,0.00191&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.494959,15.644531&oq=jers&t=h&hnear=Jersey+City,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.716657,-74.151099&panoid=L5b_Dw2Gxfq6sgEIonm5AA&cbp=12,289.12,,0,0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on December 30, 2013, 10:47:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 30, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Falling signal! https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jersey+City,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.716657,-74.151099&spn=0.001268,0.00191&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.494959,15.644531&oq=jers&t=h&hnear=Jersey+City,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.716657,-74.151099&panoid=L5b_Dw2Gxfq6sgEIonm5AA&cbp=12,289.12,,0,0

Image date: August 2012.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 31, 2013, 09:16:04 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 30, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Falling signal! https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jersey+City,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.716657,-74.151099&spn=0.001268,0.00191&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.494959,15.644531&oq=jers&t=h&hnear=Jersey+City,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.716657,-74.151099&panoid=L5b_Dw2Gxfq6sgEIonm5AA&cbp=12,289.12,,0,0

That and one of the telephone poles across the street looks to be in a precarious position.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on December 31, 2013, 11:36:55 AM
Signal head isn't falling as much as it's rotated downward. Looks like an Astro-Brac wasn't tightened enough on the mastarm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr. Matté on December 31, 2013, 12:14:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 30, 2013, 10:47:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 30, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Falling signal! https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jersey+City,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.716657,-74.151099&spn=0.001268,0.00191&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.494959,15.644531&oq=jers&t=h&hnear=Jersey+City,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.716657,-74.151099&panoid=L5b_Dw2Gxfq6sgEIonm5AA&cbp=12,289.12,,0,0
Image date: August 2012.

I'll bite, what does that date have to do with this signal? If you're referring to one of the hurricanes, Irene was August 2011 and Sandy was October 2012.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on December 31, 2013, 12:23:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on December 31, 2013, 12:14:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 30, 2013, 10:47:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 30, 2013, 10:38:19 PM
Falling signal! https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jersey+City,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.716657,-74.151099&spn=0.001268,0.00191&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.494959,15.644531&oq=jers&t=h&hnear=Jersey+City,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.716657,-74.151099&panoid=L5b_Dw2Gxfq6sgEIonm5AA&cbp=12,289.12,,0,0
Image date: August 2012.

I'll bite, what does that date have to do with this signal? If you're referring to one of the hurricanes, Irene was August 2011 and Sandy was October 2012.

I meant it's not current. It has probably been fixed by now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on December 31, 2013, 01:15:09 PM
No shit, Sherlock?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on December 31, 2013, 02:29:18 PM
Quote from: NE2 on December 31, 2013, 01:15:09 PM
No shit, Sherlock?

Dig deeper, Watson.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on December 31, 2013, 03:22:35 PM
One of the last Mercury signals in service on 5th Av. in Manhattan. Circa 1968. To the left in the photograph shows merely one portion of the well-known 5th Av. Donald Deskey twin-lamp fixture with the attachment for a three-section traffic signal, in which would be installed sooner or later at this time.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2Ftumblr_mhglifyPQs1qzqju7o1_1280_zpscff84f53.jpg&hash=1b10e5fe700117c1f0f6359ffc870647c08a5c48) (http://s1013.photobucket.com/user/Steven197981/media/tumblr_mhglifyPQs1qzqju7o1_1280_zpscff84f53.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 01, 2014, 11:42:52 PM
I'm sure a similar setup has popped up in this thread already:

http://goo.gl/4R5xvL

I don't live in CO Springs, but my grandparents do and when I visit them, all visible lights have greens/arrows at once (split phase right?). I'm not sure why 2 doghouses are necessary. Maybe just a 3-head arrow setup? If lets say both directions had greens at once, would this lead to a 2-left turn-yield to oncoming vehicles setup, which I believe to be against MUTCD regulations? I honestly have no idea, I just thought it was an odd setup of lights the few times we went through it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 04, 2014, 02:49:53 PM
Quote from: jake on January 01, 2014, 11:42:52 PM
I'm sure a similar setup has popped up in this thread already:

http://goo.gl/4R5xvL

I don't live in CO Springs, but my grandparents do and when I visit them, all visible lights have greens/arrows at once (split phase right?). I'm not sure why 2 doghouses are necessary. Maybe just a 3-head arrow setup? If lets say both directions had greens at once, would this lead to a 2-left turn-yield to oncoming vehicles setup, which I believe to be against MUTCD regulations? I honestly have no idea, I just thought it was an odd setup of lights the few times we went through it.

Yes, you're describing a split phase operation.

These two turn lanes are not option lanes, so the doghouses are completely unnecessary.

Two left turn lanes with permitted lefts (yield to oncoming vehicles) isn't unheard of, and isn't against the MUTCD to my knowledge. However, it's not really a recommended practice and is usually avoided.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on January 04, 2014, 05:26:11 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 04, 2014, 02:49:53 PM

Two left turn lanes with permitted lefts (yield to oncoming vehicles) isn't unheard of, and isn't against the MUTCD to my knowledge. However, it's not really a recommended practice and is usually avoided.
There are at least two in my area. The first of these is a FYA: http://goo.gl/maps/f0RYI

Since there is a T-intersection and thus no protected left turn by opposing traffic, nor is the signal ever operated in protected left-only mode, the FYAs are unnecessary. There were previously doghouse signal heads for each turn lane. This is on a busy enough road that the two-lane, permissive left turn makes me uneasy.

The second of these was converted from a protected-only to a FRA. http://goo.gl/maps/yok27
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on January 04, 2014, 05:59:52 PM
Those are starting to show up on new installations in Minnesota too, Broadway at I-35 in Forest Lake being one example.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 04, 2014, 06:23:39 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 04, 2014, 02:49:53 PM
Two left turn lanes with permitted lefts (yield to oncoming vehicles) isn't unheard of, and isn't against the MUTCD to my knowledge. However, it's not really a recommended practice and is usually avoided.

There was a thread listing locations for those a while back. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9240.0)

I'm beginning to wonder if having permissive double lefts is always problematic (particularly at T-intersections or one-way streets), or if automatically going to protected-only phasing for double lefts is overkill and there should be a bit more study before making the decision.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2014, 02:51:54 AM
From the lists I've read, it appears that Colorado likes the permissive double left. Interesting. I'd imagine if you suggested that here in Washington you would be promptly laughed at and then told to bugger off, citing insanity. Seriously, they just rebuilt a section of roadway near my house, upgraded from two to five, 12-foot lanes, outside lanes 14 feet with a flush median in the center. As usual for old Pierce County, the two new lights installed were one-lane protected-only lefts. The Pierce County site indicated that turn lights are only used when the VPH (vehicle per hour) rate is over something like 240. I drive this road every single day and there is no way in hell it's near 240 turning vehicles. And that number is only to suggest when a turn light should be considered, not necessarily a protected-only light.

Nearby however, the county replaced a signal with an FYA. Weird they did not install a guide indicating what to do on a flashing yellow arrow. Best of luck to the populace I guess.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8lX0RLS.png&hash=9a54a1f9dcc76ebcb56c007cfe134c94d718afa4)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 06, 2014, 12:13:17 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=los+angeles&ll=34.152226,-118.465903&spn=0.000002,0.00066&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.152226,-118.466159&panoid=HcDTs1rN8boNcGXL4BhwsQ&cbp=12,7.46,,2,-5.33

While fiddling around with GSV, I found this interesting traffic light in Los Angeles near Sepulveda and Ventura, the 5 section tower on the mast arm has the red arrow pointing right, but the green arrow pointing left. I understand why this signal is how it is, but I haven't seen anything like it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alps on January 06, 2014, 06:48:10 PM
Quote from: jake on January 06, 2014, 02:51:54 AM
From the lists I've read, it appears that Colorado likes the permissive double left. Interesting. I'd imagine if you suggested that here in Washington you would be promptly laughed at and then told to bugger off, citing insanity. Seriously, they just rebuilt a section of roadway near my house, upgraded from two to five, 12-foot lanes, outside lanes 14 feet with a flush median in the center. As usual for old Pierce County, the two new lights installed were one-lane protected-only lefts. The Pierce County site indicated that turn lights are only used when the VPH (vehicle per hour) rate is over something like 240. I drive this road every single day and there is no way in hell it's near 240 turning vehicles. And that number is only to suggest when a turn light should be considered, not necessarily a protected-only light.
240 vehicles is one every 15 seconds. It only seems like a lot until you stand out there and realize that's only 4 cars during a 60 second cycle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 20, 2014, 06:21:04 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 06, 2014, 12:13:17 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=los+angeles&ll=34.152226,-118.465903&spn=0.000002,0.00066&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.152226,-118.466159&panoid=HcDTs1rN8boNcGXL4BhwsQ&cbp=12,7.46,,2,-5.33

While fiddling around with GSV, I found this interesting traffic light in Los Angeles near Sepulveda and Ventura, the 5 section tower on the mast arm has the red arrow pointing right, but the green arrow pointing left. I understand why this signal is how it is, but I haven't seen anything like it.

The right red arrow seems superfluous.  The no turn on red sign is very clearly posted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on January 20, 2014, 07:33:26 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 20, 2014, 06:21:04 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 06, 2014, 12:13:17 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=los+angeles&ll=34.152226,-118.465903&spn=0.000002,0.00066&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.152226,-118.466159&panoid=HcDTs1rN8boNcGXL4BhwsQ&cbp=12,7.46,,2,-5.33

While fiddling around with GSV, I found this interesting traffic light in Los Angeles near Sepulveda and Ventura, the 5 section tower on the mast arm has the red arrow pointing right, but the green arrow pointing left. I understand why this signal is how it is, but I haven't seen anything like it.

The right red arrow seems superfluous.  The no turn on red sign is very clearly posted.
Not necessarily.  That depends on how California defines red arrows (if they do at all, some states have no definition of what a red arrow means).  In some states, a red arrow is no different than a red ball; where turns are permittied against a red arrow.  In other states, a red arrow means you are not permittied to turn.  I don't know offhand where California stands in regards to red arrows (and no, I'm not going to bother looking it up).  For the record, I personally feel that a red arrow should mean that one isn't permitted to turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on January 20, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: signalman on January 20, 2014, 07:33:26 AM
Not necessarily.  That depends on how California defines red arrows (if they do at all, some states have no definition of what a red arrow means).
They do.  A red arrow means you're not permitted to turn until you get a green light or green arrow.

Before the advent of the red arrows, California used signals with red and yellow balls and a green arrow supplemented with a "LEFT OR U-TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" sign posted below the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Indyroads on January 20, 2014, 04:47:16 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on January 20, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: signalman on January 20, 2014, 07:33:26 AM
Not necessarily.  That depends on how California defines red arrows (if they do at all, some states have no definition of what a red arrow means).
They do.  A red arrow means you're not permitted to turn until you get a green light or green arrow.

Before the advent of the red arrows, California used signals with red and yellow balls and a green arrow supplemented with a "LEFT OR U-TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" sign posted below the signal.

Also before the advent of the red and yellow arrows on California roads Caltrans and City /County DOT's  used programmable signals (like the 3M programmable signals or louvers to prevent the wrong lane from seeing the signal face

quoting ~S
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on January 20, 2014, 05:32:04 PM
Here is an installation from back near my former residence in Ramona CA, it was installed around 1999 and I always thought, in this approach to be overkill.  Straight ahead is a private residential driveway, you only have 2 lanes, one going only right, one going only left.  The signal on the far left of the mast arm is just to indicate that you have full permitted left turning.

This is Warnock Road approaching San Vincente, 2/3 of the volume goes right after using the Dye/Warnock combination to bypass Ramona to get to the large San Diego Country Estates subdivision, about 4 miles to the right.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=ramona+ca&ll=33.014832,-116.866896&spn=0.00093,0.001321&hnear=Ramona,+San+Diego+County,+California&gl=us&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=33.014832,-116.866777&panoid=ji52PUWIszevfdSALrd03Q&cbp=12,112.53,,0,0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: FreewayDan on January 20, 2014, 10:21:33 PM
Quote from: Indyroads on January 20, 2014, 04:47:16 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on January 20, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: signalman on January 20, 2014, 07:33:26 AM
Not necessarily.  That depends on how California defines red arrows (if they do at all, some states have no definition of what a red arrow means).
They do.  A red arrow means you're not permitted to turn until you get a green light or green arrow.

Before the advent of the red arrows, California used signals with red and yellow balls and a green arrow supplemented with a "LEFT OR U-TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" sign posted below the signal.

Also before the advent of the red and yellow arrows on California roads Caltrans and City /County DOT's  used programmable signals (like the 3M programmable signals or louvers to prevent the wrong lane from seeing the signal face

quoting ~S

An example of left turn signals in West Covina, CA that use a 3M programmable signal at the end of the mast and a 8-8-12 louver signal at the corner:
http://goo.gl/maps/GnDfB

However, there's an intersection in Bay Point, CA, that uses a McCain programmable signal at the end of the mast and a louver signal at the corner (no red arrows there):
http://goo.gl/maps/Xj2ft
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2014, 04:53:47 PM
This is a new signal installation in Puyallup, Wash. Don't know exactly why there is a signal facing the wrong way. I wonder if it's permanent or some sort of transit signal. You would think if it was permanent they would make sure it doesn't block the street blade.

Also, Puyallup's first FYAs (they always used doghouses). FYI, the road is being widened to 5 lanes from 4: http://goo.gl/szgBfp.

They just built a massive warehouse due west of the signal. Puyallup and neighbouring Fife seem to be doing lots of work in preperation for the WA SR 167 extension: http://goo.gl/gxU6Cn

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8lcZfFI.jpg&hash=93a803e370f1e41d89a23e0d77fd930557c86ed0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NE2 on January 21, 2014, 04:56:00 PM
Quote from: jake on January 21, 2014, 04:53:47 PM
Puyallup and neighbouring Fife seem to be doing lots of work in preperation for the WA SR 167 extension: http://goo.gl/gxU6Cn
I'm confused. Why would you use the Goog as a URL shortener? It makes me think it's a link to Google Maps.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 21, 2014, 05:23:32 PM
^^ A signal like that is used where approaching traffic may not be able to see the main signals at design speed.  They are most common where there is a horizontal curve at or near the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2014, 05:42:14 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 21, 2014, 04:56:00 PM
Quote from: jake on January 21, 2014, 04:53:47 PM
Puyallup and neighbouring Fife seem to be doing lots of work in preperation for the WA SR 167 extension: http://goo.gl/gxU6Cn
I'm confused. Why would you use the Goog as a URL shortener? It makes me think it's a link to Google Maps.

I use Goo.gl because, as long as I'm logged in to my Google Account, I can keep track of my shortened links. That way in case they break (which I believe they do), I can repair it rather easily.

Quote from: Big John on January 21, 2014, 05:23:32 PM
^^ A signal like that is used where approaching traffic may not be able to see the main signals at design speed.  They are most common where there is a horizontal curve at or near the intersection.

:pan: I think you know my city better than me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 21, 2014, 06:31:16 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=los+angeles&ll=34.00362,-118.239155&spn=0.00206,0.002411&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=34.003716,-118.239163&panoid=MZ21LrAfDBwO_U7K9UBepA&cbp=12,13.15,,3,-5.19

Here's another one of California's Red Ball - Red Arrow traffic lights. This one is on Alameda Street in Los Angeles. There are about three altogether on Alameda between 41st and 55th Streets.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Joe The Dragon on January 26, 2014, 07:46:22 PM
very odd why not build that as a dual one way pair?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 26, 2014, 10:53:11 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on January 20, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: signalman on January 20, 2014, 07:33:26 AM
Not necessarily.  That depends on how California defines red arrows (if they do at all, some states have no definition of what a red arrow means).
They do.  A red arrow means you're not permitted to turn until you get a green light or green arrow.

Before the advent of the red arrows, California used signals with red and yellow balls and a green arrow supplemented with a "LEFT OR U-TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" sign posted below the signal.

As stated, the red right arrow indicates no right turn while the arrow is lit.  The no turn on red sign also indicates no turn on red.  Yet I'm still perplexed as to why both are signed.  It would be simpler to have a standard red-yellow-green with a no turn on red sign, why create a new light that is weird and would confuse most drivers and is probably not compliant with the MUTCD outside of California.

Is this a new standard in California?  I grew up in California, and while I was living there, (up until 12 years ago) I never saw a traffic signal like this.  The only thing that may make sense is to have a light that prohibits a right turn on red for part of the red through cycle*, but allows it for the other part of the red cycle.
Yet, I don't believe that the signal on Sepulveda is timed that way. 


* Imagine the following scenario (traffic signal timing) [Ignoring yellow light and all red phases]

1) N-S street has a green light.  E-W street has a red light.
2) N-S street has a red light.  E-W street has a red light.  E-W street shows a green arrow to allow left turns from E-W to N-S.  In California, you'd typically see a corresponding green right turn arrow from N-S to E-W provided that there is a right turn only lane and provided No U-turns are allowed on the E-W.  Let's assume that U-turns are allowed here.
3) E-W street has a green light.

Now let's say that we would like to permit a right turn from N-S to E-W during phase 2 (since the only possible conflict is with U-turns) but disallow the right turn during phase 3.  The only way I've seen currently that provides for this set-up are electronic "No turn on red signs" that light up during phase 3, but not during phase 2.  Perhaps this new signal has the red right arrow only lit up during phase 3, but not during phase 2, thereby allowing for a right turn during phase 2 but not during phase 3.  This would brilliantly solve the problem to allow the right turn during part of the phase, without having to wire a special sign, because the message of being allowed to turn is conveyed in the signal itself.

[Yet that can't be the case here because the No turn on red sign would still prohibit the turn during phase 2.]

If we had a similar light sequence, but U-turns were prohibited, the standard way of allowing for the right turn in phase 2, but prohibiting it in phase 3, would be to have a green right arrow during phase 2 only and a very clear "No turn on red sign."

For the light at Alameda and Vernon, part of the problem is having two parallel roads (Big Alameda and little Alameda) so close together.  I don't know the sequencing here, but perhaps they allow Big Alameda to go straight and right, while Little Alameda has a red, allow both Alamedas to go straight and disallow all turns, and then allow LIttle Alameda to go straight and right while Big Alameda had a red.  The red arrow might indicate when the right turn can't be made and may be lit during part of the green phase as well.

If anyone frequents these corners, please let us know the timing and let us know if our theories are off-base.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 26, 2014, 11:30:13 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on January 26, 2014, 07:46:22 PM
very odd why not build that as a dual one way pair?

In California, through many streets that follow railroad corridors, you'd see the railroad being placed in the median and a dual one way pair as you suggest.  (See Exposition Blvd near USC, for example).

In other corridors, you have a street that is up against a railroad on one side only.  See Valley Blvd in the City of Industry as an example of that.  In that case, you'd have minor streets that are south of the railroad end at Valley and minor streets north of the railroad end at a cul de sac.

In other corridors, you may have a situation similar to Valley Blvd, but instead of ending at cul-de-sacs, the streets to the north end at a minor street that is parallel to the railroad.  This minor street is typically not as wide as the major street and often is not continuous for more than a few blocks.  This minor street often has the same name as the big street on the other side of the railroad, because there are no addresses along the rail ROW.  The even numbers are south of the railroad on the main street and the odd numbers are north of the railroad on the minor street.  In many cases, they are nicknamed "Big San Fernando" or "Little San Fernando" to distinguish the streets.  You can see this along San Fernando Road in Sun Valley.  This is also the case along this stretch of Alameda.  There is an active railway that was recently undergrounded along this stretch (Alameda Corridor Project, express freight railway to the Harbor), but the street layout is similar to the way it was when the railroad was at grade.  Since little Alameda is much narrower than big Alameda, this is not a good place for a one-way pair, keep the majority of the traffic on big Alameda.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 03, 2014, 10:30:59 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hampstead+nc&ll=34.310459,-77.778116&spn=0.001026,0.001206&hnear=Hampstead,+Pender,+North+Carolina&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=34.310595,-77.777956&panoid=cW8iRCzh44I53XLu8Eazfg&cbp=12,170,,3,-5.26

Here is an interesting find in Wilmington, NC, a flashing yellow arrow signal with the arrow pointing up instead of the typical left. There are a couple more signals like this north of where US 17 bypasses Wilmington. I'm curious if those signals have the red arrow or the red ball.

Also, it is interesting to note that there are pole-mounted signals, which I have never seen in North Carolina.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 04, 2014, 10:04:45 AM
I noticed that just a block up, there is another odd-looking FYA intersection.  Would this be an "inverted" jug handle??

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hampstead+nc&ll=34.312007,-77.776152&spn=0.00138,0.00327&hnear=Hampstead,+Pender,+North+Carolina&t=h&z=19
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on February 04, 2014, 10:23:04 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 04, 2014, 10:04:45 AM
I noticed that just a block up, there is another odd-looking FYA intersection.  Would this be an "inverted" jug handle??

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hampstead+nc&ll=34.312007,-77.776152&spn=0.00138,0.00327&hnear=Hampstead,+Pender,+North+Carolina&t=h&z=19

More like a Michigan Left with extra room for large vehicles to turn.  https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.922838,-86.147967&spn=0.001133,0.002642&t=h&z=19
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 04, 2014, 11:00:11 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 03, 2014, 10:30:59 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hampstead+nc&ll=34.310459,-77.778116&spn=0.001026,0.001206&hnear=Hampstead,+Pender,+North+Carolina&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=34.310595,-77.777956&panoid=cW8iRCzh44I53XLu8Eazfg&cbp=12,170,,3,-5.26

Here is an interesting find in Wilmington, NC, a flashing yellow arrow signal with the arrow pointing up instead of the typical left. There are a couple more signals like this north of where US 17 bypasses Wilmington. I'm curious if those signals have the red arrow or the red ball.

Also, it is interesting to note that there are pole-mounted signals, which I have never seen in North Carolina.

When zoomed out, based on the position of the turn lane and traffic light, I see why the arrow is straight up. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 11, 2014, 05:23:59 PM
Here is an interesting traffic light setup in Darlington, SC

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=darlington+sc&ll=34.303721,-79.872031&spn=0.000513,0.000603&hnear=Darlington,+South+Carolina&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.303721,-79.872031&panoid=Re-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w&cbp=12,74.71,,2,-5.03
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on February 12, 2014, 09:52:44 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 11, 2014, 05:23:59 PM
Here is an interesting traffic light setup in Darlington, SC

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=darlington+sc&ll=34.303721,-79.872031&spn=0.000513,0.000603&hnear=Darlington,+South+Carolina&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.303721,-79.872031&panoid=Re-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w&cbp=12,74.71,,2,-5.03

What's up with the double reds on each signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex4897 on February 12, 2014, 03:25:09 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 12, 2014, 09:52:44 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 11, 2014, 05:23:59 PM
Here is an interesting traffic light setup in Darlington, SC

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=darlington+sc&ll=34.303721,-79.872031&spn=0.000513,0.000603&hnear=Darlington,+South+Carolina&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.303721,-79.872031&panoid=Re-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w&cbp=12,74.71,,2,-5.03

What's up with the double reds on each signal?

Emphasis?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 12, 2014, 04:32:48 PM
Quote from: Alex4897 on February 12, 2014, 03:25:09 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 12, 2014, 09:52:44 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 11, 2014, 05:23:59 PM
Here is an interesting traffic light setup in Darlington, SC

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=darlington+sc&ll=34.303721,-79.872031&spn=0.000513,0.000603&hnear=Darlington,+South+Carolina&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.303721,-79.872031&panoid=Re-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w&cbp=12,74.71,,2,-5.03

What's up with the double reds on each signal?

Emphasis?

Damn near same setup in Old Town, Tacoma, WA on Ruston Way @ McCarver:

Hard to tell because it's those ridiculous angled-signals but it has a double red setup. If emphasis is the issue, not quite sure why the emphasis. If you click the image it takes you to the street view, where you can see it's perpendicular to a level crossing (BNSF railway). Maybe that's the reason?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fsgw3yju.png&hash=9e48544d9108861775cfca8512a0904beb84c508) (http://goo.gl/Q3NO8S)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 12, 2014, 04:35:31 PM
Quote from: Alex4897 on February 12, 2014, 03:25:09 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 12, 2014, 09:52:44 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 11, 2014, 05:23:59 PM
Here is an interesting traffic light setup in Darlington, SC

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=darlington+sc&ll=34.303721,-79.872031&spn=0.000513,0.000603&hnear=Darlington,+South+Carolina&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.303721,-79.872031&panoid=Re-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w&cbp=12,74.71,,2,-5.03

What's up with the double reds on each signal?

Emphasis?

Well, in South Carolina, the state uses double-red left turn signals for all single-lane protected left turns. It looks like both lanes don't proceed at the same time at this intersection. A similar situation occurs at the light immediately next to this intersection, although those lights are 3-sections
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 13, 2014, 06:13:46 PM
Here is another interesting find in San Francisco at the intersection of Market Street and Eureka.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=1740+Cesar+Chavez+St,+San+Francisco,+San+Francisco+County,+California+94124&hl=en&ll=37.7618,-122.438359&spn=0.000491,0.000603&geocode=FR8GQAIdL2q0-A&hnear=1740+Cesar+Chavez+St,+San+Francisco,+San+Francisco+County,+California+94124&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=37.761711,-122.43835&panoid=EHv8GQdILZJlCZmTsobWGA&cbp=12,325.02,,3,-1.11
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 20, 2014, 07:29:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ontario,+CA/@34.06861,-117.593237,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sBe2JHavR_GPTV5ZoHCZfeg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c334dbeadd627b:0x703e35af9583190  An interesting signal assembly on Archibald Avenue at the I-10 SPUI in Ontario, CA.  I thought I would share this as for CA this is a rarity to not have the typical Caltrans mast arms, but I guess because this is a Single Point Urban Interchange to be able to mount the signal heads they had to do something completely different.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 20, 2014, 10:44:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 20, 2014, 07:29:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ontario,+CA/@34.06861,-117.593237,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sBe2JHavR_GPTV5ZoHCZfeg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c334dbeadd627b:0x703e35af9583190  An interesting signal assembly on Archibald Avenue at the I-10 SPUI in Ontario, CA.  I thought I would share this as for CA this is a rarity to not have the typical Caltrans mast arms, but I guess because this is a Single Point Urban Interchange to be able to mount the signal heads they had to do something completely different.

I find that interchange most interesting because of the massive distance between the 10 East to Archibald South exit slip lane and the SPUI interchange. Seems like a second set of stop lines might be in order for traffic going south on Archibald, like when the 215 North meets Eucalyptus near March: http://goo.gl/IRrKcL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on February 21, 2014, 08:50:28 AM
http://goo.gl/maps/D8Gao

Here's a more interesting California traffic light assembly for a SPUI.  Also, the sign gantries leading up to the intersection are through Warren Trusses on Taylor St.  Conventional Caltrans sign bridges are Pratt trusses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on February 23, 2014, 03:01:27 PM
Quote from: jake on February 20, 2014, 10:44:20 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 20, 2014, 07:29:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ontario,+CA/@34.06861,-117.593237,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sBe2JHavR_GPTV5ZoHCZfeg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c334dbeadd627b:0x703e35af9583190  An interesting signal assembly on Archibald Avenue at the I-10 SPUI in Ontario, CA.  I thought I would share this as for CA this is a rarity to not have the typical Caltrans mast arms, but I guess because this is a Single Point Urban Interchange to be able to mount the signal heads they had to do something completely different.

I find that interchange most interesting because of the massive distance between the 10 East to Archibald South exit slip lane and the SPUI interchange. Seems like a second set of stop lines might be in order for traffic going south on Archibald, like when the 215 North meets Eucalyptus near March: http://goo.gl/IRrKcL

What I really like about this interchange is at the southbound Archibald onramp to the 10 west, there is a traffic signal with pedestrian crossing lights.  Too many times on ramps like these, drivers speed up and it is very dangerous to cross at the crosswalk.  It shows that Caltrans took pedestrian safety into account.

Are there many pedestrians crossing here?  Not really relevant, because usually there's safety in numbers and the more dangerous crosswalks are for those who cross where peds are unexpected, even if legal.

I'd like to see this at the Harbor Blvd on-ramps to I-5 near Disneyland.  There are a lot of pedestrians who walk from Disneyland to the cheaper hotels north of Ball.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 04, 2014, 11:06:42 PM
Liberty Av. and 126th St. as it was in the early 2000s. Queens, New York.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F530582_485507554813390_1465355565_n_zpsb55b7c6b.jpg&hash=78786d46521213e494ea14003ee3a0a37c26e94f)

At that time, many two-section (red and green) traffic signals were still in useful service in some parts of solely Queens, such as the Rockaways, Richmond Hill, and Ozone Park. I remember these well.

In the 2000s, as time progressed, two-section traffic signals continued to dwindle, and the last survivors in the borough were finally removed from service sometime in 2007. Both on Shore Front Pkwy. in the Rockaways and Liberty Avenue (at 114th St. as I recall) under the el segment.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 06, 2014, 12:29:11 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.737936,-95.460748,3a,75y,180h,93.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sTJSpYqT1JRmHLx6S222Alw!2e0 Has anyone seen signal backplates like these before?

I must admit that they are quite weird.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 06, 2014, 02:31:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2014, 12:29:11 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.737936,-95.460748,3a,75y,180h,93.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sTJSpYqT1JRmHLx6S222Alw!2e0 Has anyone seen signal backplates like these before?

I must admit that they are quite weird.

I think they look pretty cool! Definitely not standard (not to my limited knowledge) but still pretty awesome.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 06, 2014, 03:36:55 PM
The backplates on the actual signals is okay...It's the backplates on the crosswalk signals that are fugly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 06, 2014, 06:24:28 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2014, 12:29:11 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.737936,-95.460748,3a,75y,180h,93.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sTJSpYqT1JRmHLx6S222Alw!2e0 Has anyone seen signal backplates like these before?

I must admit that they are quite weird.

They're kinda shaped like bananas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on March 06, 2014, 07:26:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2014, 12:29:11 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.737936,-95.460748,3a,75y,180h,93.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sTJSpYqT1JRmHLx6S222Alw!2e0 Has anyone seen signal backplates like these before?

I must admit that they are quite weird.

They're trying too hard with those streetlights.  If you look closely, you can see it's just a shell with a standard cobrahead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: xcellntbuy on March 07, 2014, 05:27:05 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on March 04, 2014, 11:06:42 PM
Liberty Av. and 126th St. as it was in the early 2000s. Queens, New York.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F530582_485507554813390_1465355565_n_zpsb55b7c6b.jpg&hash=78786d46521213e494ea14003ee3a0a37c26e94f)

At that time, many two-section (red and green) traffic signals were still in useful service in some parts of solely Queens, such as the Rockaways, Richmond Hill, and Ozone Park. I remember these well.

In the 2000s, as time progressed, two-section traffic signals continued to dwindle, and the last survivors in the borough were finally removed from service sometime in 2007. Both on Shore Front Pkwy. in the Rockaways and Liberty Avenue (at 114th St. as I recall) under the el segment.
Wow.  Those old 2-light signals lasted a long, long time.  My first encounter with 2-signal lights in New York was along the roadway that weaved under and outside of the condemned West Side Highway in 1978 before all of it was finally demolished.  West Street in those days was quite a ride.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on April 08, 2014, 06:14:01 PM
New traffic lights in Myrtle Beach, SC, at the intersection of 29th Ave N. @ Grissom Pkwy

The City of Myrtle Beach has been swapping out their older traffic lights with these new black traffic signals. Although, the black backplates are uncommon. The intersection of Grissom Pkwy and Pine Island Rd have been replaced with these signals too.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi271.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj153%2FPColumbus611%2FImage040820141652581_zpsd13ac070.jpg&hash=f577a36c82e0210eb7d7a2bb1dc1e1335ba120b9)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi271.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj153%2FPColumbus611%2F7c21431b-96f1-44ce-b79a-18f2837f26a1_zpsf4f197a5.jpg&hash=a733b28cd2ea9c873b54d7326bf892745128621f)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi271.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj153%2FPColumbus611%2Fe930c8fb-04c4-473f-8c60-308b27c5ff63_zpsb28b51c6.jpg&hash=31bd4dc2f23f457b8bd19c1987d6e3a314ddd292)

Here is the GSV of an intersection with the older traffic lights.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=myrtle+beach&ie=UTF-8&ei=wXNEU6itLMTLsAS41oAI&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BamaZeus on April 13, 2014, 07:49:39 PM
SIAP, but this photo of Times Square in 1943 came across my Twitter feed just now (Historical Pics), featuring a color snapshot of a 2-color signal, and a classic One Way sign

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BlIxPmrIQAE4ZBJ.jpg)

https://twitter.com/HistoricalPics/status/455480656701964288/photo/1




Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 13, 2014, 08:09:21 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on April 08, 2014, 06:14:01 PM
Here is the GSV of an intersection with the older traffic lights.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=myrtle+beach&ie=UTF-8&ei=wXNEU6itLMTLsAS41oAI&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAg

Columbus, you need to remove your search query before you copy/paste the link; when that link is clicked, it just takes a person to the map of Myrtle Beach. It doesn't even load GSV.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on April 15, 2014, 08:56:47 PM
Sorry, thought I did.

Here is a fixed GSV

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.711074,-78.882085&spn=0.000514,0.000603&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=33.711035,-78.88204&panoid=KF5a4ZWq_KJPUUBtQW0pEw&cbp=12,347.97,,0,-26.68
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 22, 2014, 01:56:02 AM
Rather strange setup near at I-75 & FL 326 near Ocala:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FExsWGkA.png&hash=249ec317f122d7f641a718dc1c2802dbb46647af)

A right turn that is controlled by both an arrow and a yield sign...what?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 23, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
^ Permanent yield or stop control should not be used at signalized approaches. I believe that is a new standard added in the most recent MUTCD.

In this case, the correct action would likely be to remove the yield sign/line and also change the red arrows to circular reds to allow RTOR.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: amroad17 on April 23, 2014, 07:49:32 PM
There are some "different" looking traffic signals on OH 4 Bypass around Hamilton, OH.  I had not been on that stretch of highway for over six years when it was mostly a two-lane road.  On Easter Sunday, I traveled the stretch between the OH 129 freeway and OH 4 in Fairfield.  I was in for a surprise.  The road now is a four- to six-lane highway.  At the traffic light intersections, the lights were on what could be equated to a long sign bridge spanning the highway in a SW quadrant to a NE quadrant. It was a rather impressive sight to see.  Unfortunately, I did not take any photos.  These intersections also had "Michigan Lefts" north and south of each intersection--mainly for the side roads as you could make a left turn from OH 4 Bypass.

If one of our members is around that area sometime in the near future, could you take and post photos of these traffic lights?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on April 23, 2014, 09:41:48 PM
Quote from: jake on April 22, 2014, 01:56:02 AM
Rather strange setup near at I-75 & FL 326 near Ocala:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FExsWGkA.png&hash=249ec317f122d7f641a718dc1c2802dbb46647af)

A right turn that is controlled by both an arrow and a yield sign...what?

There's a similar situation to that in Beaver Dam, WI (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=43.485855,-88.810151&spn=0.000016,0.013937&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=43.485938,-88.810102&panoid=I7RrgaH-mE23nYNA_8-P5A&cbp=12,217.37,,0,9.56). Been like that for years...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 23, 2014, 10:49:02 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on April 23, 2014, 07:49:32 PM
There are some "different" looking traffic signals on OH 4 Bypass around Hamilton, OH.  I had not been on that stretch of highway for over six years when it was mostly a two-lane road.  On Easter Sunday, I traveled the stretch between the OH 129 freeway and OH 4 in Fairfield.  I was in for a surprise.  The road now is a four- to six-lane highway.  At the traffic light intersections, the lights were on what could be equated to a long sign bridge spanning the highway in a SW quadrant to a NE quadrant. It was a rather impressive sight to see.  Unfortunately, I did not take any photos.  These intersections also had "Michigan Lefts" north and south of each intersection--mainly for the side roads as you could make a left turn from OH 4 Bypass.

If one of our members is around that area sometime in the near future, could you take and post photos of these traffic lights?
Similar to Dubuque IA: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.491845,-90.665015,3a,75y,341.26h,89.09t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJ_TxPdaOvFdzCj2HmW4V9A!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: amroad17 on April 24, 2014, 12:40:56 PM
Yes.  Also, looking at streetview, one cannot directly cross the intersections from the side roads.  You have to make a right turn, then a U-turn left, then another right to continue straight on the road you were on.  North of the OH 129 freeway, OH 4 Bypass is divided until north of Princeton Road, then becomes a two-lane road until its end at OH 4.  The Princeton Road intersection is traditional--not like the ones south of the OH 129 freeway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 23, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
^ Permanent yield or stop control should not be used at signalized approaches. I believe that is a new standard added in the most recent MUTCD.

In this case, the correct action would likely be to remove the yield sign/line and also change the red arrows to circular reds to allow RTOR.

Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.  Either the yield sign and yield line should be removed (a la Illinois), or the signal heads should be removed (a la Indiana and Missouri).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 23, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
^ Permanent yield or stop control should not be used at signalized approaches. I believe that is a new standard added in the most recent MUTCD.

In this case, the correct action would likely be to remove the yield sign/line and also change the red arrows to circular reds to allow RTOR.

Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.  Either the yield sign and yield line should be removed (a la Illinois), or the signal heads should be removed (a la Indiana and Missouri).
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 24, 2014, 10:11:19 PM
Different laws in different states. In New York State, red-ball permits right-on-red unless prohibited by sign. On red-arrow, right-on-red is always prohibited. New York City does not permit any right-on-red except where permitted by sign. And so it goes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 26, 2014, 02:21:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 23, 2014, 01:03:46 AM
^ Permanent yield or stop control should not be used at signalized approaches. I believe that is a new standard added in the most recent MUTCD.

In this case, the correct action would likely be to remove the yield sign/line and also change the red arrows to circular reds to allow RTOR.

Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.  Either the yield sign and yield line should be removed (a la Illinois), or the signal heads should be removed (a la Indiana and Missouri).

From a purely signal design standpoint (not looking at various state laws), the red arrow indicates a turn prohibition. If right turn on red is to be allowed, the better signal design decision is to use a circular red.

I've not understood why states don't make a distinction as far as this is concerned. Allowing RTOR with a red arrow seems counter intuitive to me...and I can't think of a reason why you'd use an RT arrow signal and allow RTOR if the turn wasn't protected for some reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.

Quote from: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.

If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

I'm thinking there needs to be some kind of consistency about the meaning of red arrows.  For example, if I'm visiting Florida and I see a red right arrow, I'm not turning until I see a green signal of some sort potentially pissing off a local which could lead to a road rage incident.

Before the advent of red arrows, left turn signals in California typically were comprised of a red ball, yellow ball and a green arrow but these signals were also accompanied by a sign that read "LEFT (OR U-TURN) ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" to indicate that a left turn on a red ball is not allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on April 26, 2014, 02:54:31 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.

Quote from: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.

If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

I'm thinking there needs to be some kind of consistency about the meaning of red arrows.  For example, if I'm visiting Florida and I see a red right arrow, I'm not turning until I see a green signal of some sort potentially pissing off a local which could lead to a road rage incident.

Before the advent of red arrows, left turn signals in California typically were comprised of a red ball, yellow ball and a green arrow but these signals were also accompanied by a sign that read "LEFT (OR U-TURN) ON GREEN ARROW ONLY" to indicate that a left turn on a red ball is not allowed.
I know what you mean and I agree completely with you.  I was just pointing out that there is no distinction between the two in Florida.
If I were the one spelling out the specifications for that signal installation, I'd have used a red ball, not a red arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: realjd on April 27, 2014, 12:18:20 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Many states use a red ball for left turns. How is allowing right turns on a red arrow and prohibiting left turns on a left arrow any more or less confusing than allowing RTOR on a red ball but prohibiting left turns on a red ball? People figure it out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 27, 2014, 12:51:51 AM
Quote from: realjd on April 27, 2014, 12:18:20 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Many states use a red ball for left turns. How is allowing right turns on a red arrow and prohibiting left turns on a left arrow any more or less confusing than allowing RTOR on a red ball but prohibiting left turns on a red ball? People figure it out.

Well, I guess Washington/Oregon/British Columbia's approach of allowing left turn turn on red onto a one way street and right on red ball/arrow the least confusing and therefore most logical setup. In Washington, this left turn on red setup even includes freeway ramps. The least amount of prohibition, it would seem, the better. Of course, pure understanding of such loose laws is the elephant in the room for these states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on April 27, 2014, 02:55:13 AM
Honestly, you just have to understand the theory.  You should be able to turn against red (after a full stop) if you don't have to cross a lane of opposing traffic (whether that's on your road or the perpendicular road).  Basically, you can turn against red if you're hugging the curb.

Ergo, both streets must be one way
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Pete from Boston on April 27, 2014, 09:55:06 AM

Quote from: KEK Inc. on April 27, 2014, 02:55:13 AM
Honestly, you just have to understand the theory.  You should be able to turn against red (after a full stop) if you don't have to cross a lane of opposing traffic (whether that's on your road or the perpendicular road).  Basically, you can turn against red if you're hugging the curb.

Ergo, both streets must be one way

Most states allow it on one-way to one-way:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_turn_on_red#Left_turn_on_red

What surprises me is that some allow it from two-way streets.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr_Northside on April 27, 2014, 01:07:23 PM
Quote from: realjd on April 27, 2014, 12:18:20 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Many states use a red ball for left turns. How is allowing right turns on a red arrow and prohibiting left turns on a left arrow any more or less confusing than allowing RTOR on a red ball but prohibiting left turns on a red ball? People figure it out.

As pointed out above, in the vast majority of situations, in most states, if it's not one-way to one-way, a left turn on a solid red anything is prohibited.  Whether it is an arrow or "ball" is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kacie Jane on April 27, 2014, 01:14:26 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on April 27, 2014, 01:07:23 PM
Quote from: realjd on April 27, 2014, 12:18:20 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Many states use a red ball for left turns. How is allowing right turns on a red arrow and prohibiting left turns on a left arrow any more or less confusing than allowing RTOR on a red ball but prohibiting left turns on a red ball? People figure it out.

As pointed out above, in the vast majority of situations, in most states, if it's not one-way to one-way, a left turn on a solid red anything is prohibited.  Whether it is an arrow or "ball" is irrelevant.

Exactly. And in many states, a right turn on red anything after stopping is permitted. Whether it is an arrow or a ball is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 27, 2014, 02:28:44 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 27, 2014, 01:14:26 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on April 27, 2014, 01:07:23 PM
Quote from: realjd on April 27, 2014, 12:18:20 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Many states use a red ball for left turns. How is allowing right turns on a red arrow and prohibiting left turns on a left arrow any more or less confusing than allowing RTOR on a red ball but prohibiting left turns on a red ball? People figure it out.

As pointed out above, in the vast majority of situations, in most states, if it's not one-way to one-way, a left turn on a solid red anything is prohibited.  Whether it is an arrow or "ball" is irrelevant.

Exactly. And in many states, a right turn on red anything after stopping is permitted. Whether it is an arrow or a ball is irrelevant.

AND a left turn from a two way to a one way on red arrow or red ball is also allowed (in some states).

I think we are going in circles?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on April 27, 2014, 02:56:13 PM
I have always treated Right Red Arrow signals simply as RTOR permitted, unless there is an accompanying sign which states either NO TURN ON RED or RIGHT TURN SIGNAL.  I have never seen a YIELD sign at a signaled intersection.


I do have one intersection in our town where most traffic turns left from a OWS to a OWS.  Problem is, since this scenario is such a rarity in Western Colorado, the city does not put a helpful sign saying that you either CAN or CAN'T turn left on red (it is legal in CO).   So each time I come up to said intersection behind someone, I never know if I will have to wait for the green light or if the person(s) ahead of me will do a LTOR. 

These are probably the same morons who will come to a complete stop in a right turn lane, even if the light is displaying a green turn arrow (and there are more of them than you think out here)! :no:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on April 29, 2014, 01:52:36 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.

Quote from: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.

If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Technically, yes in Illinois.  The signal must have a sign stating along the lines of "LEFT TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".  Otherwise, there is nothing stopping you from turning left on the red arrow or red ball (which usually have the "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs next to them).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 29, 2014, 01:52:36 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.

Quote from: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.

If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Technically, yes in Illinois.  The signal must have a sign stating along the lines of "LEFT TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".  Otherwise, there is nothing stopping you from turning left on the red arrow or red ball (which usually have the "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs next to them).

But if it's a 2 way road to a 2 way road, it doesn't matter because left turns on red would be illegal anyway.  And I'm not sure how often a red arrow would pop up on a one way to one way road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on April 30, 2014, 09:34:31 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 29, 2014, 01:52:36 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 26, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2014, 01:32:28 PM
Why would changing the arrow to a ball make any difference in RTOR?  In this state (Illinois), they mean the same thing, and a "NO TURN ON RED" sign is required.

Quote from: signalman on April 24, 2014, 05:00:52 PM
In Florida a red arrow and red ball also mean the same thing.  So, a decision has to be made...either remove the signals or remove the yield sign and line.

If right turns on red arrows are permitted, are left turns on red arrows also permitted?  I'm trying to show how confusing it might be to drivers if red arrows have different meanings based purely on the direction the arrow is pointing.

Technically, yes in Illinois.  The signal must have a sign stating along the lines of "LEFT TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".  Otherwise, there is nothing stopping you from turning left on the red arrow or red ball (which usually have the "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs next to them).

But if it's a 2 way road to a 2 way road, it doesn't matter because left turns on red would be illegal anyway.  And I'm not sure how often a red arrow would pop up on a one way to one way road.

Not quite.  It still would require either of the two above-mentioned signs.  Otherwise, it can be treated as a permissive left when the through lanes are green.  That's why every protective-only left signal in the state has that signage.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 30, 2014, 04:00:34 PM
Two way-to-two way protected right turn, near Lakewood, Washington. I suppose it works just fine, but A) I don't understand the point, and B) It's only time I've ever encountered such a light in the Seattle area. I would think, if pedestrians are an issue, a right turn FYA might work. I guess they've had a few run-ins with pedestrians and don't trust the cars to yield to them anymore.

As we've already covered in the last 10-20 posts, Washington (along with many other states) does allow right on a red arrow, so you can still go (after a stop) even if it's red.

Google Maps (http://goo.gl/y03H6C)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgeODcZh.png&hash=9817ec463863ddb399642ef64ed59525e717e806)

ALSO,

A two lane-left turn FYA in the Seattle area. Like the last signal, pretty much unheard of around these parts.

6th Ave & James (http://goo.gl/Up76lJ)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyIEjax6.png&hash=2f4cd54c7d1ca10e40a6fd4c70b3624ad3e0f45a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on May 01, 2014, 12:18:57 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
But if it's a 2 way road to a 2 way road, it doesn't matter because left turns on red would be illegal anyway.  And I'm not sure how often a red arrow would pop up on a one way to one way road.

It does happen:

Pratt St and Light St
(Google for some reason doesn't have a good streetview, so I found this blurry picture)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.s3-media.wbal.com%2FMedia%2FArchive%2Fa46799b5-2002-47b7-8bf9-ab5166812406%2Fthumb-400.jpg&hash=424ea89d9f4cfe5bbcc0d89346ef6f1f7b5e44fc)

A much better one at Lombard and Light Sts:

http://goo.gl/maps/IaaSL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on May 01, 2014, 02:30:44 AM
I like the double red arrow, is that a new standard for Maryland?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 01, 2014, 02:43:19 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on May 01, 2014, 12:18:57 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
But if it's a 2 way road to a 2 way road, it doesn't matter because left turns on red would be illegal anyway.  And I'm not sure how often a red arrow would pop up on a one way to one way road.

It does happen:

Pratt St and Light St
(Google for some reason doesn't have a good streetview, so I found this blurry picture)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.s3-media.wbal.com%2FMedia%2FArchive%2Fa46799b5-2002-47b7-8bf9-ab5166812406%2Fthumb-400.jpg&hash=424ea89d9f4cfe5bbcc0d89346ef6f1f7b5e44fc)

A much better one at Lombard and Light Sts:

http://goo.gl/maps/IaaSL

Isn't that an improper use of traffic lights though?  The 2nd lane could be used for left or straight traffic, but yet has conflicting signals (red left turn, green thru).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on May 01, 2014, 07:10:30 PM
Quote from: jake on April 30, 2014, 04:00:34 PM
[size=78%]As we've already covered in the last 10-20 posts, Washington (along with many other states) does allow right on a red arrow, so you can still go (after a stop) even if it's red.[/size]


Well, I know that is true for Bicyclists and Motorcyclists when they don't trigger the sensors (aka Dead Red), and true for turning onto a one-way street (traveling left) from a two-way street (including freeway onramps), but is that true from traditional two-way to two-way streets/roads?  And if so, could we find the RCW, I'd like to have it in my information?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on May 02, 2014, 12:53:43 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on May 01, 2014, 02:30:44 AM
I like the double red arrow, is that a new standard for Maryland?

We've had it for a while actually. I don't know when it was introduced though, to be honest.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 01, 2014, 02:43:19 PM
Isn't that an improper use of traffic lights though?  The 2nd lane could be used for left or straight traffic, but yet has conflicting signals (red left turn, green thru).

The left turn signal is merely to stop traffic from running over pedestrians during their walk phase. I would have to agree with you though, but I suppose this was their only solution.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 16, 2014, 01:41:17 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on May 02, 2014, 12:53:43 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on May 01, 2014, 02:30:44 AM
I like the double red arrow, is that a new standard for Maryland?

We've had it for a while actually. I don't know when it was introduced though, to be honest.

I believe that the source for this might be some state laws that require two signal faces at every intersection, in case a light bulb burns out.  In California, where there is a protected left turn signal, you'd see a minimum of 2 regular signal faces and 2 left turn signal faces (one on the mast arm and one on the left corner) in one direction.

In other states, they may require 2 faces for the regular signal but only 1 face for the left turn arrow.  So if the left arrow light bulb burns out, you just miss your opportunity to turn.  I believe MD may require 2 faces for the  red turn arrow only.  This can be accomplished by making 2 left turn RYG faces, or as Baltimore does RA,RA,YA,GA.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 01, 2014, 02:43:19 PM
Isn't that an improper use of traffic lights though?  The 2nd lane could be used for left or straight traffic, but yet has conflicting signals (red left turn, green thru).

The left turn signal is merely to stop traffic from running over pedestrians during their walk phase. I would have to agree with you though, but I suppose this was their only solution.
[/quote]

It's essentially a LPI, but still allowing non-turning traffic the full green time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 22, 2014, 01:39:33 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 16, 2014, 01:41:17 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on May 02, 2014, 12:53:43 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on May 01, 2014, 02:30:44 AM
I like the double red arrow, is that a new standard for Maryland?

We've had it for a while actually. I don't know when it was introduced though, to be honest.

I believe that the source for this might be some state laws that require two signal faces at every intersection, in case a light bulb burns out.  In California, where there is a protected left turn signal, you'd see a minimum of 2 regular signal faces and 2 left turn signal faces (one on the mast arm and one on the left corner) in one direction.

In other states, they may require 2 faces for the regular signal but only 1 face for the left turn arrow.  So if the left arrow light bulb burns out, you just miss your opportunity to turn.  I believe MD may require 2 faces for the  red turn arrow only.  This can be accomplished by making 2 left turn RYG faces, or as Baltimore does RA,RA,YA,GA.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 01, 2014, 02:43:19 PM
Isn't that an improper use of traffic lights though?  The 2nd lane could be used for left or straight traffic, but yet has conflicting signals (red left turn, green thru).

The left turn signal is merely to stop traffic from running over pedestrians during their walk phase. I would have to agree with you though, but I suppose this was their only solution.

It's essentially a LPI, but still allowing non-turning traffic the full green time.
[/quote]


Sorry to quote myself, but I've found some more information on another traffic light that has a similar set up, but the traffic light looks different, the Los Angeles red ball- red arrow light:

See the following GSV:  http://goo.gl/maps/L4ld9

OK, 9th (aka James Wood Blvd) is one-way eastbound and Figueroa is one way northbound.  On the right side of the view of the intersection approaching along 9th street, you see two tradional RYG signals.  On the left side, you have red ball-red left arrow-yellow ball-green ball.

1) While Figueroa has the green, 9th sees red ball and red arrow.
2) When Figueroa has the red, 9th sees a green ball, red arrow, and a WALK signal.
3) A few seconds later, 9th sees a green ball, and a WALK signal.

THere's also a sign at the corner, no left turn on red arrow.

Here is another example of a lead pedestrian interval (LPI), where the thru green time is maximized.  To at least partially protect pedestrian from turning cars, turning cars are prohibited from turning for the first few seconds of green, then a few seconds later, the left turners are allowed to turn, while yielding to pedestrians.  There is no protected left turn, hence no green arrow.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 22, 2014, 02:30:55 PM
On a different matter, one block away from my previous post, you see this:

http://goo.gl/maps/4vuEq

Figueroa is one-way northbound and 8th Street is one-way westbound.  In the picture, you're facing north and you can clearly see that 8th street is one-way to the left.  Yet, on the right side of the signal, below the 8th St sign, is a five aspect signal face. 

Now most of the time when you see a five aspect signal face, the bottom two signals are for green arrow and yellow arrow.  Yet, those cannot be for turning left, as they are on the right side of the street.  And they cannot be for turning right, as 8th Street goes the other way.

The only possiblity that I can think of is that those bottom two indications are somehow related to the bus lane that is in effect during rush hours and provides some type of queue jump for the buses.  But if there's anybody who's familiar with this signal and has some insight, I'd be happy to find out more.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 24, 2014, 04:20:26 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 22, 2014, 01:39:33 PM
See the following GSV:  http://goo.gl/maps/L4ld9

OK, 9th (aka James Wood Blvd) is one-way eastbound and Figueroa is one way northbound.  On the right side of the view of the intersection approaching along 9th street, you see two tradional RYG signals.  On the left side, you have red ball-red left arrow-yellow ball-green ball.

1) While Figueroa has the green, 9th sees red ball and red arrow.
2) When Figueroa has the red, 9th sees a green ball, red arrow, and a WALK signal.
3) A few seconds later, 9th sees a green ball, and a WALK signal.

THere's also a sign at the corner, no left turn on red arrow.

Here is another example of a lead pedestrian interval (LPI), where the thru green time is maximized.  To at least partially protect pedestrian from turning cars, turning cars are prohibited from turning for the first few seconds of green, then a few seconds later, the left turners are allowed to turn, while yielding to pedestrians.  There is no protected left turn, hence no green arrow.

Surprisingly, the combination of red arrow and circular green in one face is not one specifically prohibited in the MUTCD... However, I don't think the MUTCD folks would have dreamt of this kind of application. If there weren't a sign, I'd be slightly confused.

The proper design, if constructed today, would be to use a typical 3-section head and have a separate light up/blank out no left turn sign during the LPI.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on July 21, 2014, 02:20:46 PM
I wasn't sure where to put this signal, so I'm just dumping it here. On my trip to The Woodlands, Texas (near Houston), I found this signal:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1101.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg431%2Fwisvishr0%2FScreenShot2014-07-21at11529PM.png%3Ft%3D1405966699&hash=63629f02b4782a6bc60b805b430c57f0f73f8f58)

Instead of using a four-head signal like we use in MD, (here: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.057231,-77.161214,3a,18y,273.87h,88.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1srZNrC0f5XioFYkpACysVSw!2e0!6m1!1e1), they decided to omit the green arrow and just include the sign, "Protected left on green orb."

Is that even acceptable in MUTCD? The entire town of The Woodlands is privately owned, I believe, so they use their own signs (some of their practices really irk me, like the lack of "4-way" or "All-way" signs under stop signs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on July 21, 2014, 10:17:30 PM
Yikes.  I wouldn't count on non-roadgeeks to know a "protected left" from a "permitted left" and the configuration shown might even give people a misconception that a green ball means a protected left all the time--a possibly deadly misunderstanding.  What the hell are they doing there?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 22, 2014, 09:55:12 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 30, 2014, 09:34:31 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2014, 05:55:14 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 29, 2014, 01:52:36 PM
Technically, yes in Illinois.  The signal must have a sign stating along the lines of "LEFT TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".  Otherwise, there is nothing stopping you from turning left on the red arrow or red ball (which usually have the "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs next to them).

But if it's a 2 way road to a 2 way road, it doesn't matter because left turns on red would be illegal anyway.  And I'm not sure how often a red arrow would pop up on a one way to one way road.

Not quite.  It still would require either of the two above-mentioned signs.  Otherwise, it can be treated as a permissive left when the through lanes are green.  That's why every protective-only left signal in the state has that signage.

I'm not quite seeing that in the Illinois Statutes (Link (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=062500050HCh.+11+Art.+III&ActID=1815&ChapterID=49&SeqStart=111800000&SeqEnd=113300000))

Quote from: Illinois Codified Statutes2. Except as provided in paragraphs 3 and 3.5 of this subsection (c), vehicular traffic facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if there is no such stop line, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if there is no such crosswalk, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain standing until an indication permitting the movement indicated by such red arrow is shown.

3. Except when a sign is in place prohibiting a turn and local authorities by ordinance or State authorities by rule or regulation prohibit any such turn, vehicular traffic facing any steady red signal may cautiously enter the intersection to turn right, or to turn left from a one-way street into a one-way street, after stopping as required by paragraph 1 or paragraph 2 of this subsection.

Quote from: roadfro on June 24, 2014, 04:20:26 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 22, 2014, 01:39:33 PM
See the following GSV:  http://goo.gl/maps/L4ld9

OK, 9th (aka James Wood Blvd) is one-way eastbound and Figueroa is one way northbound.  On the right side of the view of the intersection approaching along 9th street, you see two tradional RYG signals.  On the left side, you have red ball-red left arrow-yellow ball-green ball.

1) While Figueroa has the green, 9th sees red ball and red arrow.
2) When Figueroa has the red, 9th sees a green ball, red arrow, and a WALK signal.
3) A few seconds later, 9th sees a green ball, and a WALK signal.

THere's also a sign at the corner, no left turn on red arrow.

Here is another example of a lead pedestrian interval (LPI), where the thru green time is maximized.  To at least partially protect pedestrian from turning cars, turning cars are prohibited from turning for the first few seconds of green, then a few seconds later, the left turners are allowed to turn, while yielding to pedestrians.  There is no protected left turn, hence no green arrow.

Surprisingly, the combination of red arrow and circular green in one face is not one specifically prohibited in the MUTCD... However, I don't think the MUTCD folks would have dreamt of this kind of application. If there weren't a sign, I'd be slightly confused.

The proper design, if constructed today, would be to use a typical 3-section head and have a separate light up/blank out no left turn sign during the LPI.

I think the design shown in streetview runs afoul of the intent of the 2009 MUTCD's prohibition against having protected only left turns with shared lanes that run at different times than the adjoining through movement (Section 4D.17 Paragraph 06).  The shared lane has a decent risk of a driver going straight rear ending another driving waiting for the red arrow to disappear.

Ideally today, there would only be dedicated left turn lanes and a flashing yellow arrow would be used for the permissive phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 25, 2014, 02:59:47 PM

Quote from: roadfro on June 24, 2014, 04:20:26 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 22, 2014, 01:39:33 PM
See the following GSV:  http://goo.gl/maps/L4ld9

OK, 9th (aka James Wood Blvd) is one-way eastbound and Figueroa is one way northbound.  On the right side of the view of the intersection approaching along 9th street, you see two tradional RYG signals.  On the left side, you have red ball-red left arrow-yellow ball-green ball.

1) While Figueroa has the green, 9th sees red ball and red arrow.
2) When Figueroa has the red, 9th sees a green ball, red arrow, and a WALK signal.
3) A few seconds later, 9th sees a green ball, and a WALK signal.

THere's also a sign at the corner, no left turn on red arrow.

Here is another example of a lead pedestrian interval (LPI), where the thru green time is maximized.  To at least partially protect pedestrian from turning cars, turning cars are prohibited from turning for the first few seconds of green, then a few seconds later, the left turners are allowed to turn, while yielding to pedestrians.  There is no protected left turn, hence no green arrow.

Surprisingly, the combination of red arrow and circular green in one face is not one specifically prohibited in the MUTCD... However, I don't think the MUTCD folks would have dreamt of this kind of application. If there weren't a sign, I'd be slightly confused.

The proper design, if constructed today, would be to use a typical 3-section head and have a separate light up/blank out no left turn sign during the LPI.

I think the design shown in streetview runs afoul of the intent of the 2009 MUTCD's prohibition against having protected only left turns with shared lanes that run at different times than the adjoining through movement (Section 4D.17 Paragraph 06).  The shared lane has a decent risk of a driver going straight rear ending another driving waiting for the red arrow to disappear.

Ideally today, there would only be dedicated left turn lanes and a flashing yellow arrow would be used for the permissive phase.
[/quote]

It might technically violate the MUTCD, but I don't think the problem of rear end crashes would occur in this intersection.  Keep in mind this left turn is near the curb lane of a one-way street in a Downtown.  Almost all drivers should be aware that a turning driver would probably have to yield to pedestrians even if there weren't a red arrow here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv704%2Fpackerfan386%2F10574230_10152628481058784_3823779026070146336_n_zps4191541d.jpg&hash=794dc32166a79d17930e5f9d6888294bf575fb57)
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv704%2Fpackerfan386%2F10574230_10152628481058784_3823779026070146336_n_zps4191541d.jpg&hash=794dc32166a79d17930e5f9d6888294bf575fb57)
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.

Looks like Illinois.  McHenry County, specifically, with the cutaway signal visors.

I'm not so sure Cheeseheads would want to hear that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 05, 2014, 06:14:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.

Looks like Illinois.  McHenry County, specifically, with the cutaway signal visors.

I'm not so sure Cheeseheads would want to hear that.

Illinois or Wisconsin, that storm looks biblical (at least compared to the rather underwhelming storms we have in the NW).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 06:59:53 PM
Quote from: jake on August 05, 2014, 06:14:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.

Looks like Illinois.  McHenry County, specifically, with the cutaway signal visors.

I'm not so sure Cheeseheads would want to hear that.

Illinois or Wisconsin, that storm looks biblical (at least compared to the rather underwhelming storms we have in the NW).

It's gonna be a good rain storm.  Maybe some lightning as well.  You worry about it if it's greenish in color and the air is so humid you can cut it with a knife.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on August 05, 2014, 08:56:49 PM

Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 06:59:53 PM
Quote from: jake on August 05, 2014, 06:14:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.

Looks like Illinois.  McHenry County, specifically, with the cutaway signal visors.

I'm not so sure Cheeseheads would want to hear that.

Illinois or Wisconsin, that storm looks biblical (at least compared to the rather underwhelming storms we have in the NW).

It's gonna be a good rain storm.  Maybe some lightning as well.  You worry about it if it's greenish in color and the air is so humid you can cut it with a knife.

And the air gets really still..

Ugh, memories.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 09:42:20 PM
Quote from: 6a on August 05, 2014, 08:56:49 PM

Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 06:59:53 PM
Quote from: jake on August 05, 2014, 06:14:23 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 05, 2014, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on August 05, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
Typical modern Wisconsin signalized intersection (non-divided road):

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
L-T Facebook page

I like the setup almost just as much as the old trombone arms.

Looks like Illinois.  McHenry County, specifically, with the cutaway signal visors.

I'm not so sure Cheeseheads would want to hear that.

Illinois or Wisconsin, that storm looks biblical (at least compared to the rather underwhelming storms we have in the NW).

It's gonna be a good rain storm.  Maybe some lightning as well.  You worry about it if it's greenish in color and the air is so humid you can cut it with a knife.

And the air gets really still..

Ugh, memories.

And then this starts up: http://youtu.be/oYeql9xE19k#aid=P-KmGRP3O7U
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on August 05, 2014, 09:45:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 09:42:20 PM

And then this starts up: http://youtu.be/oYeql9xE19k#aid=P-KmGRP3O7U

Death from above ;)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 05, 2014, 09:49:39 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 09:42:20 PM
And then this starts up: http://youtu.be/oYeql9xE19k#aid=P-KmGRP3O7U
They replaced the controller on it when that city upgraded their siren system recently.
The siren stays at full speed on the first cycle, but then every cycle after that, the siren doesn't reach full speed.
Here's how it sounds now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Iiv0Tdrw2Q
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 10:33:27 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on August 05, 2014, 09:49:39 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 09:42:20 PM
And then this starts up: http://youtu.be/oYeql9xE19k#aid=P-KmGRP3O7U
They replaced the controller on it when that city upgraded their siren system recently.
The siren stays at full speed on the first cycle, but then every cycle after that, the siren doesn't reach full speed.
Here's how it sounds now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Iiv0Tdrw2Q

NOOOOOOOOOO!!!! They killed it! Those things did always scare the crap out of me. Closest siren to my house during the couple years I lived in Columbus, OH was a 1000T. Never got used to it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on August 06, 2014, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: US71 on August 05, 2014, 09:45:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 05, 2014, 09:42:20 PM

And then this starts up: http://youtu.be/oYeql9xE19k#aid=P-KmGRP3O7U

Death from above ;)

Run for the storm shelter, Auntie Em!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 14, 2014, 12:06:51 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winter+Park,+FL/@28.600644,-81.351072,3a,75y,156.76h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s2VNTwxBzwwwiTEHLtLJVeg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x88e7701bdba629c5:0xc63f82952cf5ee20
Some old signals I found in Winter Park, FL.  Also look at the crosswalk signals as well.  They are old and non MUTCD compliance with the old fashioned WAIT and WALK instead of the hand and person.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on August 14, 2014, 03:42:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 14, 2014, 12:06:51 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winter+Park,+FL/@28.600644,-81.351072,3a,75y,156.76h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s2VNTwxBzwwwiTEHLtLJVeg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x88e7701bdba629c5:0xc63f82952cf5ee20
Some old signals I found in Winter Park, FL.  Also look at the crosswalk signals as well.  They are old and non MUTCD compliance with the old fashioned WAIT and WALK instead of the hand and person.
What great gems!  I hope they live on for a long time.   :nod:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 18, 2014, 10:19:18 PM
Shore Front Pkwy. Queens, New York. 2000. From Jeff Saltzman.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F10442551_802273959803413_6742265087513486263_n_zpse70b68b2.jpg&hash=f3b5c8c79dd82e7a24a25ee235704fd76255bc0c)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 18, 2014, 10:28:29 PM
Unbelievable! Only in NYC in the 21st Century!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 18, 2014, 10:34:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 18, 2014, 10:28:29 PM
Unbelievable! Only in NYC in the 21st Century!

I remember these well. At the time, Queens was the only borough that still had them in service in some areas, such as Richmond Hill, Ozone Park, and the Rockaways. I always loved to watch them operate.

They continued to dwindle in the 2000s, and the last handful were removed sometime in 2006. I was rather sad, but at least I still have memories of them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 18, 2014, 10:47:19 PM
What is also interesting to mention is that some of these two-section heads were retro-fitted with L.E.D. inserts. Some units were partially converted, while others were completely altered.

Many were modified in the late 1990s, when the D.O.T. first experimented with red L.E.D. inserts in Queens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 20, 2014, 10:37:49 PM
An advertisement regarding the Marbelite type M-P6L. The company's first and only polycarbonate signal. It was designed in the mid 2000s for solely the city of New York. Because of this, the pedestrian signal meets N.Y.C.D.O.T. specifications.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F1512381_690549690975841_1453631354_n_zpsc2ff8d04.jpg&hash=cdd63258cf832724cec2c1a86a7f5822c8c52c15)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F1524805_690549694309174_600301619_n_zps194e3f38.jpg&hash=d179d4b56781a5cd9d85f7d3bb62480cf9c9cae7)

Title: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on August 22, 2014, 05:25:21 PM
I've been trying to catch this phase for some time now to no avail...until today! Ackerman Road at Kenny Road, Columbus.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F14%2F08%2F22%2Fd45d8ab45b76b46d3e3d7a0146e31a25.jpg&hash=03f69a234a14eb877553fb199cd3dabe20d3250a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 22, 2014, 07:34:48 PM
Quote from: 6a on August 22, 2014, 05:25:21 PM
I've been trying to catch this phase for some time now to no avail...until today! Ackerman Road at Kenny Road, Columbus.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F14%2F08%2F22%2Fd45d8ab45b76b46d3e3d7a0146e31a25.jpg&hash=03f69a234a14eb877553fb199cd3dabe20d3250a)

I remember seeing that and thinking it was broken. Then I saw it again. And again. Horrible.
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on August 22, 2014, 08:16:21 PM
Yeah, it bugs the shit out of me. This is the full picture to show the entire setup since I'm sure there will be questions.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F14%2F08%2F22%2Ff1815b61ead5aaf954453edf1abfb02f.jpg&hash=a6d6b03b52beaa478947ad8d588aa6e2971975ca)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 22, 2014, 10:15:33 PM
That was common throughout Pennsylvania for a long period of time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on August 23, 2014, 12:46:07 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on August 22, 2014, 10:15:33 PM
That was common throughout Pennsylvania for a long period of time.

It's still kind of common. Here's an example in Collingdale, with new signals hooked up to an old controller.

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5068/5870361605_2c291f7200_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 02:56:18 PM
One at Edmondson Ave and Franklin St: http://goo.gl/maps/evD40
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 23, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 02:56:18 PM
One at Edmondson Ave and Franklin St: http://goo.gl/maps/evD40
That's even worse as the through traffic has a green signal.
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:26:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 23, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 02:56:18 PM
One at Edmondson Ave and Franklin St: http://goo.gl/maps/evD40
That's even worse as the through traffic has a green signal.


iPad

Why is that? Wouldn't you have the green orb on the doghouse signal on as well?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 23, 2014, 03:32:01 PM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:26:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 23, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 02:56:18 PM
One at Edmondson Ave and Franklin St: http://goo.gl/maps/evD40
That's even worse as the through traffic has a green signal.


iPad

Why is that? Wouldn't you have the green orb on the doghouse signal on as well?

But the doghouse wouldn't have a red. That's just asking for trouble.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 03:35:06 PM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:26:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 23, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 02:56:18 PM
One at Edmondson Ave and Franklin St: http://goo.gl/maps/evD40
That's even worse as the through traffic has a green signal.


iPad

Why is that? Wouldn't you have the green orb on the doghouse signal on as well?

It apparently only turns on when that lane is open to straight ahead traffic. Just before the signal is a light up sign (http://goo.gl/maps/1Pyqy) that changes whether the 2nd from left lane is right turn only or straight only. when the sign is lit to the latter, the doghouse will only show the green (actually a straight ahead arrow). The whole arrangement is weird, as the right turn signals are only red when the pedestrian signal has a walk phase. Fortunately, this signal's days are numbered with the Baltimore Red Line on the way and Baltimore refitting signals in general.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:38:37 PM

Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 03:35:06 PM


It apparently only turns on when that lane is open to straight ahead traffic. Just before the signal is a light up sign (http://goo.gl/maps/1Pyqy) that changes whether the 2nd from left lane is right turn only or straight only. when the sign is lit to the latter, the doghouse will only show the green (actually a straight ahead arrow). The whole arrangement is weird, as the right turn signals are only red when the pedestrian signal has a walk phase. Fortunately, this signal's days are numbered with the Baltimore Red Line on the way and Baltimore refitting signals in general.

Oh, that explains it. Ugh, so confusing.


iPad
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on August 23, 2014, 04:20:13 PM
Quote from: 6a on August 22, 2014, 08:16:21 PM
Yeah, it bugs the shit out of me. This is the full picture to show the entire setup since I'm sure there will be questions.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F14%2F08%2F22%2Ff1815b61ead5aaf954453edf1abfb02f.jpg&hash=a6d6b03b52beaa478947ad8d588aa6e2971975ca)

There is another one like it on Wilson Bridge Rd and N. High Street in Worthington, facing westbound traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 24, 2014, 07:20:36 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:38:37 PM

Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 03:35:06 PM


It apparently only turns on when that lane is open to straight ahead traffic. Just before the signal is a light up sign (http://goo.gl/maps/1Pyqy) that changes whether the 2nd from left lane is right turn only or straight only. when the sign is lit to the latter, the doghouse will only show the green (actually a straight ahead arrow). The whole arrangement is weird, as the right turn signals are only red when the pedestrian signal has a walk phase. Fortunately, this signal's days are numbered with the Baltimore Red Line on the way and Baltimore refitting signals in general.

Oh, that explains it. Ugh, so confusing.


iPad


Another terrible thing about this intersection, as seen when the GSV vehicle passed through is that the pedestrian control signals are offset.  The crosswalk between the southeastern corner and the median is "walk" and the crosswalk between the median and the southwestern corner is "don't walk".  So if someone wanted to legally cross between the two corners, they would have to wait at a very narrow median.

I've never liked this approach, because I generally assume that if I see a "walk" signal, that I would have the right of way to cross all the way to the other corner and I wouldn't even think that I should wait at a median as narrow as this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 24, 2014, 10:56:02 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 24, 2014, 07:20:36 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 23, 2014, 03:38:37 PM

Quote from: kj3400 on August 23, 2014, 03:35:06 PM


It apparently only turns on when that lane is open to straight ahead traffic. Just before the signal is a light up sign (http://goo.gl/maps/1Pyqy) that changes whether the 2nd from left lane is right turn only or straight only. when the sign is lit to the latter, the doghouse will only show the green (actually a straight ahead arrow). The whole arrangement is weird, as the right turn signals are only red when the pedestrian signal has a walk phase. Fortunately, this signal's days are numbered with the Baltimore Red Line on the way and Baltimore refitting signals in general.

Oh, that explains it. Ugh, so confusing.


iPad


Another terrible thing about this intersection, as seen when the GSV vehicle passed through is that the pedestrian control signals are offset.  The crosswalk between the southeastern corner and the median is "walk" and the crosswalk between the median and the southwestern corner is "don't walk".  So if someone wanted to legally cross between the two corners, they would have to wait at a very narrow median.

I've never liked this approach, because I generally assume that if I see a "walk" signal, that I would have the right of way to cross all the way to the other corner and I wouldn't even think that I should wait at a median as narrow as this.
They could've caught the signals as they were transitioning from walk to the flashing don't walk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)

If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on August 25, 2014, 05:57:37 PM
I guess I just don't get why there is a need for both a ball and an arrow in these cases. Are these not all for turn only lanes? Why wouldn't an arrow along be enough?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2014, 06:10:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)

If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).

I completely agree with the concept of emphasis, but this is a right turn. Worst case scenario, the traffic will stop on red, then follow through with the turn. If the arrow burned out, which isn't really a big deal because it would be replaced almost immediately, the turning traffic would just follow the left/straight signal, which would eventually display a green orb above a green left arrow. Wait, there's only one green orb ... these signals are really confusing me. :spin:

Quote from: 6a on August 25, 2014, 05:57:37 PM
I guess I just don't get why there is a need for both a ball and an arrow in these cases. Are these not all for turn only lanes? Why wouldn't an arrow along be enough?

My guess is emphasis for the mainline (i.e. straight-through) traffic that it needs to stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on August 25, 2014, 07:54:04 PM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 06:10:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)

If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).

I completely agree with the concept of emphasis, but this is a right turn. Worst case scenario, the traffic will stop on red, then follow through with the turn. If the arrow burned out, which isn't really a big deal because it would be replaced almost immediately, the turning traffic would just follow the left/straight signal, which would eventually display a green orb above a green left arrow. Wait, there's only one green orb ... these signals are really confusing me. :spin:

Quote from: 6a on August 25, 2014, 05:57:37 PM
I guess I just don't get why there is a need for both a ball and an arrow in these cases. Are these not all for turn only lanes? Why wouldn't an arrow along be enough?

My guess is emphasis for the mainline (i.e. straight-through) traffic that it needs to stop.

Yeah, most right turn doghouses don't have any redundancy measures here in Maryland (while left-turn doghouses do).

On a tangent, the redundant left turn "doghouses" actually become "dog towers" in many intersections in Maryland, as they enlarge and emphasize the left-turn indications.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1101.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg431%2Fwisvishr0%2FScreenShot2014-08-25at75206PM.png&hash=710765f9883a8cea22c79fc078ef5fd7650296ea)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 07:59:14 PM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 06:10:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)

If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).

I completely agree with the concept of emphasis, but this is a right turn. Worst case scenario, the traffic will stop on red, then follow through with the turn. If the arrow burned out, which isn't really a big deal because it would be replaced almost immediately, the turning traffic would just follow the left/straight signal, which would eventually display a green orb above a green left arrow. Wait, there's only one green orb ... these signals are really confusing me. :spin:

Don't be so sure about that.  There are people that will refuse to turn right on red no matter what.  And they wouldn't turn on a thru green ball because the right turn signal still stays red.  They will eventually go, I'm sure, after some irritating horn honking.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 25, 2014, 08:09:40 PM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 25, 2014, 07:54:04 PM

On a tangent, the redundant left turn "doghouses" actually become "dog towers" in many intersections in Maryland, as they enlarge and emphasize the left-turn indications.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1101.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg431%2Fwisvishr0%2FScreenShot2014-08-25at75206PM.png&hash=710765f9883a8cea22c79fc078ef5fd7650296ea)
MD decided that 8" lenses were appropriate for the near-side supplemental signal.  The arrows have to be on 12" lenses per MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2014, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 07:59:14 PM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 06:10:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.

If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).

I completely agree with the concept of emphasis, but this is a right turn. Worst case scenario, the traffic will stop on red, then follow through with the turn. If the arrow burned out, which isn't really a big deal because it would be replaced almost immediately, the turning traffic would just follow the left/straight signal, which would eventually display a green orb above a green left arrow. Wait, there's only one green orb ... these signals are really confusing me. :spin:

Don't be so sure about that.  There are people that will refuse to turn right on red no matter what.  And they wouldn't turn on a thru green ball because the right turn signal still stays red.  They will eventually go, I'm sure, after some irritating horn honking.

The right turn signals are in line with the far left signal house. If the far left signal house displays a green arrow/green ball, the right two signals are green arrows. IF the arrows are burned out (both of them, god forbid), those two signals will simply be blank. Some of the more law-abiding citizens might opt to stop and then proceed as if following standard power-cut procedures, but most citizens probably won't notice them at all.

I'll go film the intersection later to give you an idea of what we are dealing with. I'll add a new post with a previous quote of yours to make sure you see it. Sound good?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 25, 2014, 09:38:53 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 25, 2014, 08:09:40 PM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 25, 2014, 07:54:04 PM

On a tangent, the redundant left turn "doghouses" actually become "dog towers" in many intersections in Maryland, as they enlarge and emphasize the left-turn indications.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1101.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg431%2Fwisvishr0%2FScreenShot2014-08-25at75206PM.png&hash=710765f9883a8cea22c79fc078ef5fd7650296ea)
MD decided that 8" lenses were appropriate for the near-side supplemental signal.  The arrows have to be on 12" lenses per MUTCD.

NY Region 10 loves doing the "separate doghouse", except all lenses are 12". Never figured that one out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2014, 10:31:56 PM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on August 25, 2014, 07:54:04 PM
On a tangent, the redundant left turn "doghouses" actually become "dog towers" in many intersections in Maryland, as they enlarge and emphasize the left-turn indications.

Those remind me of the Australian signal housings:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hobbiesplus.com.au%2Fsignspotters%2Fledlight8so.jpeg&hash=9269fd439775f3e09221d7b180ac6db305bbb585)

Granted, ours don't have the red arrow, but the concept is still fairly comparable.

That reminds me, why don't we use a red arrow that can just "disappear" when not needed (i.e. when there aren't pedestrians present)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 26, 2014, 12:54:49 AM
Until the early 1970s, 1st generation neon pedestrian signals from Winko-Matic were still installed in New York City. They first appeared in the mid 1950s, and incandescent pedestrian signals took their place by the mid 1960s.

What were installed in later years appeared to be N.O.S. and were still dark olive green. Though all would eventually be repainted yellow.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F10533717_786728618024614_1375082561183764098_n_zpsa04e97cd.jpg&hash=a81fc41bac52216da8232bded368ef5492e0ca82)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on August 26, 2014, 02:18:12 PM
An early set-up from downtown Brooklyn in New York. 1950s. The first three-section traffic signals of the time were painted dark olive green, and a plumbizer arm was used to suspend a cluster of traffic signals. It would be in use for a short period of time until the traditional hanger would replace it sometime in the late 1950s.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2Fdowntown32_zps5598c348.jpg&hash=1e1a7fb35b7d0cb2e987fd4900c5508ce9825066)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 27, 2014, 09:01:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 07:59:14 PM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 06:10:51 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 25, 2014, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jake on August 25, 2014, 01:22:37 AM
Fife, Washington  ///  GSV is from Aug 2012 but the signal is still this way, at least as of 30 minutes ago.

Not quite sure why one right turn lane needs two arrows, but whatever.



If there was a sole arrow, and that light bulb burned out, one would never know when they have the right of way for the right turn.  It's always good to have 2 traffic lights serving the same purpose in case one has a malfunction of any sorts (including burned out bulbs).

I completely agree with the concept of emphasis, but this is a right turn. Worst case scenario, the traffic will stop on red, then follow through with the turn. If the arrow burned out, which isn't really a big deal because it would be replaced almost immediately, the turning traffic would just follow the left/straight signal, which would eventually display a green orb above a green left arrow. Wait, there's only one green orb ... these signals are really confusing me. :spin:

Don't be so sure about that.  There are people that will refuse to turn right on red no matter what.  And they wouldn't turn on a thru green ball because the right turn signal still stays red.  They will eventually go, I'm sure, after some irritating horn honking.

You rarely see these in So. California.  Here is an example at the corner of Santa Monica and Wilshire in Beverly Hills:

http://goo.gl/maps/xC1ZJ


I'm not a fan of these types of signals either.  I beleive the MUTCD should be amended to require that on a three aspect signal head, all aspects should control  for the same direction and consequently no two aspects would ever be shown at the same time. 

So we should not see both a red light and a green arrow (left or right) on a three aspect signal turned on at the same time.  This should either be a doghouse, or a five aspect tower signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:21:49 PM
I actually don't have a problem with the 3-section signal showing a red ball and green arrow simultaneously. I can understand a red ball with a green arrow on a doghouse, why is the 3-section red ball with a green arrow any different?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 27, 2014, 09:29:45 PM
I think the confusion is that at least from far away the signal appears to be showing conflicting directions.  In truth, there is no conflict, but it leads to the appearance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 27, 2014, 09:47:46 PM
^ But if the second head is for redundancy, IMHO it should be mounted on the support post for the mast arm, or a signal head should be provided on the near side of the intersection.

Supposedly, the signals at an intersection go into all-red flash if a movement has only one indication and that indication burns out.

Quote from: mrsman on August 27, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

You rarely see these in So. California.  Here is an example at the corner of Santa Monica and Wilshire in Beverly Hills:

http://goo.gl/maps/xC1ZJ


I'm not a fan of these types of signals either.  I beleive the MUTCD should be amended to require that on a three aspect signal head, all aspects should control  for the same direction and consequently no two aspects would ever be shown at the same time. 

So we should not see both a red light and a green arrow (left or right) on a three aspect signal turned on at the same time.  This should either be a doghouse, or a five aspect tower signal.

I think they are kind of prohibited already by parts of Section 4D of the MUTCD.  Assuming the green arrow indications are being used properly, the signal head design would fall under MUTCD Section 4D.23.  Paragraph 02, Item A-2 looks applicable:
Quote from: 2009 MUTCD2.  Steady CIRCULAR RED, steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW, and right-turn GREEN ARROW. Only one of three indications shall be displayed at any given time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 27, 2014, 09:51:23 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 27, 2014, 09:47:46 PM
^ But if the second head is for redundancy, IMHO it should be mounted on the support post for the mast arm, or a signal head should be provided on the near side of the intersection.

Supposedly, the signals at an intersection go into all-red flash if a movement has only one indication and that indication burns out.

Quote from: mrsman on August 27, 2014, 09:01:50 PM

You rarely see these in So. California.  Here is an example at the corner of Santa Monica and Wilshire in Beverly Hills:

http://goo.gl/maps/xC1ZJ


I'm not a fan of these types of signals either.  I beleive the MUTCD should be amended to require that on a three aspect signal head, all aspects should control  for the same direction and consequently no two aspects would ever be shown at the same time. 

So we should not see both a red light and a green arrow (left or right) on a three aspect signal turned on at the same time.  This should either be a doghouse, or a five aspect tower signal.

I think they are kind of prohibited already by parts of Section 4D of the MUTCD.  Assuming the green arrow indications are being used properly, the signal head design would fall under MUTCD Section 4D.23.  Paragraph 02, Item A-2 looks applicable:
Quote from: 2009 MUTCD2.  Steady CIRCULAR RED, steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW, and right-turn GREEN ARROW. Only one of three indications shall be displayed at any given time.

Yes, CIRCLE RED, YELLOW ARROW, GREEN ARROW is the perfect signal at an intersection where the only legal movement is a turn.  And in that case each signal phase would be exclusive and you would not see CIRCLE RED and GREEN ARROW at the same time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.

New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 27, 2014, 10:17:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.

New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.

As a driver, that signal would drive me crazy. If you are in the centre lane and the car in front of you decides to turn left, you're basically down to one straight lane, which is an unnecessary obstruction of traffic flow. Should just be two-left yield on green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:28:08 PM
Quote from: jake on August 27, 2014, 10:17:45 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.

New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.

As a driver, that signal would drive me crazy. If you are in the centre lane and the car in front of you decides to turn left, you're basically down to one straight lane, which is an unnecessary obstruction of traffic flow. Should just be two-left yield on green.

2 left yield on green is unheard of in New York. Typically, there isn't enough straight traffic at this location to require a second lane (it ends immediately beyond the signal), as it runs into a mountain pretty quickly. NY 254 ends at the signal and town maintenance takes over. Only needed for when school buses are going to/from the schools on the right. It used to be a single left and that was a nightmare during tourist season (the entire year). Typically, if the light is green, through traffic keeps to the right and both lanes are used as turn lanes. As the turn movement is by far the heaviest at this intersection (as in its AADT exceeds the AADT of the entire road west of this intersection by quite a bit) and the side road (SB offramp) is a minor movement (typically handled by Exit 20), there usually isn't much of a problem, with sensors keeping the turn movement going unless there is opposing traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 27, 2014, 10:52:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.

New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.

Both of those run afoul of the MUTCD:

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.17 Paragraph06A protected only mode left-turn movement that does not begin and terminate at the same time as the adjacent through movement shall not be provided on an approach unless an exclusive left-turn lane exists.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.19 Paragraph 01A shared signal face shall not be used for protected only mode left turns unless the CIRCULAR GREEN and left-turn GREEN ARROW signal indications always begin and terminate together.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.21 Paragraph 05A protected only mode left-turn movement that does not begin and terminate at the same time as the adjacent through movement shall not be provided on an approach unless an exclusive left-turn lane exists.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.23 Paragraph 01A shared signal face shall not be used for protected only mode right turns unless the CIRCULAR GREEN and right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indications always begin and terminate together.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 11:28:56 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 27, 2014, 10:52:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on August 27, 2014, 09:57:19 PM
In the case with the example from California, the red w/ green arrow was for a right turn lane and a shared right/through lane. In that case, like the others, I think showing the red ball with the green arrow is just a matter of trying to stay consistent with other signals facing the same direction. If the 4-section signal (in the California example) had the red ball with a green arrow, and the 3-section had only the green arrow, it would look odd.

New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.

Both of those run afoul of the MUTCD:

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.17 Paragraph06A protected only mode left-turn movement that does not begin and terminate at the same time as the adjacent through movement shall not be provided on an approach unless an exclusive left-turn lane exists.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.19 Paragraph 01A shared signal face shall not be used for protected only mode left turns unless the CIRCULAR GREEN and left-turn GREEN ARROW signal indications always begin and terminate together.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.21 Paragraph 05A protected only mode left-turn movement that does not begin and terminate at the same time as the adjacent through movement shall not be provided on an approach unless an exclusive left-turn lane exists.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 4D.23 Paragraph 01A shared signal face shall not be used for protected only mode right turns unless the CIRCULAR GREEN and right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indications always begin and terminate together.

When were these regulations put in? I say that because Region 1 does not typically go afoul of the MUTCD. That being said, the New York example should probably have the middle lane equipped with electronic lane use signage. The biggest issue is that there's a significant amount of traffic going from NY 254 to Saratoga or Albany when the second through lane is needed. What I would do is have a second dedicated turn lane at all times except 7-10 AM M-F and 7-11 AM Sundays. At these times, there would be a shared lane that follows the MUTCD. Opposing traffic is light enough to limit red times on NY 254. If the school wasn't right there, I'd toss in a loop ramp or flyover to get the turn movement out of the way, but that's just me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on August 28, 2014, 02:22:57 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 27, 2014, 10:14:20 PM
New York, in a couple places, uses a dedicated turn signal, a doghouse, and a straight arrow in that order at double left turns where one lane has the option of turning or going straight. I-87 Exit 19 in Queensbury (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.329675,-73.685331,3a,75y,266.06h,71.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr8_00tG5gJzgx5O7UDgiog!2e0) is an example. As the doghouse is all arrows, there is never a signal with an ambiguous movement. Differs from the standard approach to such an intersection in that the straight movement can occur without the turning movement.
This example reminds me of an example 1995hoo shared in DC.  I don't remember if it was earlier in this thread or another one.  IMO, it has bad idea written all over it.  In practice, locals may keep right to go straight.  But I can envision someone not familiar with the intersection wanting to go straight in the left lane, only to encounter someone waiting to turn left; where the left turning vehicle must wait for a green arrow.  The intersection should be restriped for either one through lane or widened to facilitate two dedicated left turn lanes. 

Someone else mentioned allowing a permissive double left turn.  I don't like that setup personally.  I think it makes someone in the left left turn lane more exposed to an accident due to the driver's lack of visibility.  Especially if the vehicle in the right left turn lane pulled past the stop bar a bit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 28, 2014, 02:46:31 AM
Quote from: signalman on August 28, 2014, 02:22:57 AM
Someone else mentioned allowing a permissive double left turn.  I don't like that setup personally.  I think it makes someone in the left left turn lane more exposed to an accident due to the driver's lack of visibility.  Especially if the vehicle in the right left turn lane pulled past the stop bar a bit.

I've spent enough time in Edmonton to know that it works much better than you could ever imagine. And in almost all situations, both lines of traffic were well into the intersection waiting to turn. I can assure you that it feels like driving in another continent entirely.

Here's a picture of one of the intersections...there's not very many dual lefts in Edmonton, but I can count on one hand the number of protected-only signals I've ever seen. They are in fact so rare, the city installs "no left turn on red" signs (the symbolic Canadian version) to keep people from turning anyways:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7qwSPpe.png&hash=fcb20bd5e9e60bd6b0533d4361f35e90feaa5ac7)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on August 28, 2014, 02:56:33 AM
^ I have to admit that sight lines look reasonable.  However, I'm still not sold on it being safe.  I've seen far too many impatient and stupid drivers out there.  While I'm all for weeding out the inept, I do feel bad for a driver going straight in the opposite direction who had the right of way and was guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Those are the drivers whom I'm looking to protect by making double lefts protected only.  I know one can argue the a left turner doesn't have to turn left during the permissive phase if they feel it's unsafe to do so.  However, if there isn't any protected phase, they may never feel it's safe to turn until after midnight.  I also know that the through vehicles going the opposite way should be in control of their vehicle at all times and be able to slow down to avoid a crash with someone turning left into their path.  However, I am in the group that speed doesn't kill, stupid does.  Unfortunately, we can't fix stupid.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 28, 2014, 08:50:37 AM
Quote from: signalman on August 28, 2014, 02:56:33 AM
^ I have to admit that sight lines look reasonable.  However, I'm still not sold on it being safe.  I've seen far too many impatient and stupid drivers out there.  While I'm all for weeding out the inept, I do feel bad for a driver going straight in the opposite direction who had the right of way and was guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Those are the drivers whom I'm looking to protect by making double lefts protected only.  I know one can argue the a left turner doesn't have to turn left during the permissive phase if they feel it's unsafe to do so.  However, if there isn't any protected phase, they may never feel it's safe to turn until after midnight.  I also know that the through vehicles going the opposite way should be in control of their vehicle at all times and be able to slow down to avoid a crash with someone turning left into their path.  However, I am in the group that speed doesn't kill, stupid does.  Unfortunately, we can't fix stupid.

I agree. But then again, how many double lefts are even in Canada? I can't remember any where I've been that weren't at a T intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 28, 2014, 10:19:10 AM
We have several permissive double lefts here in Huntsville. They seem to be rather safe. The only difference is that two people can turn left at once from one direction in the permissive phase instead of just one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on August 28, 2014, 11:15:34 AM
The only one I can think of in Maryland is at Liberty Heights Av. and Northern Pkwy.

http://goo.gl/maps/b928K
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 28, 2014, 12:58:13 PM
New York has a very limited amount of permissive double rights, several of which are around Buffalo. There's one in Amherst (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.001386,-78.822004,3a,75y,290.65h,73.11t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5zfFbiI8ArZbHIvqn-30Cg!2e0). Region 5 also has a double right that allows turns on red (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.885119,-78.754984,3a,75y,112.88h,93.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sixLkfDNz99rp4g5Al7h65w!2e0). No signage restricts that movement to the rightmost lane. Tons of accidents here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 29, 2014, 05:00:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 28, 2014, 08:50:37 AM
Quote from: signalman on August 28, 2014, 02:56:33 AM
^ I have to admit that sight lines look reasonable.  However, I'm still not sold on it being safe.  I've seen far too many impatient and stupid drivers out there.  While I'm all for weeding out the inept, I do feel bad for a driver going straight in the opposite direction who had the right of way and was guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Those are the drivers whom I'm looking to protect by making double lefts protected only.  I know one can argue the a left turner doesn't have to turn left during the permissive phase if they feel it's unsafe to do so.  However, if there isn't any protected phase, they may never feel it's safe to turn until after midnight.  I also know that the through vehicles going the opposite way should be in control of their vehicle at all times and be able to slow down to avoid a crash with someone turning left into their path.  However, I am in the group that speed doesn't kill, stupid does.  Unfortunately, we can't fix stupid.

I agree. But then again, how many double lefts are even in Canada? I can't remember any where I've been that weren't at a T intersection.

I would hate to have traffic control be a methodology for implementing a Darwin award.  Traffic control needs to be designed with safety as the primary concern, even at the expense of traffic throughput.  And it should be designed from the point of view of the average driver.  If it's too complicated to allow a permissive double left, then it should not be designed that way.

I can't speak for every state, but I know that CA prohibits permissive double lefts because of the issues that signalman addresses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 02, 2014, 09:25:35 AM
I was noticing that in Ontario that instead of using the green arrow for permissive left turns like we do, they flash their green signals to let motorists know of that specific phase.

Is that a Canada thing or is it only provincial within Ontario?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2014, 06:52:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 02, 2014, 09:25:35 AM
I was noticing that in Ontario that instead of using the green arrow for permissive left turns like we do, they flash their green signals to let motorists know of that specific phase.

Is that a Canada thing or is it only provincial within Ontario?

The only provinces I have set foot in, British Columbia and Alberta, both use flashing green arrows during the protected phase. Otherwise, the signal is just a green orb (unless the signal is protected-only). The purpose is so Canada can, as a whole, avoid the FYA, the doghouse, and other 5-head signals (from a color-blind perspective, the flashing arrow means go, the solid arrow means perhaps you should slow down and yield. No arrow means straight-up yield).

For the record, I prefer this setup compared to doghouses (less power usage) and FYAs (only two signals are required at a standard intersection versus three for an FYA).



Post 1010!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/62799063/wins_400x400.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 03, 2014, 05:23:34 AM
Quote from: jake on September 02, 2014, 06:52:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 02, 2014, 09:25:35 AM
I was noticing that in Ontario that instead of using the green arrow for permissive left turns like we do, they flash their green signals to let motorists know of that specific phase.

Is that a Canada thing or is it only provincial within Ontario?

The only provinces I have set foot in, British Columbia and Alberta, both use flashing green arrows during the protected phase. Otherwise, the signal is just a green orb (unless the signal is protected-only). The purpose is so Canada can, as a whole, avoid the FYA, the doghouse, and other 5-head signals (from a color-blind perspective, the flashing arrow means go, the solid arrow means perhaps you should slow down and yield. No arrow means straight-up yield).

For the record, IIRC, Canada had the flashing circular green before the FYA was mainstream in the U.S. Since Canada is a different country, they aren't under obligation to adopt FYA or any other signal scheme, unless there's some treaty clause somewhere that I've never heard about.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2014, 01:32:41 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 03, 2014, 05:23:34 AM
Quote from: jake on September 02, 2014, 06:52:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 02, 2014, 09:25:35 AM
I was noticing that in Ontario that instead of using the green arrow for permissive left turns like we do, they flash their green signals to let motorists know of that specific phase.

Is that a Canada thing or is it only provincial within Ontario?

The only provinces I have set foot in, British Columbia and Alberta, both use flashing green arrows during the protected phase. Otherwise, the signal is just a green orb (unless the signal is protected-only). The purpose is so Canada can, as a whole, avoid the FYA, the doghouse, and other 5-head signals (from a color-blind perspective, the flashing arrow means go, the solid arrow means perhaps you should slow down and yield. No arrow means straight-up yield).

For the record, IIRC, Canada had the flashing circular green before the FYA was mainstream in the U.S. Since Canada is a different country, they aren't under obligation to adopt FYA or any other signal scheme, unless there's some treaty clause somewhere that I've never heard about.

I would imagine that the only reason our traffic signals are even remotely similar, is probably due to the NAFTA (or its predecessor, the FTA). Before the 80s, IIRC, Canadian and American traffic control systems had greater variation than there is now. Not a lot, but more.

But back to the topic, I can't think of any reason that Canada would need to adopt the FYA. It seems that their version, just a solid green orb after the flashing arrow phase, works perfectly well. Now with that said, I am not a signal expert, so I'm not sure if the yellow trap still exists in this situation or not. And if it did, whether or not it would need to be addressed at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on September 03, 2014, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 01:32:41 PM
I would imagine that the only reason our traffic signals are even remotely similar, is probably due to the NAFTA (or its predecessor, the FTA). Before the 80s, IIRC, Canadian and American traffic control systems had greater variation than there is now. Not a lot, but more.

Nope.  It's due to mere proximity, not NAFTA.  Prior to NAFTA, they were sill very similar.  Even the FMVSS and CMVSS are very similar regarding automobiles (and that dates back to the 1960s).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
Quote from: Brandon on September 03, 2014, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 01:32:41 PM
I would imagine that the only reason our traffic signals are even remotely similar, is probably due to the NAFTA (or its predecessor, the FTA). Before the 80s, IIRC, Canadian and American traffic control systems had greater variation than there is now. Not a lot, but more.

Nope.  It's due to mere proximity, not NAFTA.  Prior to NAFTA, they were sill very similar.  Even the FMVSS and CMVSS are very similar regarding automobiles (and that dates back to the 1960s).

Perhaps not precisely NAFTA, but the concept of free-flow between our two countries has lead to ideas being shared between the two countries. Of course, that's due to proximity as you mentioned.

Also, I remind you that, until the 70s, Canada used a white center line with a yellow shoulder. Certainly by the 70s, America was well into yellow center lines. That's a huge difference, IMO.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 06:02:32 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
Quote from: Brandon on September 03, 2014, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 01:32:41 PM
I would imagine that the only reason our traffic signals are even remotely similar, is probably due to the NAFTA (or its predecessor, the FTA). Before the 80s, IIRC, Canadian and American traffic control systems had greater variation than there is now. Not a lot, but more.

Nope.  It's due to mere proximity, not NAFTA.  Prior to NAFTA, they were sill very similar.  Even the FMVSS and CMVSS are very similar regarding automobiles (and that dates back to the 1960s).

Perhaps not precisely NAFTA, but the concept of free-flow between our two countries has lead to ideas being shared between the two countries. Of course, that's due to proximity as you mentioned.

Also, I remind you that, until the 70s, Canada used a white center line with a yellow shoulder. Certainly by the 70s, America was well into yellow center lines. That's a huge difference, IMO.

Incorrect. MUTCD didn't require them until 1971 and there was a 4 year transition period that followed. From what I can tell, Canada changed over before then.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2014, 06:07:59 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 06:02:32 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
Quote from: Brandon on September 03, 2014, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: jake on September 03, 2014, 01:32:41 PM
I would imagine that the only reason our traffic signals are even remotely similar, is probably due to the NAFTA (or its predecessor, the FTA). Before the 80s, IIRC, Canadian and American traffic control systems had greater variation than there is now. Not a lot, but more.

Nope.  It's due to mere proximity, not NAFTA.  Prior to NAFTA, they were sill very similar.  Even the FMVSS and CMVSS are very similar regarding automobiles (and that dates back to the 1960s).

Perhaps not precisely NAFTA, but the concept of free-flow between our two countries has lead to ideas being shared between the two countries. Of course, that's due to proximity as you mentioned.

Also, I remind you that, until the 70s, Canada used a white center line with a yellow shoulder. Certainly by the 70s, America was well into yellow center lines. That's a huge difference, IMO.

Incorrect. MUTCD didn't require them until 1971 and there was a 4 year transition period that followed. From what I can tell, Canada changed over before then.

Research fails me once again.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPKwyw.gif&hash=47a264dad734e3d840bd84ed1c8f7f78409f7173)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on September 03, 2014, 09:23:12 PM
Regarding permissive double left movements, there are at least four intersections with them in Chicagoland:

* Thorndale Avenue at Park Boulevard (https://www.google.com/maps?q=chicago,+il&hl=en&ll=41.983551,-88.012274&spn=0.000621,0.000862&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.901912,56.513672&hnear=Chicago,+Cook+County,+Illinois&t=h&z=20) in Itasca, hte signal is maintained by DuPage County.  This intersection has a permissive double left EB, SB has the center lane marked for left-thru-right, effectively providing a permissive double left and a double right without any restrictions for the inner right turn on red.

* Sunset Ridge Road at Skokie Boulevard (https://www.google.com/maps?q=chicago,+il&hl=en&ll=42.134394,-87.788956&spn=0.001752,0.001725&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.901912,56.513672&hnear=Chicago,+Cook+County,+Illinois&t=h&z=19), signal is maintained by Cook County IIRC.

* Joliet Street at Cass Street (https://www.google.com/maps?q=chicago,+il&hl=en&ll=41.527623,-88.084463&spn=0.000885,0.000862&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.901912,56.513672&hnear=Chicago,+Cook+County,+Illinois&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=41.527623,-88.084463&panoid=qRpRxN7L-B8btRLXeqt6eg&cbp=12,15.34,,0,5.74) in downtown Joliet.

* IL 50/Cicero Avenue at the north outer road for I-290 (https://www.google.com/maps?q=chicago,+il&hl=en&ll=41.871834,-87.744938&spn=0.000622,0.000862&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.901912,56.513672&hnear=Chicago,+Cook+County,+Illinois&t=h&z=20) (Chicago signal)


I remember reading online somewhere that permissive double lefts can work well if they are offset enough.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
There are a couple of them in different areas of New York City as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 09:37:36 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
There are a couple of them in different areas of New York City as well.

Are all on one-way streets? I wasn't counting them because there's no opposing traffic, but I know of a few that fit this description.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:53:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 09:37:36 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
There are a couple of them in different areas of New York City as well.

Are all on one-way streets? I wasn't counting them because there's no opposing traffic, but I know of a few that fit this description.

While that is true, I did not refer to those on one-way streets there. Such lanes are found on two-lane thoroughfares throughout the boroughs. I personally know of several. One in particular was altered several years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 10:20:38 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:53:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 09:37:36 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
There are a couple of them in different areas of New York City as well.

Are all on one-way streets? I wasn't counting them because there's no opposing traffic, but I know of a few that fit this description.

While that is true, I did not refer to those on one-way streets there. Such lanes are found on two-lane thoroughfares throughout the boroughs. I personally know of several. One in particular was altered several years ago.

Son of a bitch (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.704464,-73.815613,3a,60.7y,132.27h,81.42t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snMokomcBrwM3w1tTvdrqSg!2e0). Other direction is pretty minor, but still.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 07, 2014, 08:37:27 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:53:22 PM
Quote from: cl94 on September 03, 2014, 09:37:36 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 03, 2014, 09:34:09 PM
There are a couple of them in different areas of New York City as well.

Are all on one-way streets? I wasn't counting them because there's no opposing traffic, but I know of a few that fit this description.

While that is true, I did not refer to those on one-way streets there. Such lanes are found on two-lane thoroughfares throughout the boroughs. I personally know of several. One in particular was altered several years ago.

Now are some of the issues regarding sight lines also an issue if you are on a 2-way street, but the street that you are turning onto is one-way.  It would seem to me that the biggest culprit for blocking sight lines in a double left situation are opposing left turns, not the other cars in the other lane making your left turn.  So if there are no opposing left turns because you are turning onto a one-way street (or the street you are turning onto terminates at this intersection) then a permissive double left should be allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 11, 2014, 04:47:52 AM
Ozone Park, Queens, N.Y. set-up. From 2005. New and old sections that were in use.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F10649973_813742388656570_7350370858841363781_n_zpsca0e5692.jpg&hash=0e230d1ee9c2660598906334da48a5b01265efed)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 08, 2014, 07:54:53 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7314247,-77.5197958,3a,75y,51.99h,81.83t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFHcOEzYSYcWRFa1uyso4ew!2e0 I was always wondering why left turn lanes always flash red as red means that you must come to a complete stop before turning.  Making a left turn anywhere does not require a full stop under law, unless someone is coming.  Therefore left turn signals should be flashing yellow.

Anyway here is one in Virginia along US 301 that is not a full signal, but flashes a red left turn for turning left here at an intersection near Emporia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on October 09, 2014, 07:56:44 AM
I think it's so you're not fooled into thinking you have the right of way, since you're crossing a stream of traffic that does.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Joe The Dragon on October 09, 2014, 08:35:09 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on September 03, 2014, 09:23:12 PM
Regarding permissive double left movements, there are at least four intersections with them in Chicagoland:

* Thorndale Avenue at Park Boulevard (https://www.google.com/maps?q=chicago,+il&hl=en&ll=41.983551,-88.012274&spn=0.000621,0.000862&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.901912,56.513672&hnear=Chicago,+Cook+County,+Illinois&t=h&z=20) in Itasca, hte signal is maintained by DuPage County.  This intersection has a permissive double left EB, SB has the center lane marked for left-thru-right, effectively providing a permissive double left and a double right without any restrictions for the inner right turn on red.



I remember reading online somewhere that permissive double lefts can work well if they are offset enough.

Going away with the EOE
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 12, 2014, 01:38:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 08, 2014, 07:54:53 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7314247,-77.5197958,3a,75y,51.99h,81.83t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFHcOEzYSYcWRFa1uyso4ew!2e0 I was always wondering why left turn lanes always flash red as red means that you must come to a complete stop before turning.  Making a left turn anywhere does not require a full stop under law, unless someone is coming.  Therefore left turn signals should be flashing yellow.

Anyway here is one in Virginia along US 301 that is not a full signal, but flashes a red left turn for turning left here at an intersection near Emporia.

I don't know why there is a separate left turn signal there at all.

With the two flashing yellows, it should be understood that this is an intersection where only cross traffic has a stop sign.  And in that type of intersection, left turns yield to oncoming traffic with or without flashing lights.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 12, 2014, 06:40:30 PM
Someone please help me figure this out. I shot this video on Friday in Bremerton, Washington (at this (http://goo.gl/aAWrTw) crosswalk).

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on October 12, 2014, 07:08:40 PM
Quote from: jake on October 12, 2014, 06:40:30 PM
Someone please help me figure this out.
Broken signal? They flash amber like that in Europe in case of a broken signal, but then it's usually all traffic lights in the intersection. Or perhaps if it's a turn lane it might be a warning signal/proceed with caution?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 12, 2014, 07:13:50 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 12, 2014, 07:08:40 PM
Quote from: jake on October 12, 2014, 06:40:30 PM
Someone please help me figure this out.



Broken signal? They flash amber like that in Europe in case of a broken signal, but then it's usually all traffic lights in the intersection. Or perhaps if it's a turn lane it might be a warning signal/proceed with caution?

There are driveways on either side of the signal, but sitting in the center lane at the crosswalk is bit odd, because the driveways aren't for at least another 40 or 50 feet. Then again, if traffic is sitting in that center lane waiting to turn, and there is another car facing them also waiting to turn, their paths would cross because there is no 90 degree turn there.

God I'm confused.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on October 12, 2014, 09:12:28 PM
I bet it is a left turn signal. It is equivalent to the modern F.Y.A. set-up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 12, 2014, 11:44:10 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on October 12, 2014, 09:12:28 PM
I bet it is a left turn signal. It is equivalent to the modern F.Y.A. set-up.

Imagine that both directions have cars waiting at the crosswalk to turn left...their paths would be conflicting, since the west-bound turn movement cannot be completed within the bounds of the opposite direction's stop line.

Either way, the signal needs replacing (two orbs flashing different colors haven't been allowed for some time, AFAIK).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on October 15, 2014, 07:18:56 PM
Quote from: jake on October 12, 2014, 11:44:10 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on October 12, 2014, 09:12:28 PM
I bet it is a left turn signal. It is equivalent to the modern F.Y.A. set-up.

Imagine that both directions have cars waiting at the crosswalk to turn left...their paths would be conflicting, since the west-bound turn movement cannot be completed within the bounds of the opposite direction's stop line.

Either way, the signal needs replacing (two orbs flashing different colors haven't been allowed for some time, AFAIK).
But only the yellow one is flashing...?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2014, 07:29:57 PM
Quote from: kj3400 on October 15, 2014, 07:18:56 PM
Quote from: jake on October 12, 2014, 11:44:10 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on October 12, 2014, 09:12:28 PM
I bet it is a left turn signal. It is equivalent to the modern F.Y.A. set-up.

Imagine that both directions have cars waiting at the crosswalk to turn left...their paths would be conflicting, since the west-bound turn movement cannot be completed within the bounds of the opposite direction's stop line.

Either way, the signal needs replacing (two orbs flashing different colors haven't been allowed for some time, AFAIK).

But only the yellow one is flashing...?

That would be a grammatical error. :-D I meant to type "two orbs of different colors in the same direction haven't been allowed for some time".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on October 15, 2014, 08:37:43 PM
Quote from: jake on October 12, 2014, 11:44:10 PM

Imagine that both directions have cars waiting at the crosswalk to turn left...their paths would be conflicting, since the west-bound turn movement cannot be completed within the bounds of the opposite direction's stop line.


I recently viewed this on Google Map, and I understand your point. Though unlikely present there, if vehicular detection was in use, then both left turn lanes could be split-phased. From my point of view, this would eliminate the conflict of motorists trying to make left turns from both directions at the same time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on October 28, 2014, 06:15:50 AM
NE 45th St. has a couple of solid FYA by UW in Seattle, but they are dedicated turn lanes (albeit, people who turn left on 20th Ave NE generally whip through the left turn lane for 19th Ave NE). 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on November 08, 2014, 08:36:57 PM
I stumbled upon this site while checking out info on old jukeboxes and video games. I don't know if anyone here is familiar with this company, but they look like they do novelty signals, commercial signals and legitimate traffic signals for municipalities as well.

http://trafficlights.com/default.htm

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex4897 on November 09, 2014, 12:49:08 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on November 08, 2014, 08:36:57 PM
I stumbled upon this site while checking out info on old jukeboxes and video games. I don't know if anyone here is familiar with this company, but they look like they do novelty signals, commercial signals and legitimate traffic signals for municipalities as well.

http://trafficlights.com/default.htm

I've gotten controllers from this site before, they work without issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on November 11, 2014, 05:04:53 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F14%2F11%2F11%2Fefb2dfe38c9a7af95e94dc18a278cc5d.jpg&hash=db5d80856d85a98244effcfe81e60d2248469a42)

Here's a unique sign found commonly throughout Seattle.  The light was red for a while so I decided to snap a picture while waiting. 


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on November 12, 2014, 02:15:10 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on November 08, 2014, 08:36:57 PM
I stumbled upon this site while checking out info on old jukeboxes and video games. I don't know if anyone here is familiar with this company, but they look like they do novelty signals, commercial signals and legitimate traffic signals for municipalities as well.

http://trafficlights.com/default.htm

LightsToGo has been around for some time (probably over eight years). The company is well known for manufacturing sequencers, which are capable of performing simple operations for signals wired to them.

As you mentioned, too, LightsToGo also sells signals; however, some of them are slightly overpriced in my opinion. I would rather visit EBay and find one for a good deal. Just my two cents.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on November 14, 2014, 09:31:55 PM
The problem with most of them is that they cheap out and don't include a snubber circuit, meaning you can't drive anything inductive with them, but more importantly for most people they might get destroyed if a bulb burns out. There's one sequencer that has relays, but it's not well-liked for some reason (I have no direct experience with any of them).

On the other hand, I have a flasher where something got both the triac and the snubber, or at least burned the resistor to a crisp... I ordered some triacs from China so I'll try to repair it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on November 16, 2014, 07:34:30 AM
Vintage New York City pedestrian signals in service. From the Bronx. Mosholu Pkwy.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F63447_10203865513412785_8956263443010281241_n_zps16d7ec5f.jpg&hash=84bb3d87246ed70a4c4b3538e0fa58f01e1fd18b)

The pair that face the cross street were manufactured by the Winko-Matic company, and they used neon tubes. The pedestrian signal that faces the crosswalk of Mosholu Pkwy. was manufactured by Marbelite.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on November 16, 2014, 11:20:49 AM


How does NYC keep the traffic signals in SYNC so well?  There are nearly 3,000 traffic signals in Manhattan alone and even a little bit of clock drift can lead to poor progression.  How does the city manage all the signals to make sure they are in sync and running the same time?  It sounds like a maintenance nightmare!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on November 16, 2014, 06:56:57 PM
New York City D.O.T. has its own traffic management center, which has been around for about 20 years, in lower Manhattan. It is at the headquarters, which is the 55 Water St. building.

There's essentially a large room there, where there's an electronic map of the signalized intersection in Manhattan (in real time). The A.S.T.C. signal controllers are constantly communicating through the NYCWin system, so the folks in the room have the ability to adjust a signal controller(s) if necessary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 12:04:23 PM
New member here. :)

Anyway, I've always found this signal installation to be interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395182,-77.7086442,3a,75y,171.95h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sPbLo1M0PQKsE0oUJNtTOTA!2e0?hl=en

The signals on the second mast arm are 3M type and also notice the five section stack for the protected/permissive left turn signal. This setup is rare for NYS.

Signal is located at the intersection of Pixley Rd. and Hinchey Rd. in Gates, NY (Rochester area). Signal is owned by Monroe County.



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 13, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 12:04:23 PM
New member here. :)

Anyway, I've always found this signal installation to be interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395182,-77.7086442,3a,75y,171.95h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sPbLo1M0PQKsE0oUJNtTOTA!2e0?hl=en

The signals on the second mast arm are 3M type and also notice the five section stack for the protected/permissive left turn signal. This setup is rare for NYS.

Signal is located at the intersection of Pixley Rd. and Hinchey Rd. in Gates, NY (Rochester area). Signal is owned by Monroe County.

The 3Ms certainly aren't rare, although they are being replaced with filteted signals that look more traditional. I can't recall seeing a doghouse 3M signal (certainly doesn't mean they don't exist) and the 3Ms don't have an option for the 4-section with color-changing arrow Erie County (and until very recently, Region 5) loves. 5-sections might not be common here, but I have seen them every now and then, not necessarily recently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 13, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 12:04:23 PM
New member here. :)

Anyway, I've always found this signal installation to be interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395182,-77.7086442,3a,75y,171.95h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sPbLo1M0PQKsE0oUJNtTOTA!2e0?hl=en

The signals on the second mast arm are 3M type and also notice the five section stack for the protected/permissive left turn signal. This setup is rare for NYS.

Signal is located at the intersection of Pixley Rd. and Hinchey Rd. in Gates, NY (Rochester area). Signal is owned by Monroe County.

The 3Ms certainly aren't rare, although they are being replaced with filteted signals that look more traditional. I can't recall seeing a doghouse 3M signal (certainly doesn't mean they don't exist) and the 3Ms don't have an option for the 4-section with color-changing arrow Erie County (and until very recently, Region 5) loves. 5-sections might not be common here, but I have seen them every now and then, not necessarily recently.
Monroe County loves the color changing arrow too.

Come to think of it I don't recall seeing a 3M doghouse signal either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 11:22:57 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 13, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 12:04:23 PM
New member here. :)

Anyway, I've always found this signal installation to be interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395182,-77.7086442,3a,75y,171.95h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sPbLo1M0PQKsE0oUJNtTOTA!2e0?hl=en

The signals on the second mast arm are 3M type and also notice the five section stack for the protected/permissive left turn signal. This setup is rare for NYS.

Signal is located at the intersection of Pixley Rd. and Hinchey Rd. in Gates, NY (Rochester area). Signal is owned by Monroe County.

The 3Ms certainly aren't rare, although they are being replaced with filteted signals that look more traditional. I can't recall seeing a doghouse 3M signal (certainly doesn't mean they don't exist) and the 3Ms don't have an option for the 4-section with color-changing arrow Erie County (and until very recently, Region 5) loves. 5-sections might not be common here, but I have seen them every now and then, not necessarily recently.
Monroe County loves the color changing arrow too.

Come to think of it I don't recall seeing a 3M doghouse signal either.

Ask and ye shall receive:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1112387,-108.5406032,3a,75y,231.51h,85.73t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1stZXlWfTJQJdAr8wtxuyTag!2e0

Unfortunately, this will be gone within about a year, when they convert this intersection to a roundabout.  Same may also be said with the rare (in Colorado) green FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs at the on-ramp to I-70 East, if you turn the GSV to your left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:05:56 AM
Someone explain this to me:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2374587,-74.8028441,3a,42y,307.44h,90.99t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIeN2TUXpqUXA3-NBe-gW_Q!2e0

It is impossible to see the color of the signal unless you are DIRECTLY on top of it. The signal on the right side of the GMSV link is broken. I don't understand why this intersection is like this. I am amazed I have passed through so many times on a green signal, because if it were red... well that would be a bit hard to stop in time, wouldn't it?

I was thinking of contacting the city and asking them if they ever had plans to replace this signal, because whatever lens those are suck...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2014, 12:24:16 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:05:56 AM
Someone explain this to me:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2374587,-74.8028441,3a,42y,307.44h,90.99t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIeN2TUXpqUXA3-NBe-gW_Q!2e0

It is impossible to see the color of the signal unless you are DIRECTLY on top of it. The signal on the right side of the GMSV link is broken. I don't understand why this intersection is like this. I am amazed I have passed through so many times on a green signal, because if it were red... well that would be a bit hard to stop in time, wouldn't it?

I was thinking of contacting the city and asking them if they ever had plans to replace this signal, because whatever lens those are suck...

Nope, it's done this way purposely.  You need to go back a little bit on Rt. 29 first, such as to this position: http://goo.gl/maps/ZL7qw  As you are driving on Rt. 29 North, you want to concentrate on this signal, not the one you pointed out which is only a hundred feet or so behind the first signal.  After you go thru the first light on a green you reach that second light, and you are correct that it will always be green. 

The timing of the signal is such so that regardless of the approach to that signal (there are 3 possibilities - from 29 North, from Sanhican Dr off to the right, or from traffic on Rt. 29 South making a U-turn), if that first signal is green, the light you questioned will be green.  The only time someone would get to this signal and it be red is if they sped thru the first signal on a red.  Or the road is congested (which is extremely rare in this area).

And contacting the city wouldn't do you any good.  It's a State maintained signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on December 14, 2014, 12:29:15 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:05:56 AM
Someone explain this to me:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2374587,-74.8028441,3a,42y,307.44h,90.99t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIeN2TUXpqUXA3-NBe-gW_Q!2e0
It is impossible to see the color of the signal unless you are DIRECTLY on top of it. The signal on the right side of the GMSV link is broken. I don't understand why this intersection is like this. I am amazed I have passed through so many times on a green signal, because if it were red... well that would be a bit hard to stop in time, wouldn't it?
I was thinking of contacting the city and asking them if they ever had plans to replace this signal, because whatever lens those are suck...
I expect there is some intent here, to avoid confusion for drivers entering NB from the side street (Sanhican) who have their own signal just prior to this one (to avoid confusing the far signal with their own), although it sounds like it creates more problems than it solves as is typical with this type of setup.  This entire intersection, including Sanhican and 579 with the U-turn and lack of stacking room is terrible by the way.

Edit:  Looks like Jeff beat me to it as I was typing, with a much better explanation too...

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 14, 2014, 09:50:09 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 11:22:57 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 07:34:44 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 13, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 13, 2014, 12:04:23 PM
New member here. :)

Anyway, I've always found this signal installation to be interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395182,-77.7086442,3a,75y,171.95h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sPbLo1M0PQKsE0oUJNtTOTA!2e0?hl=en

The signals on the second mast arm are 3M type and also notice the five section stack for the protected/permissive left turn signal. This setup is rare for NYS.

Signal is located at the intersection of Pixley Rd. and Hinchey Rd. in Gates, NY (Rochester area). Signal is owned by Monroe County.

The 3Ms certainly aren't rare, although they are being replaced with filteted signals that look more traditional. I can't recall seeing a doghouse 3M signal (certainly doesn't mean they don't exist) and the 3Ms don't have an option for the 4-section with color-changing arrow Erie County (and until very recently, Region 5) loves. 5-sections might not be common here, but I have seen them every now and then, not necessarily recently.
Monroe County loves the color changing arrow too.

Come to think of it I don't recall seeing a 3M doghouse signal either.

Ask and ye shall receive:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1112387,-108.5406032,3a,75y,231.51h,85.73t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1stZXlWfTJQJdAr8wtxuyTag!2e0

Unfortunately, this will be gone within about a year, when they convert this intersection to a roundabout.  Same may also be said with the rare (in Colorado) green FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs at the on-ramp to I-70 East, if you turn the GSV to your left.
Cool!

Here's a 3M signal with a conventional color changing left arrow. This is at NY 104 EB at the entrance ramp to NY 390 NB.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2064065,-77.6747254,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sEWw1x-i9a45Gj6BxbPag2g!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:18:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2014, 12:24:16 AM
Nope, it's done this way purposely.  You need to go back a little bit on Rt. 29 first, such as to this position: http://goo.gl/maps/ZL7qw  As you are driving on Rt. 29 North, you want to concentrate on this signal, not the one you pointed out which is only a hundred feet or so behind the first signal.  After you go thru the first light on a green you reach that second light, and you are correct that it will always be green. 

The timing of the signal is such so that regardless of the approach to that signal (there are 3 possibilities - from 29 North, from Sanhican Dr off to the right, or from traffic on Rt. 29 South making a U-turn), if that first signal is green, the light you questioned will be green.  The only time someone would get to this signal and it be red is if they sped thru the first signal on a red.  Or the road is congested (which is extremely rare in this area).

And contacting the city wouldn't do you any good.  It's a State maintained signal.

Hmm, okay, that actually makes sense now. Still, I really wish that the signal on the right of the one I pointed out was functional. And as Roadrunner75 pointed out, the intersection is a clusterfuck.

P.S. Wouldn't contacting Trenton at least work partially because NJDOT is based in Trenton?  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 14, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2014, 12:24:16 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:05:56 AM
I was thinking of contacting the city and asking them if they ever had plans to replace this signal, because whatever lens those are suck...
And contacting the city wouldn't do you any good.  It's a State maintained signal.

Maybe contacting the city/state and telling them to install a roundabout could work  :bigass:

But seriously, the convoluted geometry here looks like the intersection could be better served by a roundabout...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 12:24:09 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 14, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2014, 12:24:16 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 14, 2014, 12:05:56 AM
I was thinking of contacting the city and asking them if they ever had plans to replace this signal, because whatever lens those are suck...
And contacting the city wouldn't do you any good.  It's a State maintained signal.

Maybe contacting the city/state and telling them to install a roundabout could work  :bigass:

But seriously, the convoluted geometry here looks like the intersection could be better served by a roundabout...

If we're talking roundabouts, I'm always happy to offer a design. The scale is slightly off but the principle is still there. Basically you'd have to tighten up the carriageway. That should do the trick.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZXM8qZs.jpg&hash=e796f4a1552fafc2f2c658d89fc95d47ae8866d7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:15:07 AM
Nice drawing, but no more roundabouts in NJ please.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:16:30 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:15:07 AM
Nice drawing, but no more roundabouts in NJ please.

But there's not that many.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:17:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:16:30 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:15:07 AM
Nice drawing, but no more roundabouts in NJ please.

But there's not that many.
Let's keep it that way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:18:43 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:17:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:16:30 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:15:07 AM
Nice drawing, but no more roundabouts in NJ please.

But there's not that many.

Let's keep it that way.

??? Please expand. I don't see the problem with them. You aren't confusing them with traffic circles are you?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:33:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:18:43 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:17:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:16:30 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:15:07 AM
Nice drawing, but no more roundabouts in NJ please.

But there's not that many.

Let's keep it that way.

??? Please expand. I don't see the problem with them. You aren't confusing them with traffic circles are you?
NJ has had quite a history with circular intersections (the 'traffic circle').  While we may have some nostalgia for our circles, many of us think of the congestion, getting cut-off, no clear right-of-way, difficulty getting across the primary route, general anarchy, etc..  Most people I know around here are not happy to see something new that is circular, no matter how small you make it or how many Yield signs you put up.  We have simply too much traffic and too many aggressive drivers for these things to work properly, which is why we started getting rid of them in the first place.  Change the name, make it smaller, put up signs to control the right-of-way - it's still a circle to NJ drivers and we're still gonna barrel through it like we own it, other drivers be damned.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 15, 2014, 01:45:19 AM
You do realize NJ has added MANY roundabouts over the past few years. I don't know the exact amount, but I would say we now have more roundabouts than we do traffic circles in the state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:52:04 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 15, 2014, 01:45:19 AM
You do realize NJ has added MANY roundabouts over the past few years. I don't know the exact amount, but I would say we now have more roundabouts than we do traffic circles in the state.
I would agree with that.  I see a bunch popping up on minor routes or in residential areas.  Often unnecessary but relatively harmless.  Putting in a new one on a major route such as 29 would be an absolute mess.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:54:28 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on December 15, 2014, 01:52:04 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 15, 2014, 01:45:19 AM
You do realize NJ has added MANY roundabouts over the past few years. I don't know the exact amount, but I would say we now have more roundabouts than we do traffic circles in the state.

I would agree with that.  I see a bunch popping up on minor routes or in residential areas.  Often unnecessary but relatively harmless.  Putting in a new one on a major route such as 29 would be an absolute mess.

Are there any major two-lane proper modern roundabouts in New Jersey? On a more-or-less major thoroughfare? Not a traffic circle, but an actual roundabout built within the last decade or so? Excluding converted traffic circles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 15, 2014, 03:31:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 12:24:09 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 14, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
Maybe contacting the city/state and telling them to install a roundabout could work  :bigass:

But seriously, the convoluted geometry here looks like the intersection could be better served by a roundabout...

If we're talking roundabouts, I'm always happy to offer a design. The scale is slightly off but the principle is still there. Basically you'd have to tighten up the carriageway. That should do the trick.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZXM8qZs.jpg&hash=e796f4a1552fafc2f2c658d89fc95d47ae8866d7)

Didn't mean to start controversy with that suggestion...

I had actually envisioned a 5-point roundabout when I was thinking of it, to include the side street intersection to the east. In any event, your roundabout was well designed, especially the circulatory layout (which some engineers can't even seem to get right :sigh: ).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 11:03:08 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 01:54:28 AM
Are there any major two-lane proper modern roundabouts in New Jersey? On a more-or-less major thoroughfare? Not a traffic circle, but an actual roundabout built within the last decade or so? Excluding converted traffic circles.

IMO, this is the best designed two-lane modern roundabout in New Jersey (however, only one leg is actually two-lanes).  It was constructed in 2007.
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.989111,-75.010887&spn=0.001125,0.00089&t=h&z=20

There really aren't that many well designed modern roundabouts in NJ (two-lane or otherwise).  Here are some of the better designed single-lane roundabouts in NJ:
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.332066,-74.131571&spn=0.000791,0.00089&t=h&z=20
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.4841,-74.43269&spn=0.001579,0.001781&t=h&z=19
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: odditude on December 15, 2014, 11:24:07 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 12:24:09 AMIf we're talking roundabouts, I'm always happy to offer a design. The scale is slightly off but the principle is still there. Basically you'd have to tighten up the carriageway. That should do the trick.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZXM8qZs.jpg&hash=e796f4a1552fafc2f2c658d89fc95d47ae8866d7)
First off, a comment - Sanhican Dr ends at 29; the roadway crossing your drawing from left to right is all 29 (which has no local name at this point, although further south it's John Fitch Way). Also, the Sunoco got a ridiculous level of detail there. Not my preferred gas station, since they hike up the prices a bit, but...

How well do roundabouts handle large levels of traffic? 579 SB approaching 29 backs up badly during rush hour, with the vast majority of traffic turning onto 29 SB - I've seen up to 15 minute delays there.

Personally, I've always wished they'd built a grade-separated interchange there, similar to Parkside Ave a little further south.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 12:25:44 PM
Quote from: odditude on December 15, 2014, 11:24:07 AM
How well do roundabouts handle large levels of traffic? 579 SB approaching 29 backs up badly during rush hour, with the vast majority of traffic turning onto 29 SB - I've seen up to 15 minute delays there.

According to Roundabouts: An Informational Guide (Publication No. FHWA-RD-00-067), for double-lane roundabouts, 40,000 to 50,000 vehicles per day can be accommodated, depending on the traffic patterns.  Based on the geometry of the intersection, I highly doubt the NJ intersection experiences over 50,000 vehicles per day.

A triple-lane roundabout near me accommodates up to 57,000 vehicles per day.  For the most part it performs very well, but there is a half hour window during the PM rush where it can start to break down.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 05:30:56 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 15, 2014, 03:31:05 AM
I had actually envisioned a 5-point roundabout when I was thinking of it, to include the side street intersection to the east.

Quote from: odditude on December 15, 2014, 11:24:07 AM
579 SB approaching 29 backs up badly during rush hour, with the vast majority of traffic turning onto 29 SB - I've seen up to 15 minute delays there.

Quote from: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 12:25:44 PM
Quote from: odditude on December 15, 2014, 11:24:07 AM
How well do roundabouts handle large levels of traffic? 579 SB approaching 29 backs up badly during rush hour, with the vast majority of traffic turning onto 29 SB - I've seen up to 15 minute delays there.

...A triple-lane roundabout near me accommodates up to 57,000 vehicles per day.  For the most part it performs very well, but there is a half hour window during the PM rush where it can start to break down.

MAYBE a stretch too far? Definitely still going to tighten up the carriageway but we move Route 579 slightly east and make the roundabout a bit oblong shape to accommodate Sanhican Drive. The roundabout would vary from four to two lanes depending on where you are.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEPP5xg4.jpg&hash=fa4533342b2424c1855a1043bb1f997ce7ee130a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on December 15, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
^ ^ That would certainly make my travels through Trenton a bit more interesting, especially after I see how people treat the I-95/NJ 29 interchange... ugh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 05:38:06 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 15, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
^ ^ That would certainly make my travels through Trenton a bit more interesting, especially after I see how people treat the I-95/NJ 29 interchange... ugh.

Yeah, even I think this second version is just a bit too much.

EDIT: Speaking of Trenton, what the hell is this??: http://goo.gl/YczSSI Just a lane sort of starting out of nowhere that then ends in a thousand yards?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: odditude on December 15, 2014, 06:25:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 05:38:06 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 15, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
^ ^ That would certainly make my travels through Trenton a bit more interesting, especially after I see how people treat the I-95/NJ 29 interchange... ugh.

Yeah, even I think this second version is just a bit too much.

EDIT: Speaking of Trenton, what the hell is this??: http://goo.gl/YczSSI Just a lane sort of starting out of nowhere that then ends in a thousand yards?
that interchange is a mess for quite a few reasons. something tells me you would appreciate its planned replacement (http://scudderfallsbridge.com/images/FigureIII-21route29interchangegraphic.jpg) as part of the Scudders Falls Bridge replacement project. 29 NB still drops to one lane, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: odditude on December 15, 2014, 06:25:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 05:38:06 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 15, 2014, 05:34:09 PM
^ ^ That would certainly make my travels through Trenton a bit more interesting, especially after I see how people treat the I-95/NJ 29 interchange... ugh.

Yeah, even I think this second version is just a bit too much.

EDIT: Speaking of Trenton, what the hell is this??: http://goo.gl/YczSSI Just a lane sort of starting out of nowhere that then ends in a thousand yards?
that interchange is a mess for quite a few reasons. something tells me you would appreciate its planned replacement (http://scudderfallsbridge.com/images/FigureIII-21route29interchangegraphic.jpg) as part of the Scudders Falls Bridge replacement project. 29 NB still drops to one lane, though.

Interesting. I would just make 29 a dual carriageway along the edge of the river and have a folded diamond (i.e. a parclo) with a couple of signals coming off the 95. Then again, the proposal keeps 29 as a nonstop route, so it has that going for it.

Is 29 supposed to be a freeway, an expressway, or what?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 06:43:08 PM
Hey Jake, how about a teardrop roundabout to incorporate into your second diagram?  The curves of the teardrop help reduce the speed of circulating traffic inside the roundabout.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2743261,-95.990431,141m/data=!3m1!1e3

Here is a multi-lane teardrop roundabout used at an interchange in Carmel, Indiana.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.urbanplanet.org%2Fforums%2Fuploads%2Fmonthly_05_2013%2Fpost-2672-0-28709700-1369751560.jpg&hash=cb1e25e09c60a1e27e0c7be0dfda53c86952e1fe)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2014, 02:18:27 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 06:43:08 PM
Hey Jake, how about a teardrop roundabout to incorporate into your second diagram?  The curves of the teardrop help reduce the speed of circulating traffic inside the roundabout.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2743261,-95.990431,141m/data=!3m1!1e3

Here is a multi-lane teardrop roundabout used at an interchange in Carmel, Indiana.

That's a good idea. I'll give it a go and post back here when I come up with something.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 16, 2014, 04:26:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2014, 05:30:56 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 15, 2014, 03:31:05 AM
I had actually envisioned a 5-point roundabout when I was thinking of it, to include the side street intersection to the east.

MAYBE a stretch too far? Definitely still going to tighten up the carriageway but we move Route 579 slightly east and make the roundabout a bit oblong shape to accommodate Sanhican Drive. The roundabout would vary from four to two lanes depending on where you are.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEPP5xg4.jpg&hash=fa4533342b2424c1855a1043bb1f997ce7ee130a)

I think 2 lanes would work just fine, given that most of the feeder roads are two-lane anyways. And you'd need to do something with the eastbound departure to Route 29--that leg is way too straight.exit on
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 16, 2014, 09:03:13 PM
I'd say the 2-lane roundabout with an offset at-grade partial Y is the best of the 2 options compared to what currently exists. Google Maps says NJ 29 is Sanhican Dr, so I'd place any name error on them.

What I would do is make a single-lane roundabout with NJ 29 passing above on a bridge. Clearfield Ave is one-way, so slip ramps could be built to connect to/from SB NJ 29 (actually, one of them already exists). If carriageways are shifted, NB 29 would get direct ramps to/from the roundabout, with the one northwest of the interchange functioning as a frontage road between the roundabout and Mill Rd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 16, 2014, 09:30:40 PM
Caught this photo of some incandescent traffic lights changing from red to green today:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8615/16039301255_9975c7c3ba.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qrkBsP)McCain Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/qrkBsP) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 02:07:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2014, 02:18:27 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on December 15, 2014, 06:43:08 PM
Hey Jake, how about a teardrop roundabout to incorporate into your second diagram?  The curves of the teardrop help reduce the speed of circulating traffic inside the roundabout.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2743261,-95.990431,141m/data=!3m1!1e3

Here is a multi-lane teardrop roundabout used at an interchange in Carmel, Indiana.

That's a good idea. I'll give it a go and post back here when I come up with something.

Alright, so here's a version of that:

A couple of notes:

- The slip lane from CR 579 North to Edgewood is because (apparently) CR 579 is a high-speed through route, and I want to keep the average speed of the road at its maximum. Limiting the number of brake-to-5mph-then-turn instances seems to me like a good idea.
- This version turns NJ-29 into a single-carriageway with a flush median. This is because of the number of houses, and with a tighter carriageway, there's no longer any U-turn points except at the roundabout(s?).
- Given the nature of New Jersey drivers, implementing yield-ahead pavement symbols is a must. Re-enforcement signs overhead and to the side would also be implemented.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FsS30FaJ.jpg&hash=11720a839dd08340df1dee4ae988c3e3a982025d)

Here's an example of a sign that could be placed at the western leg:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTMXK4Iv.png&hash=955d5e6afc1ee5d089e47d64d27d278a95012e78)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on December 22, 2014, 09:45:00 AM
That actually looks pretty nice, but I would recommend changing the control city on 579 to either "West Trenton" (AKA Ewing), or "Hopewell [Township]".

Quote- Given the nature of New Jersey drivers, implementing yield-ahead pavement symbols is a must. Re-enforcement signs overhead and to the side would also be implemented.

Most Jersey drivers are decent in this area - it's the damn Pennsylvanian ones that completely blow through every yield without actually yielding.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 03:55:40 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 22, 2014, 09:45:00 AM
That actually looks pretty nice, but I would recommend changing the control city on 579 to either "West Trenton" (AKA Ewing), or "Hopewell [Township]".

Something like this then? I also added some info on Cadwalader Park:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F5LKfESR.png&hash=750ee127ef0a6ce140dd335214af50e9f1fd8e51)

Quote from: Zeffy on December 22, 2014, 09:45:00 AM
Quote- Given the nature of New Jersey drivers, implementing yield-ahead pavement symbols is a must. Re-enforcement signs overhead and to the side would also be implemented.

Most Jersey drivers are decent in this area - it's the damn Pennsylvanian ones that completely blow through every yield without actually yielding.

Damn Pennsylvania ruining all the fun for everyone.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FpEP4CwhG1f1uw%2Fgiphy.gif&hash=369d17d3df904514f26b8d95a985a7f649c6a892)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: odditude on December 22, 2014, 06:21:48 PM
k, looked at the NJ SLDs to figure out what was off. my previous comments are wrong, although i was correct that at no point is NJ 29 named Sanhican Dr.

what's labeled as Sanhican Dr to the NE of the roundabout/upper left of that sign is E State St, while Sanhican Dr itself begins at NJ 29 and composes the initial southernmost part of NJ 175 (and does not touch this roundabout at all). the two most major components of the intersection are CR 579/Sullivan Way (to the N) and NJ 29 (to the NW/S), with E State St (to the SE) and Mt Vernon Ave (to the W) being the minor components.

this also means that if you were to name this, you wouldn't call it "Sanhican." it also means this mess is labeled quite incorrectly on Google Maps.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 06:56:15 PM
Quote from: odditude on December 22, 2014, 06:21:48 PM
k, looked at the NJ SLDs to figure out what was off. my previous comments are wrong, although i was correct that at no point is NJ 29 named Sanhican Dr.

what's labeled as Sanhican Dr to the NE of the roundabout/upper left of that sign is E State St, while Sanhican Dr itself begins at NJ 29 and composes the initial southernmost part of NJ 175 (and does not touch this roundabout at all). the two most major components of the intersection are CR 579/Sullivan Way (to the N) and NJ 29 (to the NW/S), with E State St (to the SE) and Mt Vernon Ave (to the W) being the minor components.

this also means that if you were to name this, you wouldn't call it "Sanhican." it also means this mess is labeled quite incorrectly on Google Maps.

According to the LGS at the present-day intersection, it's actually "West State Street", not "East...". But anyways, it appears that Sanhican is actually State, and Lasalle is actually Sanhican (according to the street blades (http://goo.gl/ftVzcS)). This confuses me, because indeed, Google Maps has this wrong. But additionally, both Bing Maps and OpenStreetMap label the streets just the same as Google. I can only assume that all three have used the same source which has incorrectly labelled the streets.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 22, 2014, 07:19:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 02:07:39 AM
Here's an example of a sign that could be placed at the western leg:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTMXK4Iv.png&hash=955d5e6afc1ee5d089e47d64d27d278a95012e78)

Sign looks great! On small nitpick: roundabout diagrams usually don't show the connection between the entry stem and the circulating roadway just to the left of the entry stem--there would be a gap and an arrowhead on the end. This helps to reinforce that it is a one way circular intersection. (I'm on an iPad right now, otherwise would link to an example.)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 07:30:25 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 22, 2014, 07:19:23 PM
Sign looks great! On small nitpick: roundabout diagrams usually don't show the connection between the entry stem and the circulating roadway just to the left of the entry stem--there would be a gap and an arrowhead on the end. This helps to reinforce that it is a one way circular intersection. (I'm on an iPad right now, otherwise would link to an example.)

No, I know exactly what you mean. I just forgot to remove it. I've fixed that, changed the street name (and roundabout name), and surrounded the name in black (since it's a junction). Normally I would have added an arrow to the end pointing to the entry leg, but because I have such limited space with the present style diagram, it doesn't quite work. (EDIT 19:39 EDT: Added version with thinner circle)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRAldysk.png&hash=efd7bd8dee8bf775c54d1ba7cb25d3531e51eabd)(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVaBbSrj.png&hash=a11cb44e8743d6c4cba589c5bef4eaa06c52ad5a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfwmapper on December 22, 2014, 09:59:02 PM
I'm as sure as I can be without having actual city GIS data that the labeling on Google is correct. State does indeed curve northwards towards Edgewood/Bruce Park, while Sanhican is both NJ 29 west of the intersection as well as the road east that connects to State. First, the numbering of the buildings along the north side of State (like the church) is consistent with the rest of State (1400s), while the numbering along Sanhican starts with the little grocery store as 2, and increases up to 76 (the big apartment building) as you go west. The Sunoco station is 110, the office building next to it is 120, and so on. NJ 175 is also Sanhican for part of its length, changing to River Road where it leaves Trenton, near Afton Avenue. So, that sign probably needs to be changed again to Sanhican Drive - To State Street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on December 23, 2014, 12:51:54 AM
These vintage, 1950s G.E. "Streamline" traffic signals are thankfully still in service in Washington Twp. in northern N.J. Great traffic signals of yesteryear.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F15887759079_036473df67_o_zps0b9186b9.jpg&hash=3125327777f9c8f1032b778edcb71df4a78574ae)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: odditude on December 23, 2014, 01:03:11 PM
Quote from: dfwmapper on December 22, 2014, 09:59:02 PM
I'm as sure as I can be without having actual city GIS data that the labeling on Google is correct.
Given that I actually live in the area, drive through this intersection on a weekly basis and see the sign blades, and have confirmed with the SLDs, I'm as sure as I can be that Google is wrong.

Quote from: jakeroot on December 22, 2014, 06:56:15 PM
According to the LGS at the present-day intersection, it's actually "West State Street", not "East...".
yep, typo on my part. thanks!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on December 23, 2014, 04:25:40 PM
Looking at the closest thing I could find to Trenton's GIS data, I found that this is the road marked as "Sanhican Drive":

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZ8dWa51.png&hash=58d98741270f74a9edbe5252533109a5fc544172)

You can look for yourself by going to here (http://www.trentonnj.org/Cit-e-Access/webpage.cfm?TID=55&TPID=11580) and using the "internet dataviewing" link. WARNING: It ONLY works in Internet Explorer with compatibility settings enabled on the web page.

And this (http://goo.gl/maps/tDcmc) could help a bit, but given it's angle, I'm not sure what to make of it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfwmapper on December 24, 2014, 06:21:52 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 23, 2014, 04:25:40 PM
Looking at the closest thing I could find to Trenton's GIS data, I found that this is the road marked as "Sanhican Drive":
Which agrees with Google, and what I said.
QuoteAnd this (http://goo.gl/maps/tDcmc) could help a bit, but given it's angle, I'm not sure what to make of it.
Also seems to agree, if you look at it from a less distorted angle. Try http://goo.gl/maps/wFMr2.

NJ's data is clearly wrong. Either that or a bunch of businesses have addresses on a street that doesn't exist. Someone should probably tell them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 09:05:37 AM
Quote from: dfwmapper on December 24, 2014, 06:21:52 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 23, 2014, 04:25:40 PM
Looking at the closest thing I could find to Trenton's GIS data, I found that this is the road marked as "Sanhican Drive":
Which agrees with Google, and what I said.
QuoteAnd this (http://goo.gl/maps/tDcmc) could help a bit, but given it's angle, I'm not sure what to make of it.
Also seems to agree, if you look at it from a less distorted angle. Try http://goo.gl/maps/wFMr2.

NJ's data is clearly wrong. Either that or a bunch of businesses have addresses on a street that doesn't exist. Someone should probably tell them.

Do state politicians and political donors own those businesses?  They may be 'legit' after all.  They even file income taxes, showing massive amounts of losses every year!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: odditude on December 24, 2014, 09:13:44 AM
Quote from: dfwmapper on December 24, 2014, 06:21:52 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on December 23, 2014, 04:25:40 PM
Looking at the closest thing I could find to Trenton's GIS data, I found that this is the road marked as "Sanhican Drive":
Which agrees with Google, and what I said.
QuoteAnd this (http://goo.gl/maps/tDcmc) could help a bit, but given it's angle, I'm not sure what to make of it.
Also seems to agree, if you look at it from a less distorted angle. Try http://goo.gl/maps/wFMr2.

NJ's data is clearly wrong. Either that or a bunch of businesses have addresses on a street that doesn't exist. Someone should probably tell them.
welp, i stand corrected.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfwmapper on December 24, 2014, 04:38:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 09:05:37 AM
Do state politicians and political donors own those businesses?  They may be 'legit' after all.  They even file income taxes, showing massive amounts of losses every year!
You should ask them at their next meeting at the Legitimate Businessman's Social Club.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on December 24, 2014, 08:36:36 PM

Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on December 23, 2014, 12:51:54 AM
These vintage, 1950s G.E. "Streamline" traffic signals are thankfully still in service in Washington Twp. in northern N.J. Great traffic signals of yesteryear.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F15887759079_036473df67_o_zps0b9186b9.jpg&hash=3125327777f9c8f1032b778edcb71df4a78574ae)
What is the purpose of the little one next to the leftmost signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on December 24, 2014, 11:51:41 PM
Quote from: 6a on December 24, 2014, 08:36:36 PM

Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on December 23, 2014, 12:51:54 AM
These vintage, 1950s G.E. "Streamline" traffic signals are thankfully still in service in Washington Twp. in northern N.J. Great traffic signals of yesteryear.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F15887759079_036473df67_o_zps0b9186b9.jpg&hash=3125327777f9c8f1032b778edcb71df4a78574ae)
What is the purpose of the little one next to the leftmost signal?

It serves primarily as a protected left turn signal.

The design of the G.E. "Streamline" was unique in its own way, and, therefore, it was impossible to attach an entirely different traffic signal brand to one. So, this explains why the individual traffic signal section is suspended on its own.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 26, 2014, 09:28:48 PM
I found this assembly in Buffalo, New York earlier this week:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7574/16114891402_4c5b9bd93f_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qy22Md)

It's on Ohio Street at the lift bridge over the Buffalo River, facing southbound. Trombone arm has a horizontal-mount 8" 3-lens signal with green in the center and 2 reds and there's a 12" 2-lens signal mounted vertically on the pole. An identical setup exists in the opposite direction. At the Michigan Ave bridge shortly downstream, setup is similar, with a standard horizontal arm replacing the trombone arm. The other moveable bridge over the river (South Park Ave) and the 2 Erie Canal crossings within the city feature standard signals. All Buffalo River crossings are city-maintained.

I have never seen anything like this in New York. Judging by some photos I've seen on the forums recently, it looks like Buffalo took a couple of pages out of Wisconsin's design manual for these 2 installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 17, 2015, 11:41:17 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.481012,-75.687821,3a,75y,22.09h,98.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHZcozhxhD0kvrGveyhr0Fg!2e0
What is this type of assembly that is commonly used in Pennsylvania called?  If you wondering what I am referring to it is the "almost" doghouse assembly for the left turn signal head here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 17, 2015, 01:43:52 PM
I don't know that it has a name, but it appears to be a variant on the typical 4-section split phasing signal:

R
Y
G
GA

In this case, it appears an existing 3-section display was modified to include the green/green arrow (it's very Frankenstein-ish when you look closely in street view).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 17, 2015, 03:12:57 PM
I've seen that type of assembly all over the place. There are a couple near Buffalo, notably on NY 324 at I-290 facing the NB exit ramp.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on January 17, 2015, 07:31:55 PM
Those types of signals are found all over Delaware....like here
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.657778,-75.784378&spn=0.02174,0.090895&t=m&z=14&layer=c&cbll=39.657748,-75.784389&panoid=9k73kEP_pZsh-F8Bme_Tig&cbp=11,309.79,,0,0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 17, 2015, 11:09:45 PM
HDOT is currently in the process of hunting down the last inline 4-section signals that aren't FYAs and replacing them with those. I personally like to call them "upside-down T signals" because they look like a T that's upside-down.
They aren't very common in Alabama outside of Huntsville though, I only know of a couple down in Dothan.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on January 20, 2015, 05:15:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 17, 2015, 11:41:17 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.481012,-75.687821,3a,75y,22.09h,98.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHZcozhxhD0kvrGveyhr0Fg!2e0
What is this type of assembly that is commonly used in Pennsylvania called?  If you wondering what I am referring to it is the "almost" doghouse assembly for the left turn signal head here.

Not sure what the official term is for that type of signal, but the signal fans like to call it a "Dolly Parton."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on January 21, 2015, 05:27:26 PM
Quote from: Ian on January 20, 2015, 05:15:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 17, 2015, 11:41:17 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.481012,-75.687821,3a,75y,22.09h,98.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHZcozhxhD0kvrGveyhr0Fg!2e0
What is this type of assembly that is commonly used in Pennsylvania called?  If you wondering what I am referring to it is the "almost" doghouse assembly for the left turn signal head here.

Not sure what the official term is for that type of signal, but the signal fans like to call it a "Dolly Parton."

I concur.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 22, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

8" arrows were disallowed by MUTCD a long time ago.  The 2009 MUTCD calls for all 12" signals except for certain situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 22, 2015, 03:57:16 PM
I call them a T, inverted T, or hammerhead.

NJ has used them recently on rare occasions.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 22, 2015, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 22, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

8" arrows were disallowed by MUTCD a long time ago.  The 2009 MUTCD calls for all 12" signals except for certain situations.

I think 8" signals are still allowed for minor streets.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 22, 2015, 03:57:16 PM
I call them a T, inverted T, or hammerhead.

NJ has used them recently on rare occasions.

South Carolina uses T signals exclusively for left turn signals, I've seen few in Ohio and West Virginia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 22, 2015, 09:03:00 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 22, 2015, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 22, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

8" arrows were disallowed by MUTCD a long time ago.  The 2009 MUTCD calls for all 12" signals except for certain situations.

I think 8" signals are still allowed for minor streets.


Hence certain situations
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 22, 2015, 09:11:39 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 22, 2015, 09:03:00 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 22, 2015, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 22, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

8" arrows were disallowed by MUTCD a long time ago.  The 2009 MUTCD calls for all 12" signals except for certain situations.

I think 8" signals are still allowed for minor streets.


Hence certain situations

Colloquially speaking, "certain situations" implies "on a limited basis", but minor street signals are at least as common as major street signals (depending on the locale).

Unless I'm mistaken, it's more about distance from the stop line to the signal head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 22, 2015, 09:17:31 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 22, 2015, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 22, 2015, 03:57:16 PM
I call them a T, inverted T, or hammerhead.

NJ has used them recently on rare occasions.

South Carolina uses T signals exclusively for left turn signals, I've seen few in Ohio and West Virginia.
I've seen a T signal here in Huntsville, AL.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 22, 2015, 10:22:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2015, 09:11:39 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 22, 2015, 09:03:00 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 22, 2015, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 22, 2015, 03:55:27 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Why are 8" signals used?  Is it for costs since there's less LEDs.  I have never seen 8" directional arrow signals, so it looks funky on mast-arms when you have 8" through signals and 12" left turn signals, which is a common setup in Seattle.  Since the MUTCD requires two through signals, is that why 8" signals are favored?

Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

8" arrows were disallowed by MUTCD a long time ago.  The 2009 MUTCD calls for all 12" signals except for certain situations.

I think 8" signals are still allowed for minor streets.


Hence certain situations

Colloquially speaking, "certain situations" implies "on a limited basis", but minor street signals are at least as common as major street signals (depending on the locale).

Unless I'm mistaken, it's more about distance from the stop line to the signal head.

Jakeroot, you are not mistaken. The specific exception you're referring to is for streets with speeds of 30mph or less where the circular signal indications are mounted less than 120 feet from the stop line.

New 8" circular indications for vehicular traffic are also okay for near-side supplemental signal faces, in the yellow and green sections at emergency signals, and certain situations for closely-spaced signals (where visibility limited signals are not practical).


Existing 8" signals may be retained through the end of their useful service life. I am guessing that the signals we are talking about are okay because they were existing (albeit modified). Even in that situation, 8" arrows are not allowed, hence the separate sizes for the green modification. I think it would have been simpler to just put a full 12" display up, unless the support would not allow for the extra weight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 22, 2015, 10:43:11 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 22, 2015, 03:33:03 PM
Speaking of MUTCD requirements for two through signals, how about a split? 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.674827,-122.125599,3a,50.1y,96.51h,92.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shpIPEdc66efMSZ92pl6Few!2e0

On an approach with no through movement, whichever turning movement is the major movement on the approach will be considered the "primary" movement, and is thus required to have a minimum of two signal faces.

For this case, I assume the left turn is primary movement, as it does have two signal heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 23, 2015, 08:14:25 PM
Someone mentioned 8-inch arrow lenses. The very first arrows I ever saw as a kid back in the late 1950's were 8-inch. I don't think 12-inch lenses existed yet. Around the mid-1960's, I started seeing 12-inch used for arrows only. And some years later, probably the 1970's for circular lights.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on January 23, 2015, 09:56:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 23, 2015, 08:14:25 PM
Someone mentioned 8-inch arrow lenses. The very first arrows I ever saw as a kid back in the late 1950's were 8-inch. I don't think 12-inch lenses existed yet. Around the mid-1960's, I started seeing 12-inch used for arrows only. And some years later, probably the 1970's for circular lights.

Some signal manufacturers first offered 12" indications in the 1950s decade, such as Crouse-Hinds and Eagle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 04:33:23 PM
Will NYC switch as most of their signal heads are 8-8-8?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 24, 2015, 04:57:21 PM
Only as they need to replace signal heads that don't meet the 8" criteria. Existing installs can remain until the end of useful service life.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 24, 2015, 05:07:30 PM
And NYC speed limits are low enough in most places to allow new 8" signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 24, 2015, 06:35:55 PM
Saw this odd assembly (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.991138,-78.85299,3a,50.4y,100.53h,92.64t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sfK3jGx5D1ZQbM00oa6Lc6g!2e0) earlier today. Basically a cross between a doghouse and an inverted T. Red and arrow lenses are 12", others are 8". The single arrow lens is color-changing. Tonawanda has quite a bit of interesting signals and signage (square I-290, anyone?), but this is even strange by their standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2015, 06:31:56 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.616206,-122.201597,3a,73.9y,207.78h,95.59t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sF7ipoBD5alGbKmWIbbk6uA!2e0

Here's an odd mast-arm assembly in Bellevue, WA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on January 25, 2015, 09:00:49 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 04:33:23 PM
Will NYC switch as most of their signal heads are 8-8-8?

The city's default speed limit is 25 M.P.H., so that will not happen. Certain thoroughfares, though, throughout the boroughs  received upgrades in recent years from 8" to 12" heads, due to compliance with the speed limits (above 30 in certain locations). Other locations have 8" heads that have been grandfathered.

I am rather happy, from a collector's and enthusiast's point of view, that 8" heads will still be the norm in New York City.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on January 25, 2015, 10:49:11 AM
Quote from: cl94 on January 24, 2015, 06:35:55 PM
Saw this odd assembly (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.991138,-78.85299,3a,50.4y,100.53h,92.64t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sfK3jGx5D1ZQbM00oa6Lc6g!2e0) earlier today. Basically a cross between a doghouse and an inverted T. Red and arrow lenses are 12", others are 8". The single arrow lens is color-changing. Tonawanda has quite a bit of interesting signals and signage (square I-290, anyone?), but this is even strange by their standards.

Those replaced signal heads like this one further down Brighton Road:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.990958,-78.840224,3a,24.5y,308.72h,88.73t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sS5zSCrq6Ni6-OFWMA9XyYg!2e0
Instead of a dual 12" yellow and 12" green arrow section Tonawanda placed one 12" section with a bi-modal green-yellow arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on January 30, 2015, 09:58:16 AM
This is the first time I've seen an arrow used for the straight movement:

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.424118,-71.08969&spn=0.000003,0.001778&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=42.424037,-71.089567&panoid=Hf4_v749XHCaOBafDcluNg&cbp=12,320.16,,2,-3.61
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 10:21:11 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on January 30, 2015, 09:58:16 AM
This is the first time I've seen an arrow used for the straight movement:

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.424118,-71.08969&spn=0.000003,0.001778&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=42.424037,-71.089567&panoid=Hf4_v749XHCaOBafDcluNg&cbp=12,320.16,,2,-3.61

I've seen that plenty of times before.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.050761,-88.033588,3a,40.9y,271.92h,88.15t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJUupHZZEXuzw-GE0VaFJvg!2e0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.050818,-88.030619,3a,44.8y,269.96h,95.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s3IwPl4-Ot8ydWfjc7KH1tQ!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 30, 2015, 10:23:34 AM
Quote from: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 10:21:11 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on January 30, 2015, 09:58:16 AM
This is the first time I've seen an arrow used for the straight movement:

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.424118,-71.08969&spn=0.000003,0.001778&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=42.424037,-71.089567&panoid=Hf4_v749XHCaOBafDcluNg&cbp=12,320.16,,2,-3.61

I've seen that plenty of times before.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.050761,-88.033588,3a,40.9y,271.92h,88.15t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJUupHZZEXuzw-GE0VaFJvg!2e0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.050818,-88.030619,3a,44.8y,269.96h,95.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s3IwPl4-Ot8ydWfjc7KH1tQ!2e0

Delaware has/had them all over the place too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on January 30, 2015, 10:27:19 AM
So what's the rationale between using arrows and using solid balls? Just a choice?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on January 30, 2015, 10:33:20 AM
Arrow = only applies to the direction the arrow is pointing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on January 30, 2015, 01:31:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Plus the example Zeffy posted is located in Massachusetts; that arrangement & assembly been has around since the early 70s... years before Right turn on Red was became the legal default condition in the Bay State as well as the practice of having separate signal heads for turning lanes.

Back then, it was not uncommon to have a situation/scenario where both the red ball and one of the green arrows (be it upright, horizontal or angled) would be lit on a 4-signal head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:14:26 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 30, 2015, 01:31:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Plus the example Zeffy posted is located in Massachusetts; that arrangement & assembly been has around since the early 70s... years before Right turn on Red was became the legal default condition in the Bay State as well as the practice of having separate signal heads for turning lanes.

Back then, it was not uncommon to have a situation/scenario where both the red ball and one of the green arrows (be it upright, horizontal or angled) would be lit on a 4-signal head.

Still is, in Chicago, even with RTOR.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi837.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz298%2Fmidamcrossrds%2F100_4815_zps8098fc1c.jpg&hash=b2d0cbc02f93ad02056df21f5a2a39a795238c9b) (http://s837.photobucket.com/user/midamcrossrds/media/100_4815_zps8098fc1c.jpg.html)

MUTCD?  We don't need no stinking MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 02:16:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:14:26 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 30, 2015, 01:31:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Plus the example Zeffy posted is located in Massachusetts; that arrangement & assembly been has around since the early 70s... years before Right turn on Red was became the legal default condition in the Bay State as well as the practice of having separate signal heads for turning lanes.

Back then, it was not uncommon to have a situation/scenario where both the red ball and one of the green arrows (be it upright, horizontal or angled) would be lit on a 4-signal head.

Still is, in Chicago, even with RTOR.

MUTCD?  We don't need no stinking MUTCD.

Isn't that just a poor-man's 5-section tower? I see that style of signal all the time where I live.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:21:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 02:16:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:14:26 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 30, 2015, 01:31:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Plus the example Zeffy posted is located in Massachusetts; that arrangement & assembly been has around since the early 70s... years before Right turn on Red was became the legal default condition in the Bay State as well as the practice of having separate signal heads for turning lanes.

Back then, it was not uncommon to have a situation/scenario where both the red ball and one of the green arrows (be it upright, horizontal or angled) would be lit on a 4-signal head.

Still is, in Chicago, even with RTOR.

MUTCD?  We don't need no stinking MUTCD.

Isn't that just a poor-man's 5-section tower? I see that style of signal all the time where I live.

Nope.  There is no yellow arrow at this intersection (Cermak and the ramps to the outbound Ryan Expy).  The lanes look like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8528027,-87.6310646,146m/data=!3m1!1e3
All lanes turn, two to the left, and two to the right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 03:02:26 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:21:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 02:16:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 02:14:26 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 30, 2015, 01:31:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2015, 10:43:16 AM
@ Zeffy:

One scenario -- when no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Plus the example Zeffy posted is located in Massachusetts; that arrangement & assembly been has around since the early 70s... years before Right turn on Red was became the legal default condition in the Bay State as well as the practice of having separate signal heads for turning lanes.

Back then, it was not uncommon to have a situation/scenario where both the red ball and one of the green arrows (be it upright, horizontal or angled) would be lit on a 4-signal head.

Still is, in Chicago, even with RTOR.

MUTCD?  We don't need no stinking MUTCD.

Isn't that just a poor-man's 5-section tower? I see that style of signal all the time where I live.

Nope.  There is no yellow arrow at this intersection (Cermak and the ramps to the outbound Ryan Expy).  The lanes look like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8528027,-87.6310646,146m/data=!3m1!1e3
All lanes turn, two to the left, and two to the right.

Ah okay. So what exactly stops the right turn lanes from turning? Amber orb? I would think that all turning directions would get a green (with the right arrow lit), followed by an amber across-the-board with the arrow staying lit, followed by a red with the green arrow still lit. Immediately after, the WB Cermak traffic towards the Ryan Expressway would get their turn arrow, and once their turn arrow began to expire, so would the right turn off the Ryan Expressway (using an amber arrow, since the left-turning traffic is already facing a red orb).

FWIW, here's an odd signal near where I live:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 30, 2015, 03:53:45 PM
IIRC, it's a leading right turn.  The signal's operation is: Red -> Red/Green Arrow -> Green/Green Arrow -> Yellow -> Red.  There's a few left turn ones in Chicago like that as well where the operations is: Red -> Green -> Green/Green Arrow -> Yellow -> Red.

Example: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.87511,-87.683791,3a,40.7y,179.97h,86.25t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVy6VBxyHdjWDTI9hl0-Yfg!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 31, 2015, 12:46:30 PM
NYC used to have one exiting the Queens Midtown Tunnel on the Manhattan side, but with a left turn green arrow present during a red light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on February 01, 2015, 05:38:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 03:02:26 PM(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)
As previously mentioned; in MA, many 4-section signalheads (RY^>, RY^<, RYG>, RYG<) would feature one red-light (or yellow light)/one green-arrow lit concurrently. 

Heck one old signal installation in Lynn, MA along MA 1A (the Lynnway) northbound had a couple of 4-section signalheads that had three of its 4 lights lit concurrently as part of normal operations (Y^> and R^>).  The red (& yellow) were lit concurrently with the upright & right-turn green arrow due to another 4-section signalhead that had a left green-arrow on it; it was lit as Y^ and R^ when left-turn movements weren't allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: J Route Z on February 02, 2015, 08:32:47 PM
How come some lights are mounted sideways and some are vertical? Also, how come some are wire mounted?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on February 02, 2015, 10:15:24 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on February 02, 2015, 08:32:47 PM
How come some lights are mounted sideways and some are vertical?

I think it may have to do with wind. I tend to see it in the west, where the land is flatter and winds can be higher. Just my guess though.

http://goo.gl/maps/z3F2q

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on February 02, 2015, 10:22:02 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on February 02, 2015, 08:32:47 PM
How come some lights are mounted sideways and some are vertical?

Let's say you approach an overpass and you drive under it. The intersection you approach right after you drive under the bridge may not be visible to you if the traffic signals are vertical. If they are horizontal, then it would be easy to see them without doubt.

This is generally a common practice by many municipalities.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on February 02, 2015, 10:45:58 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on February 02, 2015, 08:32:47 PM
Also, how come some are wire mounted?
Wire mounted gives more flexibility to the exact placement of the signals. It also has a tendency of being much cheaper, even more so the more signals you add.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on February 03, 2015, 07:40:29 AM
Then there's this wonderful MUTCD violation at the Stevenson Expressway (I-55) and Cicero Avenue (IL-50):

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=41.816777,-87.743248&spn=0.002383,0.005284&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=41.816708,-87.743288&panoid=cXSZXqPwMVz1_7hj02yHXw&cbp=12,106.41,,0,-6.35

It's just like the ones in jakeroot's photograph.  The red ball is on while the green arrow is on.

Always great to see at a corner with red light cameras on your way to Midway Airport.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on February 13, 2015, 07:44:19 PM
Can someone tell me what the two gray, teardrop shaped things are? They look to be aluminum or the like and are held up with chains, but I couldn't make out if there was any actual wiring going to it.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F15%2F02%2F13%2F35d9f914456f2f33a82f7ab609ef25db.jpg&hash=d7308d9eb4c07efca493b2bfc05c2ff08133eb7a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on February 13, 2015, 08:02:45 PM
^ I could be wrong, but they look like vibration dampers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on February 13, 2015, 08:19:01 PM
That sent me in the right direction...Stockbridge dampers, thanks!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 13, 2015, 11:16:15 PM
Tons of state-erected lighting on Massachusetts expressways has those dampers; never seen so many in other states (if any) as in Massachusetts. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 14, 2015, 12:04:40 PM
So what is their function?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on February 14, 2015, 02:46:56 PM
They reduce vibration (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockbridge_damper). In this case it's on the end of a good sized mast arm.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftapatalk.imageshack.com%2Fv2%2F15%2F02%2F14%2F4bbb058a58a0e106d59d0be16035741d.jpg&hash=ebb664dda159fcc3b1d80ce0a54b3c2ed3b1d30e)

Completely unrelated, I just noticed The Google calls that National Road SW when it's West Broad St. I mean yeah, it's the National Rd but that's not the name in that area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on February 14, 2015, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: 6a on February 14, 2015, 02:46:56 PM
They reduce vibration (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockbridge_damper). In this case it's on the end of a good sized mast arm.

I have been wondering what those things were for many years. NYSDOT and NYSTA use them on sign gantries quite extensively.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on February 15, 2015, 10:52:12 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 01, 2015, 05:38:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2015, 03:02:26 PM(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEeOV6v9.png&hash=8866f75299db82ef84b2532cca724f7b69e7ac91)
As previously mentioned; in MA, many 4-section signalheads (RY^>, RY^<, RYG>, RYG<) would feature one red-light (or yellow light)/one green-arrow lit concurrently. 

Heck one old signal installation in Lynn, MA along MA 1A (the Lynnway) northbound had a couple of 4-section signalheads that had three of its 4 lights lit concurrently as part of normal operations (Y^> and R^>).  The red (& yellow) were lit concurrently with the upright & right-turn green arrow due to another 4-section signalhead that had a left green-arrow on it; it was lit as Y^ and R^ when left-turn movements weren't allowed.


This sort of thing just popped up near me.  One of my co-workers brought it to my attention because he was pulled over for moving through the intersection as though it was a protected right turn, and the cop said that because it was a red light, he still needed to stop.  This can't be right, can it?.  From what I can tell is is a replacement for those lights that added a 4th light for a protected right turn, which would turn into a green ball when all traffic was allowed to go, or am I reading it wrong?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 15, 2015, 11:02:32 AM
Quote from: cl94 on February 14, 2015, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: 6a on February 14, 2015, 02:46:56 PM
They reduce vibration (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockbridge_damper). In this case it's on the end of a good sized mast arm.

I have been wondering what those things were for many years. NYSDOT and NYSTA use them on sign gantries quite extensively.

Thanks for the explanation.  Here in CO, we have long mast arms -- and quite a bit of wind on occasion -- and yet they are nowhere to be found here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on February 15, 2015, 11:54:11 AM
It had been a curiosity to me for a while, Ian's post above sent me off to read up on them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 15, 2015, 01:11:59 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 15, 2015, 10:52:12 AM
This sort of thing just popped up near me.  One of my co-workers brought it to my attention because he was pulled over for moving through the intersection as though it was a protected right turn, and the cop said that because it was a red light, he still needed to stop.  This can't be right, can it?.  From what I can tell is is a replacement for those lights that added a 4th light for a protected right turn, which would turn into a green ball when all traffic was allowed to go, or am I reading it wrong?

Sounds like BS.  Would the cop pull someone over for going through a green arrow at a doghouse that also had circular red lit?  The signal showed green right arrow; if problems like that persist they may need to change the signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dcbjms on February 16, 2015, 09:43:04 AM
Hmm, interesting setup in Hull, QC:

http://goo.gl/maps/r7KZk

Quebec has always fascinated me with their traffic lights, and this is further proof of it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on February 21, 2015, 07:03:23 PM
Never seen this setup in NY before. This is at NY 104 at Furnace Rd.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227454,-77.281641,3a,37.5y,281.8h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sc8VKEBksHqkfH9n2rvmw7Q!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on February 27, 2015, 03:03:06 AM
Only saw this signal last week or so, but it's definitely new to me.  I guess it's what you get when you want to permit left turns on green arrows only at certain times of day and don't want to pay for a third signal.

N Washington and Princess Streets, Alexandria, VA. (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=38.808466,-77.046264&spn=0.002625,0.013078&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.808466,-77.046264&panoid=nbHzY_hX-g4LGBz0tzqFtg&cbp=11,9.17,,0,-3.81)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on February 27, 2015, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 15, 2015, 01:11:59 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 15, 2015, 10:52:12 AM
This sort of thing just popped up near me.  One of my co-workers brought it to my attention because he was pulled over for moving through the intersection as though it was a protected right turn, and the cop said that because it was a red light, he still needed to stop.  This can't be right, can it?.  From what I can tell is is a replacement for those lights that added a 4th light for a protected right turn, which would turn into a green ball when all traffic was allowed to go, or am I reading it wrong?

Sounds like BS.  Would the cop pull someone over for going through a green arrow at a doghouse that also had circular red lit?  The signal showed green right arrow; if problems like that persist they may need to change the signals.
In this day and age where most drivers have cell phones w/built-in cameras (even old-school cheap flip-types have such), had your (TEG24601) co-worker indeed been cited for such; a quick pic of the signal showing the green arrow & red light lit together would be enough evidence to legally challenge the citation in court.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on February 28, 2015, 04:07:00 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 27, 2015, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 15, 2015, 01:11:59 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 15, 2015, 10:52:12 AM
This sort of thing just popped up near me.  One of my co-workers brought it to my attention because he was pulled over for moving through the intersection as though it was a protected right turn, and the cop said that because it was a red light, he still needed to stop.  This can't be right, can it?.  From what I can tell is is a replacement for those lights that added a 4th light for a protected right turn, which would turn into a green ball when all traffic was allowed to go, or am I reading it wrong?

Sounds like BS.  Would the cop pull someone over for going through a green arrow at a doghouse that also had circular red lit?  The signal showed green right arrow; if problems like that persist they may need to change the signals.
In this day and age where most drivers have cell phones w/built-in cameras (even old-school cheap flip-types have such), had your (TEG24601) co-worker indeed been cited for such; a quick pic of the signal showing the green arrow & red light lit together would be enough evidence to legally challenge the citation in court.
Which is exactly what I told him.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 28, 2015, 04:54:08 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 28, 2015, 04:07:00 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 27, 2015, 09:06:11 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 15, 2015, 01:11:59 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 15, 2015, 10:52:12 AM
This sort of thing just popped up near me.  One of my co-workers brought it to my attention because he was pulled over for moving through the intersection as though it was a protected right turn, and the cop said that because it was a red light, he still needed to stop.  This can't be right, can it?.  From what I can tell is is a replacement for those lights that added a 4th light for a protected right turn, which would turn into a green ball when all traffic was allowed to go, or am I reading it wrong?

Sounds like BS.  Would the cop pull someone over for going through a green arrow at a doghouse that also had circular red lit?  The signal showed green right arrow; if problems like that persist they may need to change the signals.

In this day and age where most drivers have cell phones w/built-in cameras (even old-school cheap flip-types have such), had your (TEG24601) co-worker indeed been cited for such; a quick pic of the signal showing the green arrow & red light lit together would be enough evidence to legally challenge the citation in court.

Which is exactly what I told him.

Did the cop take note of the arrow being lit green at the time of the turn?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on March 04, 2015, 10:52:26 AM
http://goo.gl/maps/n4gnK

'No Movement on Red'. Well, there's something new.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 07, 2015, 01:08:13 AM
A rare close-up of a suspended, 1st generation Ruleta head. From New York City. 1926.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F1926%2520early%2520ruleta_zpsarfqzwxa.png&hash=11d43e05bf61d35e62d47ac4468f35b8bc772310)

This traffic signal had angled-signal sections, because it was located at a skewed intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 26, 2015, 10:53:08 PM
5th Av. G.E. "bronze signal" in Manhattan, N.Y. Unknown year.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F10929952_555037157970572_3897755349953090989_n_zpsjwoveeoj.png&hash=530653638565a42e8d4e62dc39a838d69b17cf35)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 26, 2015, 10:55:11 PM
E. 34th St. and Queens-Midtown Tunnel exit Marbelite cluster. Manhattan, N.Y. 1985.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F10984614_921712177859590_1347941444336278967_n_zpsfxq7itug.jpg&hash=20b5467f58dce50052d4a617251d18a84061828e)

Its original partner attached to a late 1950s truss-arm setup.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F11069949_921713624526112_7846373203964986018_n_zpstgptby3d.jpg&hash=117b29aae0ceacd2d8bc3484603ab26a70999bb3)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on March 27, 2015, 03:40:01 PM
Typical Swedish traffic lights on larger roads
(https://www.lysator.liu.se/~riiga/Bilder/Foton/P1020389.jpg)

Lower section
(https://www.lysator.liu.se/~riiga/Bilder/Foton/P1020391.jpg)

Pedestrian signal
(https://www.lysator.liu.se/~riiga/Bilder/Foton/P1020375.jpg)

Bike signal
(https://www.lysator.liu.se/~riiga/Bilder/Foton/P1020394.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on March 27, 2015, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 27, 2015, 03:40:01 PM
Typical Swedish traffic lights on larger roads
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/24401393/Foton/P1020389.jpg)
Love the old-school-looking green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 28, 2015, 12:00:09 AM
How about a 4-way traffic light with two red lights on each side?
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8690/16328351314_9e9df06cc2.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qST4Yw)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/qST4Yw) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7612/16763262060_20658bbef5.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/rxj6ME)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/rxj6ME) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8740/16743371537_00b4f5c206.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/rvya2B)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/rvya2B) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7623/16328351104_893b035f67.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qST4UU)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/qST4UU) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8696/16949775991_d8c4d0b21b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/rPN2T6)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/rPN2T6) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8754/16743371387_61bd059d3d.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/rvy9Z2)Crouse-hinds Type-M 4-way (https://flic.kr/p/rvy9Z2) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 31, 2015, 03:36:02 PM
I pass through this intersection near Tacoma, Washington quite a few times during the week (typically 10-20 times) and every time I drive through, I think about ways to improve the intersection. Here's what's up:

Nyanza Road meets Gravelly Lake Drive at what is basically a right angle. Gravelly makes a sweeping turn through the intersection, and slip lanes round off the edges:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWD9hkTd.png&hash=e464004aa88f110ee6dd053c883304fbbf87431d)

The problem that I have with the intersection is that as you drive along Gravelly Lake approaching Nyanza from the left of the image, the sharp bend hides the wire-hung protected-only left turn signal, but there is a signal repeater on the NW signal mast. So you can see from a distance whether or not the light is green, but not if the turn signal is.

To fix this, could the signal repeater feasibly be something like this?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fhamll4s.png&hash=17b5e0e5eec8c7624d920acddbfd27fbcf4232ab)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on March 31, 2015, 05:25:08 PM
^ You would need to mount two separate three-section heads to stay in compliance with the MUTCD rather than having one large six-section head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NYhwyfan on March 31, 2015, 06:32:10 PM
George Urban Blvd/French Rd - Cheektowaga, NY - old 9x12 pedestrian signal heads

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.918657,-78.713627,3a,75y,127.6h,75.3t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1st7W36vfNHRHwajP1gchcoA!2e0

Payne Ave - North Tonawana, NY - 9x12 peds mounted with 8" signals on span wire

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.03999,-78.873583,3a,75y,4.53h,82.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYkplHiP6jpeDfb1eTHRk5w!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 01, 2015, 01:57:05 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 31, 2015, 05:25:08 PM
^ You would need to mount two separate three-section heads to stay in compliance with the MUTCD rather than having one large six-section head.

Cocking nora.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on April 01, 2015, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: NYhwyfan on March 31, 2015, 06:32:10 PMPayne Ave - North Tonawana, NY - 9x12 peds mounted with 8" signals on span wire
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.03999,-78.873583,3a,75y,4.53h,82.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYkplHiP6jpeDfb1eTHRk5w!2e0
Overhead pedestrain signals; that's certainly different.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 01, 2015, 11:39:48 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 01, 2015, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: NYhwyfan on March 31, 2015, 06:32:10 PMPayne Ave - North Tonawana, NY - 9x12 peds mounted with 8" signals on span wire
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.03999,-78.873583,3a,75y,4.53h,82.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYkplHiP6jpeDfb1eTHRk5w!2e0
Overhead pedestrain signals; that's certainly different.

Never seen anything like that... Don't think that ever would have been MUTCD acceptable.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on April 04, 2015, 05:33:31 PM
In the Bronx in New York, on E. Fordham Rd., some old Marbelite "flat top" traffic signals remain. They likely date back to 1954.

From Google Maps.

One at the corner of Hoffman St.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2Fbronx%2520hoffman%2520st_zpsgqokij9k.png&hash=6abe7d03a101491ee516a23659ebb64c85eec07f)

A second one on Bathgate Av.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2Fthe%2520bronx%25202_zpsde8zeqom.jpg&hash=976608917e34d6e5f577eacb91af771d11d042f9)


Each one still uses a plumbizer, which is rare in New York City nowadays.

The "flat top" heads there are few and far between, so see them while they last.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on April 05, 2015, 05:24:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 31, 2015, 03:36:02 PM
I pass through this intersection near Tacoma, Washington quite a few times during the week (typically 10-20 times) and every time I drive through, I think about ways to improve the intersection. Here's what's up:

Nyanza Road meets Gravelly Lake Drive at what is basically a right angle. Gravelly makes a sweeping turn through the intersection, and slip lanes round off the edges:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWD9hkTd.png&hash=e464004aa88f110ee6dd053c883304fbbf87431d)

The problem that I have with the intersection is that as you drive along Gravelly Lake approaching Nyanza from the left of the image, the sharp bend hides the wire-hung protected-only left turn signal, but there is a signal repeater on the NW signal mast. So you can see from a distance whether or not the light is green, but not if the turn signal is.

To fix this, could the signal repeater feasibly be something like this?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fhamll4s.png&hash=17b5e0e5eec8c7624d920acddbfd27fbcf4232ab)


I believe the MUTCD only requires thru traffic to have a repeater for blind corners.  You're going to have to slow down anyways for a left turn. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 11, 2015, 05:04:25 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/17107337121/in/photostream/
Here is one that is missing all but one visor.

Also it has two red signals, similar to Texas and North Carolina for left turn signals.  I believe, that LADOTD has either a written or non written rule for having drawbridge signals with double reds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2015, 01:28:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 11, 2015, 05:04:25 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/17107337121/in/photostream/
Here is one that is missing all but one visor.

Also it has two red signals, similar to Texas and North Carolina for left turn signals.  I believe, that LADOTD has either a written or non written rule for having drawbridge signals with double reds.

Reminds me of the New Orleans CBD. Tons of signals without visors, and plenty with some on, some off.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 29, 2015, 04:56:42 PM
Pierce County just recently installed a new diagonal span-wire signal near South Hill, Washington. I find it amusing because, back in 2000, Pierce County celebrated the replacement of the last diagonal span-wire signal (http://goo.gl/iVLfcx), only to then install a new one 15 years later. They replaced the signals because they were hard to see. They've mitigated this by placing far-side ground-mounted signals for the sides of the intersection that are closer to their respective signals (thus the sides with the most neck-craning).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGK1IUpd.jpg&hash=5096b0d6f4872062ede57a0395ffec40145b5f8d)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 30, 2015, 09:37:03 AM
Huntsville only has one diagonal span-wire intersection with actual traffic lights on it left.
We still do have some intersections with diagonal spans that hold up beacons though, such as this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.744903,-86.60785,3a,66.8y,290.78h,90.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOJZmd8kQk9272odhZXHgaQ!2e0?authuser=1&hl=en).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on April 30, 2015, 06:00:34 PM
I wish I had a picture of the old diagonal span at W. Broad and Georgesville/Phillipi Rds. here. There were probably a dozen or more signals on this thing, it was fantastic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on April 30, 2015, 09:38:03 PM
Quote from: 6a on April 30, 2015, 06:00:34 PM
I wish I had a picture of the old diagonal span at W. Broad and Georgesville/Phillipi Rds. here. There were probably a dozen or more signals on this thing, it was fantastic.

New York installed stuff like that until pretty recently (they may still do so, but all NYSDOT intersections I've seen in the past 3-4 years out here are mast arms). A bunch of recently-installed (as in late summer 2014) county assemblies in Amherst do actually have 12 signals (8 3-section and 4 4-section with color-changing arrow).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 01, 2015, 01:08:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 29, 2015, 04:56:42 PM
Pierce County just recently installed a new diagonal span-wire signal near South Hill, Washington. I find it amusing because, back in 2000, Pierce County celebrated the replacement of the last diagonal span-wire signal (http://goo.gl/iVLfcx), only to then install a new one 15 years later. They replaced the signals because they were hard to see. They've mitigated this by placing far-side ground-mounted signals for the sides of the intersection that are closer to their respective signals (thus the sides with the most neck-craning).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGK1IUpd.jpg&hash=5096b0d6f4872062ede57a0395ffec40145b5f8d)

That's a first. A bottom bracket on two individual traffic signals. I wouldn't even consider that as a cluster without the top bracket!

:-|
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 01, 2015, 01:47:26 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 01, 2015, 01:08:53 AM
That's a first. A bottom bracket on two individual traffic signals. I wouldn't even consider that as a cluster without the top bracket!

"Pierce County" and "first" don't usually go together. If I understand what you're saying, the bracket is usually on top instead of the bottom? It did look a bit funny. Though I think it makes sense, since if wind started blowing them around, they risk blowing in front of each other. With the bracket, they'll at least swing together.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on May 01, 2015, 10:09:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2015, 01:47:26 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 01, 2015, 01:08:53 AM
That's a first. A bottom bracket on two individual traffic signals. I wouldn't even consider that as a cluster without the top bracket!

"Pierce County" and "first" don't usually go together. If I understand what you're saying, the bracket is usually on top instead of the bottom? It did look a bit funny. Though I think it makes sense, since if wind started blowing them around, they risk blowing in front of each other. With the bracket, they'll at least swing together.

It also prevents the other signals from hitting each other in heavy winds. NYSDOT used to do something similar whenever they installed lane signs on their installs to prevent the signs from hitting the signals. Here's one that used to be (since replaced) at the intersection of US 9 and NY 119 in Tarrytown...

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5220/5516216284_3e0c54605c_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 01, 2015, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Ian on May 01, 2015, 10:09:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2015, 01:47:26 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 01, 2015, 01:08:53 AM
That's a first. A bottom bracket on two individual traffic signals. I wouldn't even consider that as a cluster without the top bracket!

"Pierce County" and "first" don't usually go together. If I understand what you're saying, the bracket is usually on top instead of the bottom? It did look a bit funny. Though I think it makes sense, since if wind started blowing them around, they risk blowing in front of each other. With the bracket, they'll at least swing together.

It also prevents the other signals from hitting each other in heavy winds. NYSDOT used to do something similar whenever they installed lane signs on their installs to prevent the signs from hitting the signals. Here's one that used to be (since replaced) at the intersection of US 9 and NY 119 in Tarrytown...

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5220/5516216284_3e0c54605c_z.jpg)

New York span wire installs, whether they be NYSDOT or otherwise, typically connect closely-placed signals at the top and/or bottom, and have for some time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TrevorB on May 02, 2015, 08:24:12 PM
Southaven, MS

Goodman Road at Elmore Road/Greenbrook Parkway (soon to be replaced as MDOT adds mast arms along Goodman Road):

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.962748,-89.980445,3a,47.2y,76.56h,97.88t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9U09Gh7-4q82t0Np1xtZrg!2e0

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FcV2yjWS.jpg&hash=559534604239fc775424b4af4ec1dd1b20c53673)


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on May 03, 2015, 12:05:00 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 01, 2015, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Ian on May 01, 2015, 10:09:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2015, 01:47:26 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 01, 2015, 01:08:53 AM
That's a first. A bottom bracket on two individual traffic signals. I wouldn't even consider that as a cluster without the top bracket!

"Pierce County" and "first" don't usually go together. If I understand what you're saying, the bracket is usually on top instead of the bottom? It did look a bit funny. Though I think it makes sense, since if wind started blowing them around, they risk blowing in front of each other. With the bracket, they'll at least swing together.

It also prevents the other signals from hitting each other in heavy winds. NYSDOT used to do something similar whenever they installed lane signs on their installs to prevent the signs from hitting the signals. Here's one that used to be (since replaced) at the intersection of US 9 and NY 119 in Tarrytown...

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5220/5516216284_3e0c54605c_z.jpg)

New York span wire installs, whether they be NYSDOT or otherwise, typically connect closely-placed signals at the top and/or bottom, and have for some time.

Yes, I'm aware. But I'm talking about the lane signs, and how they're connected to the signals via that bottom bar you see in the photo. I've seen it on a good handful of intersections in the state, but a lot have been replaced since after, they started using tether wire to hold everything in place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on May 03, 2015, 12:21:31 PM
Quote from: Ian on May 03, 2015, 12:05:00 PM
Yes, I'm aware. But I'm talking about the lane signs, and how they're connected to the signals via that bottom bar you see in the photo. I've seen it on a good handful of intersections in the state, but a lot have been replaced since after, they started using tether wire to hold everything in place.
Region 2 loves to use tether wires; as observed yesterday on the Utica meet road tour.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 18, 2015, 01:11:49 AM
A new setup in Rosedale, Queens, N.Y. The setup is actuated, so pedestrian push buttons are present.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F17452558899_e8e02947f3_o%25201_zpst1rfwh32.jpg&hash=95b253a52292e44bc3e8edfb60d30ebbee4718f8)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F17451016978_1bb526721d_o_zpsvvcjzn46.jpg&hash=9ff2f87fed24e59d6f080ab155c5d1098f47166d)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F17016339844_800318178b_o_zps5wcl2vhx.jpg&hash=6040a16af4cdbbab53eb3cff98a7834a9b007516)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 18, 2015, 01:17:24 AM
Those are new? They look very old (to the uneducated, that is).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 18, 2015, 01:54:02 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 18, 2015, 01:17:24 AM
Those are new? They look very old (to the uneducated, that is).

Yes. Everything I believe has been installed by NYCDOT over a week ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 18, 2015, 04:12:27 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 18, 2015, 01:54:02 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 18, 2015, 01:17:24 AM
Those are new? They look very old (to the uneducated, that is).

Yes. Everything I believe has been installed by NYCDOT over a week ago.

Does the crosswalk have a countdown?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 18, 2015, 05:09:00 AM
No.

Standard Leotek hand and man inserts are in use. Depending on each borough's preference, NYCDOT continues to install them at intersections along with countdown units.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 23, 2015, 03:30:47 PM
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5461/17826993959_225533c18e_z.jpg)
A signal in New Orleans, LA that is missing some visors.  Notice that the overhead signal facing the right is missing its red light visor while the side mount facing the right has its red signal visor, but instead is missing its yellow and green signal visors.

Also to note in addition to this particular installation using double guys, it is also common for New Orleans using tunnel visors while the rest of LA uses cutout visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 23, 2015, 04:28:00 PM
^^ And a one way street where no vehicular traffic is facing the signals with the missing visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 23, 2015, 11:52:35 PM
Last time I was in New Orleans, a lot of the signals in the CBD were missing visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 24, 2015, 03:53:45 PM
Quote from: Big John on May 23, 2015, 04:28:00 PM
^^ And a one way street where no vehicular traffic is facing the signals with the missing visors.
No.  To the left is one way up river with traffic flowing to the right, as Magazine Street (among many) follow the course of the Mississippi River so they all form the shape of a crescent.

To the right its two way traffic and not featured in the photo is another street that takes the through traffic heading downriver along Magazine Street.  It is located on the left cut off by the photo.

So to the right is traffic coming into the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 25, 2015, 03:16:55 PM
A trolley track signal with Pennsylvania Railroad inspired positional lines instead of the traditional three color signals.
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8869/17463553754_73bba55a34_z.jpg)

Today's photo update.  Photo taken 10/24/13 under US 90 Business on St. Charles Avenue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on May 25, 2015, 05:19:52 PM
3M signals mounted on a sign gantry. These are on NY 252.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.08718,-77.632383,3a,37.5y,88.97h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVrklKsB9hI3DEAVuMITpXg!2e0?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on May 26, 2015, 04:50:56 PM
Intersections with dual left turn lanes but only one protected left turn signal head is provided.

NY 104 at Greece Ridge Center Mall., Rochester
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.208993,-77.689808,3a,75y,283h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shwL1Ri_ycH-xZDY9DJlzjA!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=en

NY 104 at Ridgemont Plaza
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.210142,-77.70306,3a,75y,250.13h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7JtYf8lK8akN_g_G3A8ZtA!2e0?hl=en

NY 96 at Commerce Dr., Victor
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.02051,-77.440501,3a,37.5y,202h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sgC2_80Kp5DriG80avvIn5A!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 04:12:17 PM
That seems common throughout a lot of areas of New York. Normally, there are at least two traffic signals that control one left turn lane elsewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 30, 2015, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 04:12:17 PM
That seems common throughout a lot of areas of New York. Normally, there are at least two traffic signals that control one left turn lane elsewhere.

You think so? In most of the New York installations I've seen, whether they be NYSDOT or county, there's one per lane at a minimum for a protected turn movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 30, 2015, 04:47:14 PM
Well here's something you don't see every day...
1st pic: 2 red lights.
2nd pic: 2 green lights.
3rd pic: 2 Burned out yellow lights!! 
The first yellow went out about 2 week ago. The 2nd yellow burned out a few days ago.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F8195B956-0168-4EB2-9B95-73D36DDFDEF4.jpg&hash=b5d23d5303a39cba758b7041d1fd2e9a4ff43e4a) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/8195B956-0168-4EB2-9B95-73D36DDFDEF4.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F62FB3733-6D7A-4C9F-95DC-148252539608.jpg&hash=e6544ba1c1da15932539b5d582594ffd2c1beb45) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/62FB3733-6D7A-4C9F-95DC-148252539608.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F3605D06A-6F19-4D98-A735-4A3D486F4AE2.jpg&hash=ef3ca0f1026cff55d6f0a750372f40e5f34ce18f) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/3605D06A-6F19-4D98-A735-4A3D486F4AE2.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Zeffy on May 30, 2015, 06:14:16 PM
I believe those are Trenton's jurisdiction and not the state's because West State Street is only within the city correct? Unfortunately, a lot of things seem to be broken (or breaking) in Trenton with regards to traffic signals. I'm fairly certain I know of a few broken detectors within the city, because they used to trigger and now they don't.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 30, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Re: the above post about 2 left-turn lanes with only one protected signal-head, that is common in Long Island, New York as well. Surprisingly, the MUTCD does not require a second head if there are two protected left-turn lanes unless the left turn is the predominant traffic movement.

And I agree that many other states do have a second head for most protected left-turns with either one or two lanes. California and Colorado come to mind.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 08:43:28 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 30, 2015, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 04:12:17 PM
That seems common throughout a lot of areas of New York. Normally, there are at least two traffic signals that control one left turn lane elsewhere.

You think so? In most of the New York installations I've seen, whether they be NYSDOT or county, there's one per lane at a minimum for a protected turn movement.

Yes. Consider NYC as an example.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 30, 2015, 09:43:06 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on May 30, 2015, 06:14:16 PM
I believe those are Trenton's jurisdiction and not the state's because West State Street is only within the city correct? Unfortunately, a lot of things seem to be broken (or breaking) in Trenton with regards to traffic signals. I'm fairly certain I know of a few broken detectors within the city, because they used to trigger and now they don't.

I believe all Trenton jurisdiction lights are fixed timed. There are even a few newer ones with attached optical sensors that are still timed. The one you mentioned previously that had an issue is a DRJTBC light, and I've never had any issues with that intersection myself. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on May 31, 2015, 11:36:16 AM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 08:43:28 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 30, 2015, 04:46:13 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on May 30, 2015, 04:12:17 PM
That seems common throughout a lot of areas of New York. Normally, there are at least two traffic signals that control one left turn lane elsewhere.

You think so? In most of the New York installations I've seen, whether they be NYSDOT or county, there's one per lane at a minimum for a protected turn movement.

Yes. Consider NYC as an example.
NYSDOT usually has two protected left turn signal heads when there are dual left turn lanes and has been doing it that way for years. In the examples I posted earlier I think the contractor cheaped out. Those signals are not even that old.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 12, 2015, 07:49:59 PM
Found this temporary one in DC during a construction project on Mass. Ave.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.899903,-77.015244,3a,75y,158.43h,98.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw2vamRgSu-4hUBp44dwDIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Unusual to see a span wire installation in our Nation's Capital.  Considering they're used to side mounted signaling, you would figure that they would continue using their norm as that is just as simple as running a wire if not simpler.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 12, 2015, 07:49:59 PM
Found this temporary one in DC during a construction project on Mass. Ave.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.899903,-77.015244,3a,75y,158.43h,98.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw2vamRgSu-4hUBp44dwDIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Unusual to see a span wire installation in our Nation's Capital.  Considering they're used to side mounted signaling, you would figure that they would continue using their norm as that is just as simple as running a wire if not simpler.

Hi! Washingtonian here.

That's interesting... you're right in that DC prefers to use side mounts, and that they *do* tend to use span wire during construction.

Here's my thinking: If you look at the poles they use at normal intersections, they tend to be pretty heavy, bulky and permanent. Most intersections have these types of poles:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1101.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg431%2Fwisvishr0%2FScreen%2520Shot%25202015-06-13%2520at%252012.24.06%2520AM.png&hash=c0b285266fbbaa7e4983ccbfc2074a219d67c562) (http://s1101.photobucket.com/user/wisvishr0/media/Screen%20Shot%202015-06-13%20at%2012.24.06%20AM.png.html)

There are (at least) two criteria that a temporary signal mount has to accomplish:

1) It's temporary (i.e. portable).
2) It's compatible with the signal (that is, you have to be able to attach the signal to the mount easily).

The normal poles DC uses aren't very temporary: they're heavy, steel beams that have to be secured in place by a huge block of concrete, and have to be buried in the ground. We'd then have to rule out the normal gray poles DC uses.

Alternatively, they could use a wooden side-pole that's temporary (like the poles that are used to hold up the span wire in your link above). The issue is, you can't use the normal method of mounting the signal to the pole (by using one of those gray arm things in my photo above), because the arm things aren't compatible with the wooden pole. You'd need to design a new arm to attach the signal to the pole. So a temporary wooden pole side mount wouldn't be compatible with the signal.

The easier option would be to use span wire, which is portable and readily available in Maryland *and* Virginia, both of which use span wire for temporary installations. Also, all traffic signals can be attached to the span wire fairly easily without having to use a different mount. Temporary, portable, available and compatible.

I have no idea if that makes sense, but that's my guess.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 13, 2015, 12:53:23 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 12, 2015, 07:49:59 PM
Found this temporary one in DC during a construction project on Mass. Ave.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.899903,-77.015244,3a,75y,158.43h,98.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw2vamRgSu-4hUBp44dwDIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Unusual to see a span wire installation in our Nation's Capital.  Considering they're used to side mounted signaling, you would figure that they would continue using their norm as that is just as simple as running a wire if not simpler.

For that particular installation, it's much simpler to use the span wire. Side mounts typically mean one signal on far left and far right, which would mean a temporary pole on 4 corners and longer wire runs. This setup uses only 3 temporary poles, and all the wire runs to both signal heads controlling a direction are right next to each other overhead--this makes it much easier to install and remove.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 02:26:46 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Hi! Washingtonian here.

In New England, if you say you are a Washingtonian, do people assume DC? Because out west, a "Washingtonian" is someone from the state of Washington.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 02:36:50 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 02:26:46 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Hi! Washingtonian here.

In New England, if you say you are a Washingtonian, do people assume DC? Because out west, a "Washingtonian" is someone from the state of Washington.

Quote from: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 02:26:46 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Hi! Washingtonian here.

In New England, if you say you are a Washingtonian, do people assume DC? Because out west, a "Washingtonian" is someone from the state of Washington.
I don't know if people recognize it in New England, but "Washingtonian" is the demonym for those of us from DC (we even have a local publication called "Washingtonian Magazine.")

I know those from Washington State are also called Washingtonians, but I didn't think it would be ambiguous given the context. We are, after all, talking about DC.

Maybe to limit any confusion, we should change the names to reflect the river that flows through it, as they do in the UK. DC could be "Washington-upon-Potomac" and Washington State could be "Washington-upon-Cascade." In that case, I'd be a "Washington-upon-Potomackian."

I like it. ;)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 03:03:32 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 02:36:50 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 02:26:46 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Hi! Washingtonian here.

In New England, if you say you are a Washingtonian, do people assume DC? Because out west, a "Washingtonian" is someone from the state of Washington.

I don't know if people recognize it in New England, but "Washingtonian" is the demonym for those of us from DC (we even have a local publication called "Washingtonian Magazine.")

I know those from Washington State are also called Washingtonians, but I didn't think it would be ambiguous given the context. We are, after all, talking about DC.

Maybe to limit any confusion, we should change the names to reflect the river that flows through it, as they do in the UK. DC could be "Washington-upon-Potomac" and Washington State could be "Washington-upon-Cascade." In that case, I'd be a "Washington-upon-Potomackian."

I like it. ;)

Lol, that might be a bit longwinded. I think we should just stick to using both and letting the listener figure it out via context. I just brought it up because I hadn't thought much about it before, not necessarily because I was confused (though it did catch me off guard).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on June 13, 2015, 02:20:22 PM
I just say they're from DC. A lot simpler.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on June 13, 2015, 06:43:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 13, 2015, 02:26:46 AM
Quote from: wisvishr0 on June 13, 2015, 12:42:35 AM
Hi! Washingtonian here.

In New England, if you say you are a Washingtonian, do people assume DC? Because out west, a "Washingtonian" is someone from the state of Washington.

Any palm / plant enthusiasts like myself also know the Latin name for a Mexican Fan Pan is called the Washingtonia Robusta and the Washingtonia filifera for the Desert Fan Palm, both found in California.

Sorry to get off topic a little bit, but I had to bring it up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 13, 2015, 09:37:05 PM
Bought this 12 inch LFE signal today:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/527/18596601819_679930f1e1.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ukjrPR)My 12 inch LFE Traffic Light (https://flic.kr/p/ukjrPR) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 02, 2015, 09:42:38 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FG84Gl9N.jpg%3F1&hash=7e7221fc03d7cf786dda829bceabc1a72f111a22)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fw2I2r6B.jpg%3F1&hash=ceed86bb54653d93f8cf5918ad75c07a4be1c90b)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuxLk5fk.jpg%3F2&hash=a45ddcedd0de800d5f6b9f95bfd585e1a371e9ea)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeDB0Zkj.jpg%3F1&hash=c34502f616377d1160e94607bf7e54edce6a0692)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fqbetaor.jpg%3F1&hash=b1d9a89176703ac4e7edc03d410a1ce6c98e686a)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKgdHt7f.jpg%3F1&hash=c67c55943c0f39c1592406eea181081d385d8c9d)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlQ0Zqj4.jpg%3F1&hash=d2cf5b6810b7d38d1f05134e1c5bdf1c7736b14f)
(Yes, they where taken with a phone, sorry there not the best.)

As long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.
They also have FYA's too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex4897 on July 03, 2015, 10:31:22 AM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 02, 2015, 09:42:38 AM
[snip]
(Yes, they where taken with a phone, sorry there not the best.)

As long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.
They also have FYA's too.
Hold up, the doghouse in that second picture is displaying a yellow arrow in the bottom left aspect.  Can you explain the phasing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 03, 2015, 11:04:07 AM
Quote from: Alex4897 on July 03, 2015, 10:31:22 AM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 02, 2015, 09:42:38 AM
[snip]
(Yes, they where taken with a phone, sorry there not the best.)

As long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.
They also have FYA's too.
Hold up, the doghouse in that second picture is displaying a yellow arrow in the bottom left aspect.  Can you explain the phasing?


It looks like it has the flashing Yellow for "Yield", which converts to a Green when the turn is protected.  I just saw one of these in Washington, and found it odd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 03, 2015, 12:23:20 PM
Saw this along US 280 in the Birmingham, AL area:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/332/18760409494_c313cb0321.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197)Odd Siemens Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on July 03, 2015, 10:01:59 PM
Two from Everett, WA. Firstly, an unusual gantry:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/499/18345185553_8a3093c6a5_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/tX6SwD)
Hewitt & Colby (https://flic.kr/p/tX6SwD) by SounderBruce (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sounderbruce/), on Flickr

And secondly, a continuous green light at a seagull intersection:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/461/18779519629_e0f5e68c43_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uBtWVc)Continuous green light in Everett (https://flic.kr/p/uBtWVc) by SounderBruce (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sounderbruce/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on July 04, 2015, 10:45:56 AM
Quote from: TEG24601 on July 03, 2015, 11:04:07 AM
Quote from: Alex4897 on July 03, 2015, 10:31:22 AM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 02, 2015, 09:42:38 AM
[snip]
(Yes, they where taken with a phone, sorry there not the best.)

As long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.
They also have FYA's too.
Hold up, the doghouse in that second picture is displaying a yellow arrow in the bottom left aspect.  Can you explain the phasing?


It looks like it has the flashing Yellow for "Yield", which converts to a Green when the turn is protected.  I just saw one of these in Washington, and found it odd.

I doubt the FYA in the Eau Claire photos is bimodal. My guess is the left turn is permissive-only throughout the cycle, since there is no dedicated left turn lane on the doghouse approaches. I haven't been able to find any specific verbiage, but it may be an un-written WisDOT policy not to allow/use them. (Although, yes, local municipalities could experiment, but they generally stick within WisDOT design parameters).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 04, 2015, 11:09:07 AM
Quote from: Bruce on July 03, 2015, 10:01:59 PM
Two from Everett, WA. Firstly, an unusual gantry:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/499/18345185553_8a3093c6a5_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/tX6SwD)
Hewitt & Colby (https://flic.kr/p/tX6SwD) by SounderBruce (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sounderbruce/), on Flickr

And secondly, a continuous green light at a seagull intersection:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/461/18779519629_e0f5e68c43_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uBtWVc)Continuous green light in Everett (https://flic.kr/p/uBtWVc) by SounderBruce (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sounderbruce/), on Flickr


I love the unique gantries that Everett comes up with.  The single span ones in South Everett along Evergreen Way and Everett Mall Way are awesome.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 04, 2015, 02:34:41 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

...

They also have FYA's too.

What I'm confused about is that the 5-section doghouse display is overhead, but the far left post-mounted vertical displays use only 4 sections... That does not make sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on July 04, 2015, 03:58:30 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 04, 2015, 02:34:41 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

...

They also have FYA's too.

What I'm confused about is that the 5-section doghouse display is overhead, but the far left post-mounted vertical displays use only 4 sections... That does not make sense.

That would blow my permissive-only phasing theory out of the water. Maybe Eau Claire is experimenting with a bimodal signal indication :hmmm:

Maybe those approaches operate in split-phasing part of the day? The lack of a dedicated left-turn lane throws a monkey-wrench into things.

Looking at a before reconstruction GSV image (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.807023,-91.501385,3a,75y,74h,85.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLkDdBFTkiJeD9OOmIxV01w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1) doesn't really shed any light either. I really wish Eau Claire wasn't a 2.5-hour drive away. :banghead:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on July 05, 2015, 06:25:51 AM
The doghouse with the FYA setup on the left side uses a bi-modal section on the bottom. After the initial protected left turn movement ends, the amber arrow then flashes for the remainder of the phase.

Finally, the top section then illuminates amber (arrow).


The video below (from Monte) provides further insight on what I mentioned above...

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 10:44:25 AM
My question is if a FYA is really needed in a doghouse assembly?  Just the doghouse itself has meant that left turns are only protected during the green arrow phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 05, 2015, 11:41:42 AM
Technically, a solid green has always meant you can turn left when safe to do so. Why we need a flashing yellow arrow in the first place always baffled me.

This weekend, here in Jersey, I watched a car with Texas plate refuse to turn left on a green ball at one intersection. I guess she wanted a yellow flashing arrow. Based on the lack of cross traffic which wouldn't cause the light to cycle and the unusual lineup of cars behind her, she was probably waiting there a long time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 05, 2015, 02:26:13 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 05, 2015, 11:41:42 AM
Why we need a flashing yellow arrow in the first place always baffled me.

Yellow trap, plus left turns can go when oncoming traffic has a protected left turn, so theoretically there's a higher vehicle through-put.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on July 05, 2015, 03:53:37 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 10:44:25 AM
My question is if a FYA is really needed in a doghouse assembly?  Just the doghouse itself has meant that left turns are only protected during the green arrow phase.

It may be cheaper to install than either a four-section or three-section FYA unit. Just my two cents.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 05, 2015, 04:42:25 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 03, 2015, 12:23:20 PM
Saw this along US 280 in the Birmingham, AL area:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/332/18760409494_c313cb0321.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197)Odd Siemens Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

I've never understood these or the green arrow only signals.  Yes, there probably is a left turn arrow that is controlled by a light RYG or doghouse, but in my opinion, this type of signal is a waste of electricity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 05, 2015, 04:47:12 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on July 05, 2015, 03:53:37 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 10:44:25 AM
My question is if a FYA is really needed in a doghouse assembly?  Just the doghouse itself has meant that left turns are only protected during the green arrow phase.

It may be cheaper to install than either a four-section or three-section FYA unit. Just my two cents.

This is especially true if converting from a regular protected/permissive doghouse setup to a FYA.  The doghouses are already installed, so it's naturally cheaper.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 09:57:13 PM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

When you have a large population of retirees & senior citizens, it doesn't really matter what you do at intersections to try to make them safer, they still won't get it.  And it's not just in Florida either.  I live in an area where the AARPers will sit in a right turn lane at a dead stop despite a red ball w/ green right arrow directly ahead of them -- and a toot on the horn doesn't wake them up, either.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 05, 2015, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 09:57:13 PM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

When you have a large population of retirees & senior citizens, it doesn't really matter what you do at intersections to try to make them safer, they still won't get it.  And it's not just in Florida either.  I live in an area where the AARPers will sit in a right turn lane at a dead stop despite a red ball w/ green right arrow directly ahead of them -- and a toot on the horn doesn't wake them up, either.

That or they make rights on red into other vehicles. The median age in Buffalo is quite high and you can tell it on the roads by the stupidity of the drivers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on July 05, 2015, 10:39:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 04, 2015, 02:34:41 PM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 03, 2015, 01:14:22 AM
The first doghouse style stop lights in Wisconsin where recently installed by the City of Eau Claire. Here are some photos I took:

...

They also have FYA's too.

What I'm confused about is that the 5-section doghouse display is overhead, but the far left post-mounted vertical displays use only 4 sections... That does not make sense.

That could be a copy of the original FYA Doghouse setup that operates in split phase at peak times and permissive only at non-peak; that has a conventional 4-head FYA on the left pole. Mn/DOT later modified the phasing and changed the signal on the left pole to a second doghouse for the more common protected / permissive setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: uknowbeers on July 05, 2015, 10:44:17 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 09:57:13 PM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

When you have a large population of retirees & senior citizens, it doesn't really matter what you do at intersections to try to make them safer, they still won't get it.  And it's not just in Florida either.  I live in an area where the AARPers will sit in a right turn lane at a dead stop despite a red ball w/ green right arrow directly ahead of them -- and a toot on the horn doesn't wake them up, either.

That intersection is not in a retiree area. It's in Orlando suburbia and has mostly commuters and families going to/from the local schools. I assume the protected-only was installed because of the odd configuration of the side streets. If you need a definitive answer, PM me and I will talk to my contact at the county.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tradephoric on July 06, 2015, 10:01:21 AM
Quote from: uknowbeers on July 05, 2015, 10:44:17 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 09:57:13 PM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

When you have a large population of retirees & senior citizens, it doesn't really matter what you do at intersections to try to make them safer, they still won't get it.  And it's not just in Florida either.  I live in an area where the AARPers will sit in a right turn lane at a dead stop despite a red ball w/ green right arrow directly ahead of them -- and a toot on the horn doesn't wake them up, either.

That intersection is not in a retiree area. It's in Orlando suburbia and has mostly commuters and families going to/from the local schools. I assume the protected-only was installed because of the odd configuration of the side streets. If you need a definitive answer, PM me and I will talk to my contact at the county.

Did the phasing of the left-turn change when the signal was converted from a doghouse to a FYA?  With this example, a leading-left would likely create a lot of problems with traffic blocking the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on July 06, 2015, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

My first and only accident I was involved in was from a flashing yellow ball.  There's a supplement under the sign that implies that the signal is for left turns. 

Some douche thought he could jump it or didn't know it wasn't protected.  Needless to say, his insurance covered everything.   I noticed that SDOT updated all of the U-District 8" flashing yellow balls to 12" flashing yellow arrows about a month after my accident. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.661256,-122.306592,3a,47.2y,103.84h,96.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG7thC70ZNPGncjfHbYELiw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: uknowbeers on July 06, 2015, 09:45:58 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 06, 2015, 10:01:21 AM
Quote from: uknowbeers on July 05, 2015, 10:44:17 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 05, 2015, 09:57:13 PM
Quote from: RG407 on July 05, 2015, 09:16:26 PM
Here's a flashing yellow arrow that flashes no more. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.713074,-81.362477,3a,75y,235.72h,77.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK0BG6N80g0reieXW99UliQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1)

This is the intersection of Longwood Hills Rd./E.E. Williamson Rd. and Rangeline Rd. in Longwood, FL, near Orlando.  Until last year there was a doghouse signal at this intersection.  It was replaced by a FYA.  A few weeks ago, the "Left turn yield on flashing yellow arrow" sign was removed and the signal now only operates with protected left turns.

Has anyone else seen this happen?  My guess is the FYA may have caused an increase in accidents since a lot people don't know what to do with them.  I've had a couple of near-misses with drivers turning when they weren't supposed to.

When you have a large population of retirees & senior citizens, it doesn't really matter what you do at intersections to try to make them safer, they still won't get it.  And it's not just in Florida either.  I live in an area where the AARPers will sit in a right turn lane at a dead stop despite a red ball w/ green right arrow directly ahead of them -- and a toot on the horn doesn't wake them up, either.

That intersection is not in a retiree area. It's in Orlando suburbia and has mostly commuters and families going to/from the local schools. I assume the protected-only was installed because of the odd configuration of the side streets. If you need a definitive answer, PM me and I will talk to my contact at the county.

Did the phasing of the left-turn change when the signal was converted from a doghouse to a FYA?  With this example, a leading-left would likely create a lot of problems with traffic blocking the intersection.

I don't travel that street often, but I highly doubt it was anything other than Leading Left, with the doghouse or with the flashing yellow arrow. FDOT likes lagging lefts at intersections (during peak times) but Seminole County almost never uses lagging lefts. I can't think of any lagging lefts on Seminole county-maintained roads, in fact.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 07, 2015, 01:48:12 AM
In Puyallup, Washington, where 2nd St intersects Meridian Ave and River Rd north of the city center near the auto dealers, is this rather strange setup. The two right-most side-saddle signals have, in order from top to bottom, red orb, amber orb, amber arrow, green arrow. In one phase of the video, the two signals act as additional repeaters for the thru-traffic, but during the latter phase, they are only for the right turn. Very strange. Oh and then during the amber phase, both the amber arrow and amber orb light up. Wtf.

https://youtu.be/bLg9ZOZIWx4
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on July 08, 2015, 12:03:04 AM
Though you can't see it in this picture, the signal at 23rd & John in Seattle has a straight arrow AND a left turn arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/706kr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:12:04 PM
http://la.streetsblog.org/2015/07/06/dangerous-intersection-of-venice-and-robertson-gets-a-flashing-yellow-signal/

Quote

Last November, David Lindley was walking across the street at the five point intersection of Venice and South Robertson Boulevard when he was struck and killed. Lindley, an autistic teen who attended nearby Hamilton High School, was mourned by friends and family who vowed to see the intersection fixed.

...

Over six months after Lindley's tragic death, LADOT recently unveiled its answer to the safety issues created by what one Hamilton High School student described as a "busy, confusing and dangerous"  intersection, a flashing yellow arrow warning drivers to be aware of pedestrians. This is the first time the City of Los Angeles has used this traffic control device, but they are common in other parts of the country. Motorists have shown greater likelihood to yield during a flashing yellow arrow than a red one.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 07, 2015, 01:48:12 AM
In Puyallup, Washington, where 2nd St intersects Meridian Ave and River Rd north of the city center near the auto dealers, is this rather strange setup. The two right-most side-saddle signals have, in order from top to bottom, red orb, amber orb, amber arrow, green arrow. In one phase of the video, the two signals act as additional repeaters for the thru-traffic, but during the latter phase, they are only for the right turn. Very strange. Oh and then during the amber phase, both the amber arrow and amber orb light up. Wtf.

https://youtu.be/bLg9ZOZIWx4

I don't consider it that strange.  I believe that the light is meant mainly to control the right turn, but it can also be used to provide additional visibility to the red light.

Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

In most states, a red right arrow is synonymous with no turn while the arrow is on.  So simply making the signal RA,YA,GA would prohibit turning on red.  So the red arrow is replaced with a red ball.  But if you have a red ball, it should be on at times when the other red balls are on, even if a right turn is permitted during the right turn phase (cross-street left turn phase).  That's what we see with red ball and green arrow at the same time.  The yellow ball and yellow arrow denote that both straight and right turn green times are ending and that red is approaching.

There is a similar signal phasing at the corner of Santa Monica and Wilshire in Beverly Hills, CA.  There, the right turn signal is Red ball, yellow arrow, green arrow.

At SM & Wilshire, like the intersection above, pedestrians are not allowed to cross the street on the right side.  That is why you have a green arrow lit for the entire green phase.  If pedestrians would be allowed to cross, you would probably see a 5-section signal on the right, which is fairly common.  R,Y,G,YA,GA.  The sequence would be as folllows:  R, R+GA, R+YA, R (all-red), G, Y, R.  The  arrows would be lit only when the cross street has green left arrow and yellow left arrow, and the RYG would match the other lights at the intersection.  But here,  as there are no pedestrian conflicts, the green ball is eliminated.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 09, 2015, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

They don't. Red balls and red arrows are synonymous. It's a little annoying to come to an off-ramp of a freeway, and some tourist is sitting there on a red arrow not turning, when they can. There's usually a symphony of horns but they don't catch on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 09, 2015, 02:01:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2015, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

They don't. Red balls and red arrows are synonymous. It's a little annoying to come to an off-ramp of a freeway, and some tourist is sitting there on a red arrow not turning, when they can. There's usually a symphony of horns but they don't catch on.
That happens there too?  I thought it only happened here in Florida.  Here, too we have people who sit at lights with a green right turn arrow saying its okay to turn.  As we know a green arrow is the same as a green ball as well, but some people are idiots.  Remember the flashing yellow arrow because some drivers cannot tell the difference between a protected left turn and and non protected turn with just the arrow at the beginning and allowed to turn on regular green.  If they cannot tell the difference there on that one, then expect it on right turns red or green arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 05:28:47 AM
There's definitely a patchwork of laws on whether or not it's legal to turn right on a red arrow. I know in California and Idaho it is not legal, but in states like Washington, Oregon, Mississippi, and Florida, it is legal.

Do you ever think someday we'll see something like a flashing red arrow to universally permit turning right on red (after stop), and a solid red arrow to universally mean such a turn is prohibited on red? That way, the meaning and legality are consistent across all 50 states. Of course these would be mostly for dedicated turn lanes only - intersections getting by just fine with red balls could likely stay that way.

I'd also want to advocate for a flashing red left arrow to denote turning left on red is legal onto one-way streets. Here in Oregon and Washington, a left on red onto a one-way (or freeway onramp) is legal, even from a two-way street. Seemed a bit odd to me at first (I grew up in the southeast and had never heard of such a legal maneuver), but after doing it a few times, it makes complete sense to me, and I'm happy to live somewhere where I can do that legally. Problem is, a ton of people around here have no idea it's legal, and just sit at the red light when there's little to no traffic and when they can safely make a turn. Some intersections have the flashing yellow arrow, but of course the arrow is red when cross traffic has green, but the turn can still be made legally. If the left turn arrows in this situation flashed red, people would know that they could turn on red after stopping and yielding to all other traffic and pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 09, 2015, 08:21:41 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2015, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

They don't. Red balls and red arrows are synonymous. It's a little annoying to come to an off-ramp of a freeway, and some tourist is sitting there on a red arrow not turning, when they can. There's usually a symphony of horns but they don't catch on.

From New York DMV:

Quote
Red Arrow: Do not go in the direction of the arrow until the red arrow light is of and a green light or arrow light goes on. A right or left turn on red is not permitted at a red arrow.

Be careful.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kkt on July 09, 2015, 12:34:34 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 09, 2015, 12:33:27 PM
Quote from: kkt on July 09, 2015, 12:32:27 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 05:28:47 AM
There's definitely a patchwork of laws on whether or not it's legal to turn right on a red arrow. I know in California and Idaho it is not legal, but in states like Washington, Oregon, Mississippi, and Florida, it is legal.

Right turn on red is legal in California, in fact California invented the legal right turn on red (at least according to Annie Hall and this legislative report http://www.cga.ct.gov/ps99/rpt/olr/htm/99-r-1021.htm (http://www.cga.ct.gov/ps99/rpt/olr/htm/99-r-1021.htm)

And according to Wikipedia, right turn on red is now the rule in all 50 states, although some cities (notably New York) have citywide laws against RTOR.

Red arrow.

Yes, I saw that right after posting and removed my post.  But not soon enough.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 09, 2015, 12:45:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 09, 2015, 08:21:41 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2015, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

They don't. Red balls and red arrows are synonymous. It's a little annoying to come to an off-ramp of a freeway, and some tourist is sitting there on a red arrow not turning, when they can. There's usually a symphony of horns but they don't catch on.

From New York DMV:

Quote
Red Arrow: Do not go in the direction of the arrow until the red arrow light is of and a green light or arrow light goes on. A right or left turn on red is not permitted at a red arrow.

Be careful.

I think he was specifically referencing WA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 09, 2015, 01:40:53 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 09, 2015, 12:45:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 09, 2015, 08:21:41 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2015, 01:07:03 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 08, 2015, 09:27:31 PM
Does WA consider a red right arrow to mean no turn on red?

They don't. Red balls and red arrows are synonymous. It's a little annoying to come to an off-ramp of a freeway, and some tourist is sitting there on a red arrow not turning, when they can. There's usually a symphony of horns but they don't catch on.

From New York DMV:

Quote
Red Arrow: Do not go in the direction of the arrow until the red arrow light is of and a green light or arrow light goes on. A right or left turn on red is not permitted at a red arrow.

Be careful.

I think he was specifically referencing WA.

Yeah; I was just sloppy in joining the overall conversation about "right turn on red arrow."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 02:12:04 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 05:28:47 AM
I'd also want to advocate for a flashing red left arrow to denote turning left on red is legal onto one-way streets. Here in Oregon and Washington, a left on red onto a one-way (or freeway onramp) is legal, even from a two-way street. Seemed a bit odd to me at first (I grew up in the southeast and had never heard of such a legal maneuver), but after doing it a few times, it makes complete sense to me, and I'm happy to live somewhere where I can do that legally.

It's also legal in Michigan to turn left on red from a two-way street to a one-way street including freeway entrance ramps.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 04:14:15 PM
Quote from: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 02:12:04 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 05:28:47 AM
I'd also want to advocate for a flashing red left arrow to denote turning left on red is legal onto one-way streets. Here in Oregon and Washington, a left on red onto a one-way (or freeway onramp) is legal, even from a two-way street. Seemed a bit odd to me at first (I grew up in the southeast and had never heard of such a legal maneuver), but after doing it a few times, it makes complete sense to me, and I'm happy to live somewhere where I can do that legally.

It's also legal in Michigan to turn left on red from a two-way street to a one-way street including freeway entrance ramps.

I haven't read up on Michigan's laws. Is that turn legal on a red arrow, or just a red ball? The two other states in which it's legal to turn left from a two-way to a one-way on red are Alaska and Idaho I believe; however, Idaho permits the turn only on a red ball, not on a red arrow. Washington and Oregon make no distinction between an arrow and ball in regards to turns on red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 05:03:30 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 04:14:15 PM
Quote from: Brandon on July 09, 2015, 02:12:04 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on July 09, 2015, 05:28:47 AM
I'd also want to advocate for a flashing red left arrow to denote turning left on red is legal onto one-way streets. Here in Oregon and Washington, a left on red onto a one-way (or freeway onramp) is legal, even from a two-way street. Seemed a bit odd to me at first (I grew up in the southeast and had never heard of such a legal maneuver), but after doing it a few times, it makes complete sense to me, and I'm happy to live somewhere where I can do that legally.

It's also legal in Michigan to turn left on red from a two-way street to a one-way street including freeway entrance ramps.

I haven't read up on Michigan's laws. Is that turn legal on a red arrow, or just a red ball? The two other states in which it's legal to turn left from a two-way to a one-way on red are Alaska and Idaho I believe; however, Idaho permits the turn only on a red ball, not on a red arrow. Washington and Oregon make no distinction between an arrow and ball in regards to turns on red.

A red ball equals a red arrow in both Michigan and Illinois, and are treated the same.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 09, 2015, 11:04:03 PM
I had only asked earlier about WA's right turn on red arrow law to try to make sense of the signal that Jakeroot posted.

But one thing that is clear given the conversation above is that it is a problem that there are different laws regarding right turn on red arrow, left turn on red, and other laws heralds the need for one set of national standards with regard to traffic laws.

So, given that most states have a no left on red onto a one-way that should be the national default.  For any intersection where the turn is permitted, it can be permitted with a sign"  "Left Turn on Red Permitted after Stop".

Similarly, I'm opposed to NYC's blanket rule against No Turn on Red, because it conflicts with teh national default.  I beleive that a sign should be posted <i> at every intersection </i> that it is warranted.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 11, 2015, 09:40:17 PM
Here's an odd one- Slade Ave at Ridge Rd/US 219/I-90 in West Seneca, NY (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.828792,-78.787797,3a,17.5y,200.81h,94.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPxLLpy0W5JPqKYx77hLvIQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DPxLLpy0W5JPqKYx77hLvIQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D67.663025%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656). Both turns are protected-only and each movement only gets one signal face (a big no-no). Top section in each face is a red arrow, middle is a circular yellow, and the bottom is a bimodal yellow/green arrow. I do not know if the middle section ever illuminates. I do not know if this is an NYSDOT or county install, but the name blades and NTOR signage are clearly NYSDOT.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 11, 2015, 09:52:17 PM
Signal replacement...

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.565335,-81.165705,3a,15y,20.19h,93.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGY1Unwz9Zhwb4r60XfBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

They're even replacing entire mast arms that are very new:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.565506,-81.194896,3a,51.5y,37.12h,82.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0MB4xVYRcR1LCUkpgwz0Lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

They're doing a few in X patterns for the wire mounted, I hate that:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.566921,-81.207421,3a,75y,287.69h,76.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sofcgqYOVF-FSwKJtsgY9kQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Mast arms built in 2011 with a bracket to extend it for this construction project being replaced by wires:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.568762,-81.223554,3a,75y,270.23h,84.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sz6p4mlPZ-sRZToEWFb7zGw!2e0!5s20150401T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on July 12, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
What's the logic in downgrading masts to wires?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 12, 2015, 03:38:35 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on July 12, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
What's the logic in downgrading masts to wires?
Higher wind resistance.
Here in Huntsville, when the city installed new signals along Airport Road after an F4 tornado tore out all of the old ones in 1989, they installed all of the signals on span wires even though some of the old ones were on masts for the added wind resistance.
Span signals may have a tendency to get blown around in the wind, but the supporting structure is less likely to collapse in high winds, from what I understand.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 12, 2015, 03:51:05 PM
I was noticing that in Fort Worth, Texas the signals there are NOT horizontal like the rest of Texas.  I even noticed that it extended outside the city limits as well.  Going east they were all along the IH 30 up until Arlington.

Am I to assume that its Tarrant County that prefers standard signals in which I was seeing?  I also know that San Antonio and Galveston both use standard as well, but not in their metro areas surrounding so much.  I was just wondering what Fort Worth area signals have in common that use them.  Not that I have anything against them, but I just cannot find the defined boundary of where the vertical ends and the rest of Texas begins so I am assuming that that is Tarrant County's rule to use vertical without backplates just as SA and Galveston have done.

BTW having different assemblies throughout Texas makes signaling more interesting between the black heads in Greater Houston to some span wires in suburban and rural areas to the rest being curved mast arms or straight arms all throughout the Lone Star State.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 12, 2015, 10:35:38 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 12, 2015, 03:38:35 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on July 12, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
What's the logic in downgrading masts to wires?
Higher wind resistance.
Here in Huntsville, when the city installed new signals along Airport Road after an F4 tornado tore out all of the old ones in 1989, they installed all of the signals on span wires even though some of the old ones were on masts for the added wind resistance.
Span signals may have a tendency to get blown around in the wind, but the supporting structure is less likely to collapse in high winds, from what I understand.

Funny, because the opposite is, from what I've been told, why NYSDOT Region 5 is mainly using mast arms from now on outside of temporary installations. Buffalo area winds are, on many days, over 20 mph steady and higher is not uncommon. They've recently had a lot of issues with signals falling during the heavy gusts this area is known for and the mast arms show little movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 12, 2015, 10:39:16 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on July 12, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
What's the logic in downgrading masts to wires?
The only thing I can think of is that the state came up with this plan a very, very long time ago, and bid it as such. The county has upgraded various intersecting roads and put the mast arms in with accommodations for this expansion, for the state decided not to change their spec to account for that. It doesn't make much sense why they are replacing  mast arms that were put are only a few years old.

I know here in Florida, they say the mast arms are generally hurricane ready while the span wires are not. I know in South Florida when we had the last 3 hurricanes, very few mast arms failed and the signals remainend intact (minus cameras and backlit street signs). Nearly every span wire lost every signal. Their big reason for not for not doing more mast arms is that the cost is double, and even more when the arms are especially long.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 13, 2015, 02:31:00 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 12, 2015, 03:38:35 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on July 12, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
What's the logic in downgrading masts to wires?
Higher wind resistance.
Here in Huntsville, when the city installed new signals along Airport Road after an F4 tornado tore out all of the old ones in 1989, they installed all of the signals on span wires even though some of the old ones were on masts for the added wind resistance.
Span signals may have a tendency to get blown around in the wind, but the supporting structure is less likely to collapse in high winds, from what I understand.

A mast arm, properly designed and installed, can have high wind resistance. This is why some places with high winds (or frequent high wind potential) either tend to have mast arms or are making that conversion.

Another consideration is the cost long term. While mast arm signals probably cost twice as much in the initial installation, that is potentially offset by long-term maintenance costs. Span wire installations have to have tension wires periodically tightened and are more susceptible to damage in winds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: AndyMax25 on July 14, 2015, 03:31:48 PM
Check out this traffic signal in the background go haywire.  The battery backup controller was failing. https://vimeo.com/133485530 (https://vimeo.com/133485530)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXKyBRUj.jpg&hash=ed67591b34f116884b9e04a0cb180bd373916924)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fi701mhs.jpg&hash=213fc6b014945f7f52cfabf2d44223809f4a437b)

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:22:11 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.

This doesn't happen a lot, but perhaps they should take a hint and put the signals on the sides of the street, like they do at other intersections downtown.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 21, 2015, 05:29:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:22:11 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.

This doesn't happen a lot, but perhaps they should take a hint and put the signals on the sides of the street, like they do at other intersections downtown.

Um, there are no signals above the street here:  https://goo.gl/maps/ZvJ1X . 

Looks like he just took the curve too sharp, and the light got hung up or imbedded in the door of that truck.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:42:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 21, 2015, 05:29:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:22:11 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.

This doesn't happen a lot, but perhaps they should take a hint and put the signals on the sides of the street, like they do at other intersections downtown.

Um, there are no signals above the street here:  https://goo.gl/maps/ZvJ1X . 

Looks like he just took the curve too sharp, and the light got hung up or [e]mbedded in the door of that truck.

Touché. I cannot see any other hanging signals in the photo nor any wires. It would appear he snagged the southern signal facing Marion turning right from 1st Ave (N) towards Marion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 24, 2015, 11:38:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:42:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 21, 2015, 05:29:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:22:11 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.

This doesn't happen a lot, but perhaps they should take a hint and put the signals on the sides of the street, like they do at other intersections downtown.

Um, there are no signals above the street here:  https://goo.gl/maps/ZvJ1X . 

Looks like he just took the curve too sharp, and the light got hung up or [e]mbedded in the door of that truck.

Touché. I cannot see any other hanging signals in the photo nor any wires. It would appear he snagged the southern signal facing Marion turning right from 1st Ave (N) towards Marion.

The discussion begs the question as to what height signals should be hung at.  (Excuse grammar).   While I have seen low clearance signs and recently posted about the low R/R bridge above Gregson Street in Durham, NC that is frequently struck by trucks, I have never seen a low clearance sign in relation to signals hung on a wire (or a mast arm). 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 24, 2015, 12:02:57 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 24, 2015, 11:38:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:42:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 21, 2015, 05:29:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2015, 05:22:11 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 21, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 21, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Apparently traffic lights aren't high enough for this rental truck driver:

...[photos removed]...

1st & Marion in Seattle this morning.

Had the steep incline not been present immediately downstream of the signal, the truck probably would have had enough clearance.

This doesn't happen a lot, but perhaps they should take a hint and put the signals on the sides of the street, like they do at other intersections downtown.

Um, there are no signals above the street here:  https://goo.gl/maps/ZvJ1X . 

Looks like he just took the curve too sharp, and the light got hung up or [e]mbedded in the door of that truck.

Touché. I cannot see any other hanging signals in the photo nor any wires. It would appear he snagged the southern signal facing Marion turning right from 1st Ave (N) towards Marion.

The discussion begs the question as to what height signals should be hung at.  (Excuse grammar).   While I have seen low clearance signs and recently posted about the low R/R bridge above Gregson Street in Durham, NC that is frequently struck by trucks, I have never seen a low clearance sign in relation to signals hung on a wire (or a mast arm). 

Obviously, signals are supposed to be above the minimum height for trucks.  In most cases, they are going to be about 15' or higher at their low point above the road.  In this case, the rental truck would've only been about 11 feet high, so clearly the light wouldn't have been that low as buses are usually a little taller, and tractor trailers are 2.5 - 3 feet taller.   Traffic lights are fairly cheap, so there's no reason to have one below the minimum height requirements for all normal vehicles (trucks, buses, cars, etc).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 24, 2015, 12:23:55 PM
^^ MUTCD calls for a 15' minimum clearance, but several states use a 17' minimum rule.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on July 26, 2015, 04:06:39 PM
The 15 ft. rule of thumb has been around for a long time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on July 26, 2015, 07:58:35 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1291.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb551%2Fslik_sh00ter%2FDouble%2520Red_zpsef8vw3df.jpg&hash=d70d34e738922ffde7459d27df1c34a63c59ca3e)

Never seen this before. Double red light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 26, 2015, 09:51:52 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 26, 2015, 07:58:35 PM
Never seen this before. Double red light.

There's a lot of them in Alberta (chiefly Edmonton) where turns are protected-only, since so many of the turns are permissive (including a surprising amount of two-lane left turns).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 26, 2015, 09:54:56 PM
I guess you're allowed to turn left on red if one of the red bulbs burns out?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on July 26, 2015, 11:54:12 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on July 26, 2015, 09:54:56 PM
I guess you're allowed to turn left on red if one of the red bulbs burns out?

Or if it is a 4-segment signal...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
There's a newly reconfigured traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and CR 546/Bakers Basin Rd. in Lawrence Twp., NJ where the pedestrian countdown signals start the countdown (parallel to US 1) but at 0, the walk symbol returns for a few seconds and starts the countdown again. The countdown happens about three times before the US 1 signals actually change to yellow and the Bakers Basin traffic can proceed thereafter.

It's personally annoying for me since 100% of the time I'm on Bakers Basin/546, I'm on my bike and I use the time before the signals change to clip out, lower my glasses so they don't get fogged up, etc. When the cross street goes yellow, that's when I start my sequence to get ready to pedal hard across there. Is there some kind of actual statement that bans this in the MUTCD or any other official document that I can cite before sending the report out to DOT? I don't want to make this solely a convenience report to them. (not that it actually matters since they never respond even when I include my email and and I've stated before, one problem remained unfixed until I wrote my state legislator)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on August 02, 2015, 09:32:01 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 26, 2015, 07:58:35 PM

Never seen this before. Double red light.

Texas uses them on their Left Turn Signals

(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2899/14323144365_9365ab3920_z_d.jpg)

(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2080/2530670341_2767feece0_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2015, 09:41:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
There's a newly reconfigured traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and CR 546/Bakers Basin Rd. in Lawrence Twp., NJ where the pedestrian countdown signals start the countdown (parallel to US 1) but at 0, the walk symbol returns for a few seconds and starts the countdown again. The countdown happens about three times before the US 1 signals actually change to yellow and the Bakers Basin traffic can proceed thereafter.

It's personally annoying for me since 100% of the time I'm on Bakers Basin/546, I'm on my bike and I use the time before the signals change to clip out, lower my glasses so they don't get fogged up, etc. When the cross street goes yellow, that's when I start my sequence to get ready to pedal hard across there. Is there some kind of actual statement that bans this in the MUTCD or any other official document that I can cite before sending the report out to DOT? I don't want to make this solely a convenience report to them. (not that it actually matters since they never respond even when I include my email and and I've stated before, one problem remained unfixed until I wrote my state legislator)

I saw this on US 130 at Browning Rd in Bellmawr one day. At least here, the signal length is dictated by a collective network of sensors determining when to change the light.  I figured that when the countdown reached to 0, there will still too much traffic approaching, and reset the ped to a walk phase and another countdown phase.

In my case above, I saw it occur once. Other times, either the walk signal never activated, or it only counted down once, and the light cycled soon after that.

If it's occurring every time the way you mentioned, there may be some sort of issue. But otherwise, the light is probably programmed to sense traffic coming from longer distances, and as above, if traffic is too heavy the light will remain green.  You'll have to go thru during slower period of traffic to determine if there's truly a problem.  I don't think there's any problems regarding the MUTCD .
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on August 02, 2015, 09:56:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
There's a newly reconfigured traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and CR 546/Bakers Basin Rd. in Lawrence Twp., NJ where the pedestrian countdown signals start the countdown (parallel to US 1) but at 0, the walk symbol returns for a few seconds and starts the countdown again. The countdown happens about three times before the US 1 signals actually change to yellow and the Bakers Basin traffic can proceed thereafter.

It's personally annoying for me since 100% of the time I'm on Bakers Basin/546, I'm on my bike and I use the time before the signals change to clip out, lower my glasses so they don't get fogged up, etc. When the cross street goes yellow, that's when I start my sequence to get ready to pedal hard across there. Is there some kind of actual statement that bans this in the MUTCD or any other official document that I can cite before sending the report out to DOT? I don't want to make this solely a convenience report to them. (not that it actually matters since they never respond even when I include my email and and I've stated before, one problem remained unfixed until I wrote my state legislator)

It could be that the pedestrian activation button for the crosswalk is not working properly or broken.  That is happened a few times in my town, resulting in the countdown timer and the WALK/DON'T WALK signal recycling 2-3 times until the actual traffic light changes for drivers.  If the light only changes on the side street when a vehicle is detected, then the crosswalk recycling will continue ad nauseum until the light does need to change for the waiting vehicle(s) on the side street.

On the other side of the coin, if there is a broken crosswalk activation button for the side street to cross the primary street, that will usually result in the side street getting a green on a regular and full-length basis with or without any vehicles &/or pedestrians waiting -- A big Pain In The Ass when the side street's green is only long enough for the waiting vehicle(s) if the signal system is working properly and there is no crosswalk traffic, but goes to a full 20-30+ second cycle if the crosswalk is activated (or broken).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 10:40:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2015, 09:41:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
If it's occurring every time the way you mentioned, there may be some sort of issue. But otherwise, the light is probably programmed to sense traffic coming from longer distances, and as above, if traffic is too heavy the light will remain green.  You'll have to go thru during slower period of traffic to determine if there's truly a problem.

I saw this happen this morning at about 9:00 AM, and saw it last weekend on Saturday morning as well so traffic was light in all directions. In this morning's instance though, all three of the turning lanes were filled so it wasn't a case of the sensors seeing a car and then the car going away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 08, 2015, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
There's a newly reconfigured traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and CR 546/Bakers Basin Rd. in Lawrence Twp., NJ where the pedestrian countdown signals start the countdown (parallel to US 1) but at 0, the walk symbol returns for a few seconds and starts the countdown again. The countdown happens about three times before the US 1 signals actually change to yellow and the Bakers Basin traffic can proceed thereafter.

It's personally annoying for me since 100% of the time I'm on Bakers Basin/546, I'm on my bike and I use the time before the signals change to clip out, lower my glasses so they don't get fogged up, etc. When the cross street goes yellow, that's when I start my sequence to get ready to pedal hard across there. Is there some kind of actual statement that bans this in the MUTCD or any other official document that I can cite before sending the report out to DOT? I don't want to make this solely a convenience report to them. (not that it actually matters since they never respond even when I include my email and and I've stated before, one problem remained unfixed until I wrote my state legislator)

It could be that the signal is set to automatic recall of the pedestrian phase, or on a "rest in walk" setting. If that happens, then the pedestrian walk phase is automatically activated and is allowed to cycle. Then if there is no conflicting traffic on the side street that would cause the main street to turn red, then the signal controller automatically restarts the walk sequence–this repeats until a conflicting call for service terminates the main street green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr. Matté on August 08, 2015, 11:19:40 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 08, 2015, 02:36:35 PM
It could be that the signal is set to automatic recall of the pedestrian phase, or on a "rest in walk" setting. If that happens, then the pedestrian walk phase is automatically activated and is allowed to cycle. Then if there is no conflicting traffic on the side street that would cause the main street to turn red, then the signal controller automatically restarts the walk sequence–this repeats until a conflicting call for service terminates the main street green.

In this particular case, all three lanes heading west had a car in it (and I believe eastbound too) so some sensor should have tripped. Again, it's just a personal tic of mine and I have thus far not received any response to my submission nor do I expect any action from NJDOT on it the next time I go through there (winds came from the east today and will be from the north tomorrow so no Pennington/Pennsylvania/Central Sourlands rides).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2015, 12:10:27 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 08, 2015, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 02, 2015, 05:23:25 PM
There's a newly reconfigured traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and CR 546/Bakers Basin Rd. in Lawrence Twp., NJ where the pedestrian countdown signals start the countdown (parallel to US 1) but at 0, the walk symbol returns for a few seconds and starts the countdown again. The countdown happens about three times before the US 1 signals actually change to yellow and the Bakers Basin traffic can proceed thereafter.

It's personally annoying for me since 100% of the time I'm on Bakers Basin/546, I'm on my bike and I use the time before the signals change to clip out, lower my glasses so they don't get fogged up, etc. When the cross street goes yellow, that's when I start my sequence to get ready to pedal hard across there. Is there some kind of actual statement that bans this in the MUTCD or any other official document that I can cite before sending the report out to DOT? I don't want to make this solely a convenience report to them. (not that it actually matters since they never respond even when I include my email and and I've stated before, one problem remained unfixed until I wrote my state legislator)

It could be that the signal is set to automatic recall of the pedestrian phase, or on a "rest in walk" setting. If that happens, then the pedestrian walk phase is automatically activated and is allowed to cycle. Then if there is no conflicting traffic on the side street that would cause the main street to turn red, then the signal controller automatically restarts the walk sequence–this repeats until a conflicting call for service terminates the main street green.

This particular intersection on US 1 is notable as the only at-grade intersection between the PA/NJ state line & the Princeton area. Bakers Basin Rd was recently widened at the intersection, and an elongated jug handle combined with a roundabout was recently installed. The chances of no traffic on the side road here during the day is nil to none. It's extremely busy here, and unfortunate they couldn't make it grade separated as they have done at numerous nearby intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex on August 12, 2015, 11:18:26 AM
The picture of a mast arm signal over an urban prairie is worth seeing.

Traffic light on road to nowhere found in middle of urban wasteland in Russia (http://www.rt.com/news/312233-russia-street-light-nowhere/)

QuoteInstalling traffic lights where no car could ever pass seem like a weird idea? Well, that's what a Russian government spending watchdog discovered in the city of Yaroslavl. Pictures of the find have quickly brewed up a storm of online scorn and ridicule.
Despite appearing to be perfectly useless, the warning beacon seems to, nevertheless, work without a hitch.

Quote"In fact there is traffic in that area, but a small one,"  Nikolay Stepanov, head of the Yaroslavl municipal services agency said. "Though the asphalt road hasn't been built, car owners managed to make a kind of country road leading to their houses. That's why the traffic light is necessary for this crossroad."

Pictures of the site however make it hard to believe there is a necessity for traffic regulation in the area. It would take a vivid imagination to even picture an intersection near the traffic lights.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 11:22:36 AM
Quote from: Alex on August 12, 2015, 11:18:26 AM
The picture of a mast arm signal over an urban prairie is worth seeing.

Traffic light on road to nowhere found in middle of urban wasteland in Russia (http://www.rt.com/news/312233-russia-street-light-nowhere/)

QuoteInstalling traffic lights where no car could ever pass seem like a weird idea? Well, that's what a Russian government spending watchdog discovered in the city of Yaroslavl. Pictures of the find have quickly brewed up a storm of online scorn and ridicule.
Despite appearing to be perfectly useless, the warning beacon seems to, nevertheless, work without a hitch.

Quote"In fact there is traffic in that area, but a small one,"  Nikolay Stepanov, head of the Yaroslavl municipal services agency said. "Though the asphalt road hasn't been built, car owners managed to make a kind of country road leading to their houses. That's why the traffic light is necessary for this crossroad."

Pictures of the site however make it hard to believe there is a necessity for traffic regulation in the area. It would take a vivid imagination to even picture an intersection near the traffic lights.

In Soviet Russia, lights are installed BEFORE intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 12, 2015, 01:39:12 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 11:22:36 AM
Quote from: Alex on August 12, 2015, 11:18:26 AM
The picture of a mast arm signal over an urban prairie is worth seeing.

Traffic light on road to nowhere found in middle of urban wasteland in Russia (http://www.rt.com/news/312233-russia-street-light-nowhere/)

QuoteInstalling traffic lights where no car could ever pass seem like a weird idea? Well, that’s what a Russian government spending watchdog discovered in the city of Yaroslavl. Pictures of the find have quickly brewed up a storm of online scorn and ridicule.
Despite appearing to be perfectly useless, the warning beacon seems to, nevertheless, work without a hitch.

Quote“In fact there is traffic in that area, but a small one,” Nikolay Stepanov, head of the Yaroslavl municipal services agency said. “Though the asphalt road hasn’t been built, car owners managed to make a kind of country road leading to their houses. That’s why the traffic light is necessary for this crossroad.”

Pictures of the site however make it hard to believe there is a necessity for traffic regulation in the area. It would take a vivid imagination to even picture an intersection near the traffic lights.

In Soviet Russia, lights are installed BEFORE intersections.

Redflex Traffic Systems is trying desperately to put red light cameras there. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on August 12, 2015, 01:49:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 12, 2015, 01:39:12 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 11:22:36 AM
Quote from: Alex on August 12, 2015, 11:18:26 AM
The picture of a mast arm signal over an urban prairie is worth seeing.

Traffic light on road to nowhere found in middle of urban wasteland in Russia (http://www.rt.com/news/312233-russia-street-light-nowhere/)

QuoteInstalling traffic lights where no car could ever pass seem like a weird idea? Well, that’s what a Russian government spending watchdog discovered in the city of Yaroslavl. Pictures of the find have quickly brewed up a storm of online scorn and ridicule.
Despite appearing to be perfectly useless, the warning beacon seems to, nevertheless, work without a hitch.

Quote“In fact there is traffic in that area, but a small one,” Nikolay Stepanov, head of the Yaroslavl municipal services agency said. “Though the asphalt road hasn’t been built, car owners managed to make a kind of country road leading to their houses. That’s why the traffic light is necessary for this crossroad.”

Pictures of the site however make it hard to believe there is a necessity for traffic regulation in the area. It would take a vivid imagination to even picture an intersection near the traffic lights.

In Soviet Russia, lights are installed BEFORE intersections.

Redflex Traffic Systems is trying desperately to put red light cameras there. 

And bribing the officials so they can do so.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 06, 2015, 09:46:12 PM
E. 50th St. and 5th Av. Manhattan, N.Y. Easter, 1959.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1013.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf258%2FSteven197981%2F11222362_730938333706872_2030453384575521126_n_zpsbwpaasgv.jpg&hash=127b041f76a1c7bcd3fc56262d8c889e730d43a3)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Inspired to see GSV in the Rockaways from another thread, I encountered this.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Far+Rockaway,+Queens,+NY/@40.583625,-73.816004,3a,66.8y,69.97h,84.86t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sp2uHc3ecQ5c9SRcAsICiOQ!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c268aaff36802d:0x18a125e4487aa688

Why is NYDOT using wooden poles to replace the old signals along the beachfront road?  Most of all I see the standard NYC traffic light pole at the following intersection.

Also another question, will anyone tell NYC that those controllers that operate the signals are out of date?  Look and you will see these new lights still use the small old style signal control boxes mounted on the signal poles.  Heck even PA is starting to use ground mounted cabinets, why is NYC so behind in technology?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 07, 2015, 05:35:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PMWhy is NYDOT using wooden poles to replace the old signals along the beachfront road?  Most of all I see the standard NYC traffic light pole at the following intersection.

According to Google Map, the street view image is from February of 2013. Shortly after super-storm Sandy struck the Rockaways. What you see at the intersection was merely temporary.

Quote from: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Also another question, will anyone tell NYC that those controllers that operate the signals are out of date?  Look and you will see these new lights still use the small old style signal control boxes mounted on the signal poles.  Heck even PA is starting to use ground mounted cabinets, why is NYC so behind in technology?

Just as a FYI, NYCDOT is up to date in traffic control technology. The cabinet in the picture from Google Map was manufactured by Peek and designed exclusively for the city of New York. It complies with NYCDOT specifications and houses Peek's NYC ASTC (Advanced Intersection Control Cabinet) solid-state unit. Available as a 6, 8, or 12 load switch assembly.

Everything's compact, which proves ideal, due to the limited space on New York City streets. An average-sized NEMA cabinet wouldn't help alleviate the issue.

In the late 1990s, NYCDOT first experimented with the ASTC unit in Manhattan, and it proved to be beneficial. It led to the official decision to convert all of the city's mechanical units to computerized units in the early 2000s. Since then, over 6000 Peek ASTC units have been installed throughout the boroughs. Although NYCDOT is still in the conversion process, not many mechanical units remain in service. The anticipated goal for the folks is to have all intersections controlled by computerized controllers by the beginning of the next decade.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 05:44:34 PM
How did you get the date?   Lately my Google images have been just saying New York and not even borough name anymore.  Being that you got that info, it must be that there is something I must of clicked on accidentally or an improved program that allows you to hide certain things.

I miss the photo dates and areas the photos are in, and would like it back. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on September 07, 2015, 05:48:02 PM
I'm not sure how you could access that feature, but, for me, when I look at street view, a small black box appears to the top left of my screen.

It shows the location, intersection, and date the Google vehicle drove through the area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 07, 2015, 07:09:55 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 07, 2015, 05:35:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Also another question, will anyone tell NYC that those controllers that operate the signals are out of date?  Look and you will see these new lights still use the small old style signal control boxes mounted on the signal poles.  Heck even PA is starting to use ground mounted cabinets, why is NYC so behind in technology?

Just as a FYI, NYCDOT is up to date in traffic control technology. The cabinet in the picture from Google Map was manufactured by Peek and designed exclusively for the city of New York. It complies with NYCDOT specifications and houses Peek's NYC ASTC (Advanced Intersection Control Cabinet) solid-state unit. Available as a 6, 8, or 12 load switch assembly.

Everything's compact, which proves ideal, due to the limited space on New York City streets. An average-sized NEMA cabinet wouldn't help alleviate the issue.

Also stands to reason that there are financial considerations at play. If most existing signals have a controller box mounted on the pole, and you can upgrade the controller without replacing the cabinet (or can replace the existing cabinet with a new pole-mounted cabinet that holds the necessary equipment), why spend the money to install a brand new standard NEMA cabinet on the sidewalk? Installing a new cabinet would involve making sure there are no utilities in the way, excavation and possible trenching, rerouting existing signal wires, rerouting the power supply, et cetera, not to mention the potential disruptions in service or having to string up temporary wires. It would be a lot of work (and money) for little benefit, especially if you can make the necessary replacement and still get the modern computerized controller technology.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 07, 2015, 07:51:04 PM
An ancient array of signals in Sumner, Washington (here (https://goo.gl/ofwtXP)); probably one of the oldest signals still in operation not in Seattle city limits. Based on the visor type (and color fade), the central signal-head came first followed by the repeaters on the NW/SE sides.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWAXqDMf.png&hash=5932fc4fa45398997e81196e363d94c6d17bba5d)

Here's a closeup of the original signal:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FHYArJZ7.png&hash=dd2e898eb626b2c24f2ccf9a6dd20982e5c0851c)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 07, 2015, 07:59:15 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 07, 2015, 07:09:55 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 07, 2015, 05:35:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Also another question, will anyone tell NYC that those controllers that operate the signals are out of date?  Look and you will see these new lights still use the small old style signal control boxes mounted on the signal poles.  Heck even PA is starting to use ground mounted cabinets, why is NYC so behind in technology?

Just as a FYI, NYCDOT is up to date in traffic control technology. The cabinet in the picture from Google Map was manufactured by Peek and designed exclusively for the city of New York. It complies with NYCDOT specifications and houses Peek's NYC ASTC (Advanced Intersection Control Cabinet) solid-state unit. Available as a 6, 8, or 12 load switch assembly.

Everything's compact, which proves ideal, due to the limited space on New York City streets. An average-sized NEMA cabinet wouldn't help alleviate the issue.

Also stands to reason that there are financial considerations at play. If most existing signals have a controller box mounted on the pole, and you can upgrade the controller without replacing the cabinet (or can replace the existing cabinet with a new pole-mounted cabinet that holds the necessary equipment), why spend the money to install a brand new standard NEMA cabinet on the sidewalk? Installing a new cabinet would involve making sure there are no utilities in the way, excavation and possible trenching, rerouting existing signal wires, rerouting the power supply, et cetera, not to mention the potential disruptions in service or having to string up temporary wires. It would be a lot of work (and money) for little benefit, especially if you can make the necessary replacement and still get the modern computerized controller technology.
NYSDOT still uses pole mounted signal controller cabinets mainly for their span wire installations but not as often as in the past.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on September 07, 2015, 08:56:51 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Inspired to see GSV in the Rockaways from another thread, I encountered this.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Far+Rockaway,+Queens,+NY/@40.583625,-73.816004,3a,66.8y,69.97h,84.86t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sp2uHc3ecQ5c9SRcAsICiOQ!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c268aaff36802d:0x18a125e4487aa688

Why is NYDOT using wooden poles to replace the old signals along the beachfront road?  Most of all I see the standard NYC traffic light pole at the following intersection.
Like M3019C LPS20 said, it was likely damaged during Superstorm Sandy.  If you move ahead a bit from the link that you provided, you can see the installation before the storm.  Also, if you look at the intersection from the Cross Bay Parkway approach (side street), you can see the temporary installation still under construction (image from January 2013).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 07, 2015, 09:52:16 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on September 07, 2015, 05:48:02 PM
I'm not sure how you could access that feature, but, for me, when I look at street view, a small black box appears to the top left of my screen.

It shows the location, intersection, and date the Google vehicle drove through the area.
Interesting.  Mine used to show it, but has not in a few weeks.  However, someone else did start the thread Google Maps F****n Sucks Now, so I assumed this was one of those instances.

Now come to think of it, the boardwalk is gone in the photo, and it does look like a disaster area.  I thought maybe it was a windy day or something, but now I remember when I was there in 03 how nice that road looked.

As far as signal controllers go, come to think of it also the rest of NYS has them on the poles as well.  I even noticed them in Michigan in some areas.  I just assumed that was the new way being that even PennDOT gave them up for sidewalk mounts and the fact big cities here in Florida and even LA in California have them on the sidewalks, I just assumed that it was because of the times.  Even in some areas in Michigan on GSV I can see independent boxes for signals.

Wow, though, Sandy was really bad.  I mean I heard about Seaside Heights, NJ and the subways in NYC getting flooded out and stuff, but until you see a picture of the devastation it really does not hit you.  Its a shame that the media only focused on the Jersey shore, and not here in New York, as the roller coaster in the ocean got the attention.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 08, 2015, 06:00:16 PM
These could be the oldest traffic signals in use in Rochester, NY

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1938859,-77.653482,3a,75y,83.75h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stCRn306gJ9etXYWAYsDw8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on September 09, 2015, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 05, 2015, 04:42:25 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 03, 2015, 12:23:20 PM
Saw this along US 280 in the Birmingham, AL area:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/332/18760409494_c313cb0321.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197)Odd Siemens Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/uzN197) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

I've never understood these or the green arrow only signals.  Yes, there probably is a left turn arrow that is controlled by a light RYG or doghouse, but in my opinion, this type of signal is a waste of electricity.

This way, there's no doubt that through traffic can keep moving.  Probably easier that trying to figure out how to explain it on a sign because, invariably, someone would stop if the left turn signal was red and no other signals were present...

Maybe "THRU TRAFFIC KEEP MOVING" but I dunno...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 09, 2015, 07:02:57 PM
Quote from: busman_49 on September 09, 2015, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 05, 2015, 04:42:25 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 03, 2015, 12:23:20 PM
Saw this along US 280 in the Birmingham, AL area:

I've never understood these or the green arrow only signals.  Yes, there probably is a left turn arrow that is controlled by a light RYG or doghouse, but in my opinion, this type of signal is a waste of electricity.

This way, there's no doubt that through traffic can keep moving.  Probably easier that trying to figure out how to explain it on a sign because, invariably, someone would stop if the left turn signal was red and no other signals were present...

Maybe "THRU TRAFFIC KEEP MOVING" but I dunno...

The best non-signalized solution would probably be to separate adjacent turn lanes by a hard median.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on September 09, 2015, 07:06:19 PM
What about this? How common are these?

https://goo.gl/maps/5XVT1

The light is green of course right now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 09, 2015, 07:10:34 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on September 09, 2015, 07:06:19 PM
What about this? How common are these?

https://goo.gl/maps/5XVT1

This is the standard setup in both BC and Alberta. I do like that Canada has standardized this and inserted a nice fire engine symbol. Helps get the point across nicely.

As for the US, I don't believe a two-head setup is used anywhere. Also, instead of the symbol, our signs generally read "Emergency Signal" or something of the like, though there are signs approaching the fire house that have a fire engine symbol.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on September 09, 2015, 09:32:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 09, 2015, 07:10:34 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on September 09, 2015, 07:06:19 PM
What about this? How common are these?

https://goo.gl/maps/5XVT1

This is the standard setup in both BC and Alberta. I do like that Canada has standardized this and inserted a nice fire engine symbol. Helps get the point across nicely.

As for the US, I don't believe a two-head setup is used anywhere. Also, instead of the symbol, our signs generally read "Emergency Signal" or something of the like, though there are signs approaching the fire house that have a fire engine symbol.

There were a few fire station outlets in NE OH in the 80s I saw that had a 2 head installation -- top head would only flash red when activated. The bottom head was a flashing yellow with the word CAUTION on the lens.  The latter would always be on except for emergencies.

The same area also had single-head red signals positioned over each lane and would flash red when activated.   
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on September 10, 2015, 01:33:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 09, 2015, 07:02:57 PM
The best non-signalized solution would probably be to separate adjacent turn lanes by a hard median.

Never thought of that!

Regarding fire signals, mostly what I've seen are 3-section signals with the bottom light a flashing yellow; when the light is activated, it would go solid yellow, then red.  Less common (that I've seen) are standard RYG signals that rest in green until needed.  I remember when I was really young and first saw one of those flashing yellow fire signals, it blew my mind because I never saw anything like it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 10, 2015, 01:46:16 PM
I remember New Jersey would have non working signals with two sections and in some areas a neon FIRE STOP would illuminate when the signal is activated.   I have never seen one in operation so I cannot tell you if it turns yellow then to red or does it just flash red like a railroad grade crossing signal. 

The last time I checked on GSV, the Colonia, NJ firehouse still had it on Inman Avenue just east of the Garden State Parkway.  However, NJ was the only place I seen them used as other places I have been use 3 section signals like normal operating signals.

Also for those of you who remember the Fire Signal on US 202 in Raritan, NJ before the Somerville Circle flyover was built that was removed when it was constructed and never installed since, could you please tell me why that signal was used considering that there was no median break at the signal?  It would only make sense if there was two completely different fire stations on both sides of US 202 that needed to access one side or the other.  However, I doubt that one, but if the station was on one side of the highway would it not need a crossover in the median, nor would it not need a full signal as only the near side would need to stop for the engine as it could only right out of the side street there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 20, 2015, 03:33:29 PM
I noticed that Missouri installs of all its traffic signals on high pedestals like in this picture.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/772/21576156605_1b406591bd_c.jpg)
Also to point out the additional mast arm attached to the signal that supports a lane control sign for the other side of the road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: noelbotevera on September 20, 2015, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 20, 2015, 03:33:29 PM
I noticed that Missouri installs of all its traffic signals on high pedestals like in this picture.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/772/21576156605_1b406591bd_c.jpg)
Also to point out the additional mast arm attached to the signal that supports a lane control sign for the other side of the road.
That's thinking resourcefully. The only part that's not resourceful is making a nightlight (I have no idea what those things are called, that tall thing that has the signs on it) to put signs on it. I'd make it a double arch shape, put the signs and the light on there. Problem solved.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 21, 2015, 01:19:19 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 20, 2015, 03:33:29 PM
I noticed that Missouri installs of all its traffic signals on high pedestals like in this picture.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/772/21576156605_1b406591bd_c.jpg)
Also to point out the additional mast arm attached to the signal that supports a lane control sign for the other side of the road.

I think the rationale behind the high concrete pedestal is to lessen the likelihood that a car hitting the median will knock over the signal pole. I don't know if this is actually kosher with current design standards for crashworthiness--you can achieve better by not using a signal pole in the center median.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 21, 2015, 10:34:40 AM
This is the rare case as most MO signals are mounted on the corners.  At least what I seen anyway, most intersections use mast arms with some rural MO signals on span wires all on the four corners (or 3 if its a three way intersection).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on October 08, 2015, 07:52:10 PM
3M signals at a very skewed intersection.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,30y,245.4h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mohkfry on October 08, 2015, 08:48:52 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on October 08, 2015, 07:52:10 PM
3M signals at a very skewed intersection.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,30y,245.4h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en


Speaking of skewed/awkward intersections, here's three worth mentioning. the first two are like this because of the railroad tracks. Play with the streetview man to look at both intersections closely.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6166494,-87.0502359,3a,75y,285.03h,82.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYKU9Q28_kVrFx-luTuJa8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.599169,-87.2669091,3a,75y,2.7h,73.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0BARyzWfkRbDg_mXU_mFRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

This next one is two intersections split by the South Shore railroad tracks.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5982311,-87.2664946,3a,37.5y,157.98h,86.09t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skAzdAj7wrz1kqjWQL9aGQw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DkAzdAj7wrz1kqjWQL9aGQw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D256.977%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 09, 2015, 12:00:57 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on October 08, 2015, 07:52:10 PM
3M signals at a very skewed intersection.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,30y,245.4h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Never seen this before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,15y,123.03h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on October 09, 2015, 02:15:12 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on October 09, 2015, 12:00:57 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on October 08, 2015, 07:52:10 PM
3M signals at a very skewed intersection.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,30y,245.4h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Never seen this before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.126553,-77.7892501,3a,15y,123.03h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDYxfQJyAcmsTA6shenjxWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

That's a standard New York sign marking the end of a speed zone. Typically, it's placed when geometric conditions where a speed limit would normally increase to the default (55 mph in New York) may limit safe operation at 55. Virginia used to use similar signs. A ''State Speed Limit 55" sign should (per the State Supplement) be placed after the curve/obstruction, but in practice, several counties and local municipalities avoid the 55 sign altogether.

Across the pond, most counties have an "end speed zone" sign featuring a black slash on a white circle that may or may not have a number behind the slash. In these places, as in New York, the national/regional default speed limit applies when such a sign is encountered.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 13, 2015, 04:07:55 AM
Following up on some of my previous posts on this thread about double left turns which may yield, has anyone ever compiled a list of all the intersections that permit it?

· I know in Colorado Springs, there are more than a few (here (https://goo.gl/Rqu9PF) and here (https://goo.gl/s9gD4h) to start) -- probably more in Colorado that I'm not aware of.
· Seattle has at least two (here (https://goo.gl/PpUwxB) and here (https://goo.gl/2eS7HW) [first link, note the cars waiting to turn]) -- there used to be one in Silverdale (two FYAs) until it was removed a few months ago.
· Edmonton has too many to post (but here (https://goo.gl/kvO6UA) and here (https://goo.gl/pTSsmz) are two examples, just for fun [first one has a sign -- second has a bunch of people in the intersection waiting to turn]).
· A dozen pages ago, SteveG1977 compiled a list of four intersections in Illinois (here (http://goo.gl/JYcITD)).

Don't ask me why I'm so fascinated by these. I honestly have no idea. In theory, they could massively increase the left turn throughput of an intersection, but obviously the risk of a collision is much higher. I guess the risk factor is so high that I'm surprised any jurisdiction permits them. But, I'm glad they do.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on October 13, 2015, 04:58:45 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2015, 04:07:55 AM
Following up on some of my previous posts on this thread about double left turns which may yield, has anyone ever compiled a list of all the intersections that permit it?

Here are two more:

The intersection of Popps Ferry Rd and Cedar Lake Rd in Biloxi MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4427198,-88.9340841,3a,24y,102.35h,94.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_m5f6Xth4tFpZ7ip5RL-iQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Traffic turning from EB Popps Ferry to NB Cedar Lake can make permissive left turns from two turn lanes. This intersection was reconfigured sometime in the past 10 years. The middle lane was actually an optional left/through lane, and the signals operated in both protected and permissive phases.

Westbound Rodriguez St to southbound I-110 in D'Iberville MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4300229,-88.8949355,3a,75y,270h,69.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_0pQnQzpBnup5L1di59J3Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Left-turning traffic from Rodriguez onto I-110 can make permissive turns from both left turn lanes.

I learned how to drive in this area, so I'm comfortable with the idea of dual permissive lefts. Now that I live in the Portland metro area, I haven't noticed any dual permissive lefts anywhere, and I kinda don't like it. But I'll take my free lefts on red anyday over a dual permissive left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: FreewayDan on October 13, 2015, 07:37:09 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on October 13, 2015, 04:58:45 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2015, 04:07:55 AM
Following up on some of my previous posts on this thread about double left turns which may yield, has anyone ever compiled a list of all the intersections that permit it?

Here are two more:

The intersection of Popps Ferry Rd and Cedar Lake Rd in Biloxi MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4427198,-88.9340841,3a,24y,102.35h,94.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_m5f6Xth4tFpZ7ip5RL-iQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Traffic turning from EB Popps Ferry to NB Cedar Lake can make permissive left turns from two turn lanes. This intersection was reconfigured sometime in the past 10 years. The middle lane was actually an optional left/through lane, and the signals operated in both protected and permissive phases.

Westbound Rodriguez St to southbound I-110 in D'Iberville MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4300229,-88.8949355,3a,75y,270h,69.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_0pQnQzpBnup5L1di59J3Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Left-turning traffic from Rodriguez onto I-110 can make permissive turns from both left turn lanes.

I learned how to drive in this area, so I'm comfortable with the idea of dual permissive lefts. Now that I live in the Portland metro area, I haven't noticed any dual permissive lefts anywhere, and I kinda don't like it. But I'll take my free lefts on red anyday over a dual permissive left.

A couple of examples of dual permissive lefts that I found:

Tucson, AZ (Campbell Avenue at Speedway Blvd):
https://goo.gl/maps/8yoWSjFTd4n

Dallas, TX (Coit Road at Frankford Road south of the PGBT):
https://goo.gl/maps/EkAS8iwYJnF2

Fort Worth, TX (Hulen Street at IH 20; a restrictive dual permissive left):
https://goo.gl/maps/xVJ8QdXra882
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 13, 2015, 02:22:43 PM
Quote from: FreewayDan on October 13, 2015, 07:37:09 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on October 13, 2015, 04:58:45 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2015, 04:07:55 AM
Following up on some of my previous posts on this thread about double left turns which may yield, has anyone ever compiled a list of all the intersections that permit it?

Here are two more:

The intersection of Popps Ferry Rd and Cedar Lake Rd in Biloxi MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4427198,-88.9340841,3a,24y,102.35h,94.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_m5f6Xth4tFpZ7ip5RL-iQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Traffic turning from EB Popps Ferry to NB Cedar Lake can make permissive left turns from two turn lanes. This intersection was reconfigured sometime in the past 10 years. The middle lane was actually an optional left/through lane, and the signals operated in both protected and permissive phases.

Westbound Rodriguez St to southbound I-110 in D'Iberville MS (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4300229,-88.8949355,3a,75y,270h,69.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_0pQnQzpBnup5L1di59J3Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Left-turning traffic from Rodriguez onto I-110 can make permissive turns from both left turn lanes.

I learned how to drive in this area, so I'm comfortable with the idea of dual permissive lefts. Now that I live in the Portland metro area, I haven't noticed any dual permissive lefts anywhere, and I kinda don't like it. But I'll take my free lefts on red anyday over a dual permissive left.

A couple of examples of dual permissive lefts that I found:

Tucson, AZ (Campbell Avenue at Speedway Blvd):
https://goo.gl/maps/8yoWSjFTd4n

Dallas, TX (Coit Road at Frankford Road south of the PGBT):
https://goo.gl/maps/EkAS8iwYJnF2

Fort Worth, TX (Hulen Street at IH 20; a restrictive dual permissive left):
https://goo.gl/maps/xVJ8QdXra882

We have several here in Huntsville, AL.
Oakwood Avenue & Lee High Drive:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.749096,-86.577904,3a,66.8y,287.61h,84.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sf-H6flxawZxMa2UkQjcCpg!2e0
Meridian Street and Pratt Avenue:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.738622,-86.584819,3a,66.8y,5.26h,85.6t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szOHteKq6yIngN04I7QvQ4A!2e0
Pratt Avenue and Washington Street:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.738915,-86.589362,3a,66.8y,11.8h,84.91t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sjeiRnpO_CE3gj-lcX81B6Q!2e0
Monroe Street and Washington Street:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.73415,-86.587881,3a,66.8y,81.27h,80.37t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7Db5aLCPAzGChCnxYWqC3g!2e0
Airport Road and Balmoral Drive:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.691171,-86.578965,3a,66.8y,167.68h,81.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1soLVods_ApZ4kEuBsAB2jng!2e0

That's all that I can think of off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on October 15, 2015, 09:29:42 PM
While visiting a friend in Oneida a month ago, I saw this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.078663,-75.653571,3a,36.8y,96.69h,89.29t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s_adYx6bPr1LBERNJ4kfI4g!2e0) weird traffic light setup.  Note the second light in the background.  Both lights change at the same time.  When I first saw them, it was dark out, and after noticing the hospital off to the right, I thought maybe it was to keep a clear area for ambulances to access the hospital.  When I went through again in the daytime, I noticed that the hospital entrance was at the second light.  After looking at the road ahead, I noticed that it would be hard, if not impossible to see cars stopped at the second light.  I'm guessing that the first light stops cars before they go down the hill so they can be seen while they're stopped.  Does anyone have any other ideas?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 21, 2015, 10:29:38 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Flushing,+Queens,+NY/@40.757885,-73.860777,3a,66.8y,199.57h,87.89t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s-4eNr5Uf2WOlXiUZIYv40w!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c260054dc0633f:0xfaec24d1b474281e

This one is pretty fascinating in Queens, NY on Northern Blvd at 108th Street.  The way that they added the red lens above the main signal head leaving a spacing between it and the rest of the housing.  I remember when adding a twelve inch green arrow on Staten Island they did it similar.  They would take out the original green ball 8 inch lens, and replace it with the 12 inch green arrow, while replacing the amber light with green, and the red with yellow.  They also would attach the new red above the original head, but not directly to it as well as they did here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 21, 2015, 11:00:28 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Flushing,+Queens,+NY/@40.75765,-73.865873,3a,66.8y,93.1h,88.59t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHbGZ7BXiyplzDvfwUlFtcA!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c260054dc0633f:0xfaec24d1b474281e

Here is another interesting add on signal.  The permissive left arrow is the one mounted separately, however its very old school as it has no yellow lens unless fiber optic lighting is used as some signals in NJ used to have them where the green arrow would change to yellow.

One thing I must say about NYC traffic lights, its never a dull moment for signal watching as they have various signal heads and additions.  Also on another note, rather then here in Florida where they usually take down the old and replace the whole head just to add an arrow or change the phasing out for the extra permissive turn ( I think I got it right this time).  Why waste a good signal head when you can just add on and rewire the whole signal head for the arrangement of orientations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 22, 2015, 12:08:52 AM
^^ The last photo shows it as a doghouse with a yellow arrow added in the 2015 view.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on October 22, 2015, 12:22:18 AM
Hey, is there a name for using traffic signals as object markers? I'll give you a couple of examples in The Bronx:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NB_Baychester_Avenue_under_Dyre_Avenue_Line_Bridge.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SB_Baychester_Avenue_under_Dyre_Ave_Line_Bridge.jpg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 22, 2015, 01:09:33 AM
Quote from: Big John on October 22, 2015, 12:08:52 AM
^^ The last photo shows it as a doghouse with a yellow arrow added in the 2015 view.
I finally found out how to switch years.  My computer defaults on 2013 always and now I see its a doghouse with 12-12 & 8-8-8.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on October 22, 2015, 09:16:04 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on October 22, 2015, 12:22:18 AM
Hey, is there a name for using traffic signals as object markers? I'll give you a couple of examples in The Bronx:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NB_Baychester_Avenue_under_Dyre_Avenue_Line_Bridge.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SB_Baychester_Avenue_under_Dyre_Ave_Line_Bridge.jpg

We'd normally just call it a warning beacon.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 22, 2015, 02:45:20 PM
DC had them on PA Avenue between the White House and the Capitol at the base of the center aisle traffic signal posts.

Staten Island had little yellow bulbs at the base of some of the signal bases that were close to the traffic lanes particularly on islands in the road on Hylan Boulevard.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mohkfry on October 22, 2015, 04:56:22 PM
Chicago is loaded with them as well as back-lit "Keep Right" signs on some of the underpasses. Gary has one as well, but other than that I can't think of any.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on October 22, 2015, 08:51:20 PM
The separation between the red and amber signals in New York City is a thing of the past, even though they are still fairly common at some intersections.

It has been discontinued since at least the late-2000s. The new setup with only a green arrow (lagging left turn movement) in use in a traffic signal cluster looks almost identical to what you posted in your second comment, but the 12" section is generally placed on the bottom rather than on the top.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on October 22, 2015, 08:54:47 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 21, 2015, 11:00:28 PMAlso on another note, rather then here in Florida where they usually take down the old and replace the whole head just to add an arrow or change the phasing out for the extra permissive turn ( I think I got it right this time).  Why waste a good signal head when you can just add on and rewire the whole signal head for the arrangement of orientations.

That was a common practice by NYCDOT for years, but it seems nowadays that old traffic signals are trashed and replaced by new heads if an alteration is required at an intersection.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: peterj920 on October 27, 2015, 05:03:40 PM
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5669/22472898732_c4e8b13cf1_z_d.jpg)

Here's a unique traffic signal/ railroad crossing signal combo in Menasha, WI.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MASTERNC on October 27, 2015, 08:15:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2015, 04:07:55 AM
Following up on some of my previous posts on this thread about double left turns which may yield, has anyone ever compiled a list of all the intersections that permit it?

· I know in Colorado Springs, there are more than a few (here (https://goo.gl/Rqu9PF) and here (https://goo.gl/s9gD4h) to start) -- probably more in Colorado that I'm not aware of.

Ran into a couple in Castle Rock outside Denver

https://goo.gl/maps/P5EdRRainU52

https://goo.gl/maps/3JLSoyK8pDx
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on October 27, 2015, 09:44:36 PM
Thinking about it, I lived a couple blocks east of one in Columbus. Main St at Alum Creek Dr (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9574585,-82.9445382,3a,75y,272.4h,68.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB1OlZFUX8ZYAclPGvBFjXQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). I think it's a city installation based on ODOT's use of protected double lefts, but (at least when I lived there) Main Street east of this point was plowed and salted by ODOT, so it's anyone's guess.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 01:41:55 PM
Why does not the fiber optic lights for permissive lefts that NJDOT uses at some places not be used nationwide?  As we all know we use either the doghouse or tower for the added yellow and green arrows for these movement set ups, but some places in NJ used fiber optic lights so that both the green and yellow would be inside the same lens.

In fact Vermont used it in Downtown Bennington at the intersection of US 7 and VT 9 for its protected left needing only a two part head, and Arlington County used it on VA 120 at I-395 back in the 80's behind a 3M lens for a permissive turn there.

I would think the fiber optic would have been easier to maintain and less housing required as you would only need one lens for two orientations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 15, 2015, 02:25:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 01:41:55 PM
Why does not the fiber optic lights for permissive lefts that NJDOT uses at some places not be used nationwide?  As we all know we use either the doghouse or tower for the added yellow and green arrows for these movement set ups, but some places in NJ used fiber optic lights so that both the green and yellow would be inside the same lens.

In fact Vermont used it in Downtown Bennington at the intersection of US 7 and VT 9 for its protected left needing only a two part head, and Arlington County used it on VA 120 at I-395 back in the 80's behind a 3M lens for a permissive turn there.

I would think the fiber optic would have been easier to maintain and less housing required as you would only need one lens for two orientations.

The first generation multi-color arrows were fiber optics. They've been LEDs for about 15 years or longer now.

That said, it is surprising more transportation departments haven't used them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on November 15, 2015, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 15, 2015, 02:25:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 01:41:55 PM
Why does not the fiber optic lights for permissive lefts that NJDOT uses at some places not be used nationwide?  As we all know we use either the doghouse or tower for the added yellow and green arrows for these movement set ups, but some places in NJ used fiber optic lights so that both the green and yellow would be inside the same lens.

In fact Vermont used it in Downtown Bennington at the intersection of US 7 and VT 9 for its protected left needing only a two part head, and Arlington County used it on VA 120 at I-395 back in the 80's behind a 3M lens for a permissive turn there.

I would think the fiber optic would have been easier to maintain and less housing required as you would only need one lens for two orientations.

The first generation multi-color arrows were fiber optics. They've been LEDs for about 15 years or longer now.

That said, it is surprising more transportation departments haven't used them.

NYSDOT used them quite extensively until recently, with some regions (notably 4 and 9) still making use of them in new installations. R4 is moving to FYAs for most new PPLT installations, but I've seen newish multi-color arrows.

Note that Erie County still uses them exclusively for PPLT/RT situations, as does R5 for PPRTs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 15, 2015, 07:40:13 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 15, 2015, 01:41:55 PM
Why does not the fiber optic lights for permissive lefts that NJDOT uses at some places not be used nationwide?  As we all know we use either the doghouse or tower for the added yellow and green arrows for these movement set ups, but some places in NJ used fiber optic lights so that both the green and yellow would be inside the same lens.

In fact Vermont used it in Downtown Bennington at the intersection of US 7 and VT 9 for its protected left needing only a two part head, and Arlington County used it on VA 120 at I-395 back in the 80's behind a 3M lens for a permissive turn there.

I would think the fiber optic would have been easier to maintain and less housing required as you would only need one lens for two orientations.

I think it has to do with a preference for having different colors in separate housings to provide a visual "jump" between signal indications, which also helps for colorblind drivers. I believe this was one of the reasons why the FYA was made a 4-section signal head and not using the yellow arrow for permissive and clearance in the same housing (but why they made the allowance for a 3-section variant where the steady green and FYA can be in the same section, since the steady yellow still provides the jump).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on December 01, 2015, 05:25:09 PM
Strange two-light signals in California City, CA, the third largest in California by area and largely just vacant desert land:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1257403,-117.9857137,3a,75y,39.79h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZEiDIBb0fd6ILv4JN8Ybyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 01, 2015, 08:41:13 PM
Maybe they're just flashing red and yellow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 08:55:44 PM
Quote from: Bruce on December 01, 2015, 05:25:09 PM
Strange two-light signals in California City, CA, the third largest in California by area and largely just vacant desert land:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1257403,-117.9857137,3a,75y,39.79h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZEiDIBb0fd6ILv4JN8Ybyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Quote from: SignBridge on December 01, 2015, 08:41:13 PM
Maybe they're just flashing red and yellow?

Dual flashing red. Western (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9040057,-78.6874738,3a,75y,192.9h,80.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sChLQPFT-XMVFIzgfCTDbeA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) New York loves these (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8225019,-78.6060371,3a,75y,98.64h,88.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIPCOwYPXm5dHY7nthEy1-g!2e0!7i3328!8i1664).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 02, 2015, 09:38:17 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 01, 2015, 08:55:44 PM
Quote from: Bruce on December 01, 2015, 05:25:09 PM
Strange two-light signals in California City, CA, the third largest in California by area and largely just vacant desert land:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1257403,-117.9857137,3a,75y,39.79h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZEiDIBb0fd6ILv4JN8Ybyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Quote from: SignBridge on December 01, 2015, 08:41:13 PM
Maybe they're just flashing red and yellow?

Dual flashing red. Western (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9040057,-78.6874738,3a,75y,192.9h,80.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sChLQPFT-XMVFIzgfCTDbeA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) New York loves these (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8225019,-78.6060371,3a,75y,98.64h,88.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIPCOwYPXm5dHY7nthEy1-g!2e0!7i3328!8i1664).
Alabama is a big fan of double beacons as well:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.705009,-86.554241,3a,66.8y,34.99h,90.78t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s1BXEHNTa99wsuxne6M5upA!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.728929,-86.767734,3a,66.8y,270.25h,91.72t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHJ55-l_RvUKjaXn_NE_UFw!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.81208,-86.930299,3a,66.8y,59.16h,97.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s01bb_juByHPZdONa7j5F4Q!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.75591,-87.973224,3a,66.8y,331.48h,106.52t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swmi_y0kabKBhiwaV2JZraA!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.588142,-86.458945,3a,66.8y,351.33h,92.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s-tpSnZFbSXRFqK1kxwEr7g!2e0
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.440826,-85.724044,3a,66.8y,280.24h,126.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s_dHcJGczAEuqzx_NLniPXg!2e0
In fact, I only know of a few beacons around here in Huntsville that aren't double beacons, and as far as I'm aware, Madison only uses double beacons. However, Fort Payne still has a ton of single-section beacons as a lot of them are the old 4-way beacons.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2015, 10:03:27 AM
Quote from: Bruce on December 01, 2015, 05:25:09 PM
Strange two-light signals in California City, CA, the third largest in California by area and largely just vacant desert land:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1257403,-117.9857137,3a,75y,39.79h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZEiDIBb0fd6ILv4JN8Ybyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

They're mostly strange looking because they don't have the visors on them.  The advantage of these 2 light setups is if a bulb goes out, the 2nd one should still remain flashing.

As was pointed out, they're not terribly uncommon.  A few in NJ:

https://goo.gl/maps/KwqSGYBpwQy

https://goo.gl/maps/AXGgWwGV8nT2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 14, 2015, 12:28:35 AM
Overhead signals aren't unheard of in England, but I've never seen one wire-hung:

213 Bingley Rd, Shipley BD18 4DH

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOWaEhlo.png&hash=c24c42212d8a0902a0199aec65a5f575888db899)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on January 05, 2016, 03:11:28 PM
Ten signal heads for a relatively simple exit ramp configuration; SIX facing the ramp:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1555/23900692840_8326757863_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Cq2ii3)I-75 SB exit to Cincinnati-Dayton Rd (3) (https://flic.kr/p/Cq2ii3) by Ryan busman_49 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/busman_49/), on Flickr

Zoomed out:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1673/24196173465_82aa9c0466_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/CS8Hoz)I-75 SB exit to Cincinnati-Dayton Rd (1) (https://flic.kr/p/CS8Hoz) by Ryan busman_49 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/busman_49/), on Flickr

I could see maybe 3 or 4 for the ramp approach, but 6?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: noelbotevera on January 05, 2016, 03:16:47 PM
I can see 10.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2016, 03:25:20 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Those appear to be poly-LFE signals too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on January 05, 2016, 04:30:23 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on January 05, 2016, 03:16:47 PM
I can see 10.
I changed the description
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on January 05, 2016, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 05, 2016, 03:25:20 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Those appear to be poly-LFE signals too.

Neat setup!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 05, 2016, 08:06:54 PM
Stop sign with red flashers on the sign post. This is a NYSDOT installation. I've seen a few other rural intersections in western Monroe and Orleans counties with this setup but without the overhead beacons that this particular intersection has.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1791087,-77.8543853,3a,37.5y,287.83h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sd1PEYrBo1-q_7q8pwqHc7w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

What's so rare about them? 12-8-8 is quite common in developed areas. Even more common in Ontario.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 07, 2016, 11:04:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

What's so rare about them? 12-8-8 is quite common in developed areas. Even more common in Ontario.
In some parts of the US, especially here in Alabama, 12-8-8s are rather uncommon and even rare. In fact, I only know of two cities here in the Tennessee Valley that have 12-8-8 signals, and only one of them still has theirs in service.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 08, 2016, 03:40:38 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 07, 2016, 11:04:04 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 04, 2016, 09:05:48 PM
Rare 12-8-8 signal on NY 33 in Rochester, NY.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1372747,-77.7655202,3a,15y,91.86h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgrv3craRpU46wXkUZrzIyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

What's so rare about them? 12-8-8 is quite common in developed areas. Even more common in Ontario.
In some parts of the US, especially here in Alabama, 12-8-8s are rather uncommon and even rare. In fact, I only know of two cities here in the Tennessee Valley that have 12-8-8 signals, and only one of them still has theirs in service.
Most older signals here in Rochester, NY are 8 inch signals but the 12-8-8 was used on occasion. 12 inch signals have been the standard for NYSDOT for quite some time and Region 4 has replaced most of the old signals with 12 inch signals in recent years.

Incidentally, the signals I posted replaced an old 12-8-8 setup when they did an LED conversion about 10 years ago or so but NYSDOT kept the 12-8-8- configuration due to clearance issues with the old span wire. Otherwise they would have went with an all 12 in. installation. This installation's days are numbered anyway due to the age of the poles (which are not galvanized and are very rusty and are probably around 50-60 years old) plus the intersection itself is outdated.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 03:29:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6442597,-74.2736223,3a,75y,349.4h,76.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDT1J09ebTmGpynTGeTmx3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This signal installation always bugged me.  Being I grew up four miles away from this intersection, I used to pass through it constantly. 

Notice that they wasted a mast arm as you can see two of them on the right side.  Instead of the signal head that is on the near side right arm being on the far side mast arm its here with both signal heads being on the same side of the intersection and mostly on the wrong side.

Is it me, or should the far right side mast arm have the signal head that is on the near side right arm?  Also is there any advantage to have the two opposite mast arms together on the same side?  Remember this is NJ where on typical two lane arterials the two overhead signal heads are on opposite sides of the road instead of both mounted to the same arm, so this is unusual for NJ in this case.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 09, 2016, 04:49:04 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 03:29:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6442597,-74.2736223,3a,75y,349.4h,76.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDT1J09ebTmGpynTGeTmx3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This signal installation always bugged me.  Being I grew up four miles away from this intersection, I used to pass through it constantly. 

Notice that they wasted a mast arm as you can see two of them on the right side.  Instead of the signal head that is on the near side right arm being on the far side mast arm its here with both signal heads being on the same side of the intersection and mostly on the wrong side.

Is it me, or should the far right side mast arm have the signal head that is on the near side right arm?  Also is there any advantage to have the two opposite mast arms together on the same side?  Remember this is NJ where on typical two lane arterials the two overhead signal heads are on opposite sides of the road instead of both mounted to the same arm, so this is unusual for NJ in this case.

You want to see a waste of a mast arm?  At this intersection: https://goo.gl/maps/Xo98rRn9GXE2 , the mast arm's sole purpose is to hold a visual traffic detector camera...which could had easily been installed on one of the other mast arms at the intersection!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2016, 05:56:18 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 09, 2016, 04:49:04 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 03:29:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6442597,-74.2736223,3a,75y,349.4h,76.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDT1J09ebTmGpynTGeTmx3w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This signal installation always bugged me.  Being I grew up four miles away from this intersection, I used to pass through it constantly. 

Notice that they wasted a mast arm as you can see two of them on the right side.  Instead of the signal head that is on the near side right arm being on the far side mast arm its here with both signal heads being on the same side of the intersection and mostly on the wrong side.

Is it me, or should the far right side mast arm have the signal head that is on the near side right arm?  Also is there any advantage to have the two opposite mast arms together on the same side?  Remember this is NJ where on typical two lane arterials the two overhead signal heads are on opposite sides of the road instead of both mounted to the same arm, so this is unusual for NJ in this case.

You want to see a waste of a mast arm?  At this intersection: https://goo.gl/maps/Xo98rRn9GXE2 , the mast arm's sole purpose is to hold a visual traffic detector camera...which could had easily been installed on one of the other mast arms at the intersection!

Are you sure it wasn't just moved after the intersection was re-aligned? Granted, the mast arm looks pretty new, but that's just monumentally stupid otherwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 08:37:30 PM
I used to see many weird things in New Jersey with signals.  I used to like when NJ would give you a protected left turn without an arrow.  Just green and it would be red on the other side of the road.  I believe Laurel Avenue at NJ 36 in Hazlet still has that particular set up.

Then you have NJ 28 E Bound stop for Faitoute Avenue in Roselle Park where there is a left turn signal giving a green arrow in the same direction with the other side no left turns allowed along with it being a three way intersection.  Basically no one passes across you and there is no reason to stop.

Also in Linden, Southbound US 1 & 9 has a signal that stops traffic for no reason at the Refinery Entrance.  Again no traffic crosses into your lanes there, and for years it never turned red at all until a paving project back in 1988 which after that caused traffic to stop.  I do not know if it still that way now, but I know of last year it still was.   Of course non road geeks will not complain about their gas being wasted and even those politicians who complain that car exhaust is part of the Climate Change problem, let NJDOT time those two signals the way they are.

NYC also has plenty of one way streets from Central Park West that stop you for potential foot traffic.  However, in Manhattan practically every intersection is signalized so one more stop is really unnoticeable.  If you do not stop there you sure will stop at the next light that has car traffic cross the street.    You could argue that the gas would be wasted the next block as all lights on Central Park West are timed together and stay red for the same amount of time as well.

Anyway, I have seen some mast arms around in many places where the last signal head is not mounted to the end of the arm.  In New Jersey I have seen that too just as Jeff pointed out with that wasted arm as shorter mast arms could be used if some of it will hang further than it needs to be.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 10, 2016, 10:43:28 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 08:37:30 PM
Anyway, I have seen some mast arms around in many places where the last signal head is not mounted to the end of the arm.  In New Jersey I have seen that too just as Jeff pointed out with that wasted arm as shorter mast arms could be used if some of it will hang further than it needs to be.
I've seen several intersections like that around here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 10, 2016, 06:31:23 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 10, 2016, 10:43:28 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 08:37:30 PM
Anyway, I have seen some mast arms around in many places where the last signal head is not mounted to the end of the arm.  In New Jersey I have seen that too just as Jeff pointed out with that wasted arm as shorter mast arms could be used if some of it will hang further than it needs to be.
I've seen several intersections like that around here.

In Nevada, for new/reconstructed intersections, there is an overhead signal centered over every lane. The mast arms come in standard lengths. So if the street is an unusual width or the signal pole is at an odd location, a longer than necessary arm may be used with the last signal head being a few feet from the end of the signal pole.

One other scenario is that the full length pole is installed initially, but a left turn signal is not installed initially. In that case, there is leftover pole space reserved for future signal heads. Another scenario is that a road is not yet widened to its full width, but a signal is installed anyway. They will sometimes use the final length signal pole and modify the signal heads later, which can leave a good deal of unused length of pole in the interim.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 10, 2016, 08:15:50 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 10, 2016, 10:43:28 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 09, 2016, 08:37:30 PM
Anyway, I have seen some mast arms around in many places where the last signal head is not mounted to the end of the arm.  In New Jersey I have seen that too just as Jeff pointed out with that wasted arm as shorter mast arms could be used if some of it will hang further than it needs to be.
I've seen several intersections like that around here.

Very common in Upstate New York for NYSDOT-installed signals. NYCDOT and Nassau County only mount at the ends due to design and Buffalo almost always has a signal at the end of their masts. Other than that, empty space at the end is not a rare sight and there are few masts here that don't have extra space.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 6a on January 12, 2016, 11:58:30 AM
I'm quite sure this has been covered here at some point, but I still want to bitch about LED heads in the snow...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160112/0d862290174c08d9409f60899cd49b49.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 12, 2016, 06:22:36 PM
Quote from: 6a on January 12, 2016, 11:58:30 AM
I'm quite sure this has been covered here at some point, but I still want to bitch about LED heads in the snow...

Yeah, like every winter.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 12, 2016, 07:57:04 PM
n00b here: I'm guessing the LEDs don't get as hot? I must admit, and this is probably due to my locale, I have never seen snow stuck inside signal heads before. Usually the snow ends up on top of the head (though the snow being inside can obviously be attributed to the wind).

Would the cut-out lens covers (opposite of the completely round type, as seen above) make any difference? Just wondering.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 12, 2016, 08:27:56 PM
It is a problem in snowy conditions. I'm surprised that traffic signal agencies aren't more concerned about this, but I guess their safety judgment was clouded by the prospect of saving so much money with LED's. Other than this issue, I like LED's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 12, 2016, 08:39:59 PM
Honestly, I never really noticed the snow problem when I lived in Buffalo. Maybe it's the cutout visors or the wind?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Joe The Dragon on January 12, 2016, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 12, 2016, 08:27:56 PM
It is a problem in snowy conditions. I'm surprised that traffic signal agencies aren't more concerned about this, but I guess their safety judgment was clouded by the prospect of saving so much money with LED's. Other than this issue, I like LED's.

also can they rake in photo red light tickets as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on January 12, 2016, 11:24:36 PM
Ticket revenue is one thing, but accidents are another matter entirely (http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/cool-led-traffic-lights-get-snow-clogged-easily-confused-drivers-run-red-lights) that require some attention.  LED signals seem to get snow-covered frequently in this neck of the woods and I don't know why it seems to be more than some places. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on January 13, 2016, 09:11:16 AM
Huh.  When I first started at NYSDOT, they talked about having to install "warmers" on LED lights to keep the snow off (an engineer sneered that the warmers negated any power-saving benefit to using LEDs).  I guess it's not done regularly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on January 13, 2016, 11:04:50 AM
At least the heaters could be used only part of the year, but indeed it would be interesting to know the cost of an incandescent head versus LED+heater.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2016, 11:28:44 AM
Motorists seeing 3 white spots on a traffic light and just freely going seem to be the real issue.  Is this the same thing they would do if the light was completely out due to a power failure? 

And as one pointed out the news story of one or two accidents, we can post thousands of stories where people crashed simply driving thru a fully visible red light in optimal conditions. 

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 13, 2016, 01:54:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2016, 11:28:44 AM
Motorists seeing 3 white spots on a traffic light and just freely going seem to be the real issue.  Is this the same thing they would do if the light was completely out due to a power failure? 

From what I've seen around Chicagoland, yes, that is exactly what they do.  Came across one that almost everyone was blowing through a few weeks ago in Arlington Heights, on Euclid, by the racecourse.  Interestingly enough, it was just down the street from another signal that was out the same way that a cop was controlling.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on January 19, 2016, 04:25:04 PM
Seattle has replaced a few of their wire mounts with poles to help clear up some bike lane-related confusion:

http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2016/01/19/new-2nd-ave-traffic-signals-clear-up-confusion/

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1p40p3gwj70rhpc423s8rzjaz.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F01%2Fbeforeafter2ndwd.jpg&hash=15ef4c3ea88924793c7ac2b50c5cb4b05fe74fc1)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on January 20, 2016, 12:10:30 AM
Unusual 8-aspect signal at Wellington & Milligan St, Perth:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJVB1GGj.png%3F1&hash=2a0202b37dbf5888c853af8e1181938456674286)
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9495363,115.8527268,3a,64y,211.67h,81.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sW1DBqDwh6aRCjcim3t6W-w!2e0!5s20140201T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9495363,115.8527268,3a,64y,211.67h,81.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sW1DBqDwh6aRCjcim3t6W-w!2e0!5s20140201T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 20, 2016, 01:04:48 AM
Quote from: Jet380 on January 20, 2016, 12:10:30 AM
Unusual 8-aspect signal at Wellington & Milligan St, Perth:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJVB1GGj.png%3F1&hash=2a0202b37dbf5888c853af8e1181938456674286)
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9495363,115.8527268,3a,64y,211.67h,81.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sW1DBqDwh6aRCjcim3t6W-w!2e0!5s20140201T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9495363,115.8527268,3a,64y,211.67h,81.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sW1DBqDwh6aRCjcim3t6W-w!2e0!5s20140201T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

I've seen DC's 6-aspect signals, but this is nuts. Can't use 3-4 and put stuff on a mast?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on January 20, 2016, 02:46:00 AM
Quote from: cl94 on January 20, 2016, 01:04:48 AM


I've seen DC's 6-aspect signals, but this is nuts. Can't use 3-4 and put stuff on a mast?
Mast arms are pretty rare here, only used where there are visibility problems. And 6-aspect signals are ubiquitous here!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 12:32:12 AM
Is a situation like this permitted? The right turn slip lane has a yield sign, but it approaches a signalized crosswalk. The crosswalk used to meet at the pork-chop island on the left, but was moved several years ago for no clear reason. I would think a better idea would be to signalize the slip lane with a right-facing FYA.

The lanes to the left of the island have left arrow faces, FWIW.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FfsVTZru.png&hash=f5575315dfbe6e7ead5b543b25fb92f4e61df30b)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NJ on January 22, 2016, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 12:32:12 AM
Is a situation like this permitted? The right turn slip lane has a yield sign, but it approaches a signalized crosswalk. The crosswalk used to meet at the pork-chop island on the left, but was moved several years ago for no clear reason. I would think a better idea would be to signalize the slip lane with a right-facing FYA.

The lanes to the left of the island have left arrow faces, FWIW.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FfsVTZru.png&hash=f5575315dfbe6e7ead5b543b25fb92f4e61df30b)

Yes it is with accordance to MUTCD. Cars must yield or stop for pedestrian at every crosswalk. Yield sign is for cars.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 04:06:13 PM
Quote from: NJ on January 22, 2016, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 12:32:12 AM
Is a situation like this permitted? The right turn slip lane has a yield sign, but it approaches a signalized crosswalk. The crosswalk used to meet at the pork-chop island on the left, but was moved several years ago for no clear reason. I would think a better idea would be to signalize the slip lane with a right-facing FYA.

The lanes to the left of the island have left arrow faces, FWIW.

Yes it is with accordance to MUTCD. Cars must yield or stop for pedestrian at every crosswalk. Yield sign is for cars.

I understand that concept. But, in this case, if the pedestrian receives a 'walk' hand, it's understood that all potential movements have been halted (and that, at most, you'll have to deal with traffic with a solid green light or traffic turning on red). But I've never encountered a situation where the crosswalk has a signal and the road has a yield sign (my point being, signs and signals shouldn't mix).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 22, 2016, 04:26:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 04:06:13 PM
Quote from: NJ on January 22, 2016, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 12:32:12 AM
Is a situation like this permitted? The right turn slip lane has a yield sign, but it approaches a signalized crosswalk. The crosswalk used to meet at the pork-chop island on the left, but was moved several years ago for no clear reason. I would think a better idea would be to signalize the slip lane with a right-facing FYA.

The lanes to the left of the island have left arrow faces, FWIW.

Yes it is with accordance to MUTCD. Cars must yield or stop for pedestrian at every crosswalk. Yield sign is for cars.

I understand that concept. But, in this case, if the pedestrian receives a 'walk' hand, it's understood that all potential movements have been halted (and that, at most, you'll have to deal with traffic with a solid green light or traffic turning on red). But I've never encountered a situation where the crosswalk has a signal and the road has a yield sign (my point being, signs and signals shouldn't mix).

It's quite iffy and a situation that should be avoided. IINM, the MUTCD recommends having a crosswalk onto the island to prevent this from occurring. Signage stating "yield to pedestrians" and'/or an FYA would be great here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kacie Jane on January 22, 2016, 06:29:47 PM
Quote from: Bruce on January 19, 2016, 04:25:04 PM
Seattle has replaced a few of their wire mounts with poles to help clear up some bike lane-related confusion:

http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2016/01/19/new-2nd-ave-traffic-signals-clear-up-confusion/

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1p40p3gwj70rhpc423s8rzjaz.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F01%2Fbeforeafter2ndwd.jpg&hash=15ef4c3ea88924793c7ac2b50c5cb4b05fe74fc1)

Minor nitpick: The old signals weren't wire mounts.  (If they were, there wouldn't be a problem.)  They were side signals with no overheads.  The confusion resulted from having the through (car) signal, the left turn signal, and the bike signal all on one pole.  Now that they're mounted overhead instead, there's less confusion as to which signal is for which lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 23, 2016, 09:45:49 PM
Quote from: cl94 on January 22, 2016, 04:26:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 04:06:13 PM
Quote from: NJ on January 22, 2016, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 22, 2016, 12:32:12 AM
Is a situation like this permitted? The right turn slip lane has a yield sign, but it approaches a signalized crosswalk. The crosswalk used to meet at the pork-chop island on the left, but was moved several years ago for no clear reason. I would think a better idea would be to signalize the slip lane with a right-facing FYA.

The lanes to the left of the island have left arrow faces, FWIW.

Yes it is with accordance to MUTCD. Cars must yield or stop for pedestrian at every crosswalk. Yield sign is for cars.

I understand that concept. But, in this case, if the pedestrian receives a 'walk' hand, it's understood that all potential movements have been halted (and that, at most, you'll have to deal with traffic with a solid green light or traffic turning on red). But I've never encountered a situation where the crosswalk has a signal and the road has a yield sign (my point being, signs and signals shouldn't mix).

It's quite iffy and a situation that should be avoided. IINM, the MUTCD recommends having a crosswalk onto the island to prevent this from occurring. Signage stating "yield to pedestrians" and'/or an FYA would be great here.

The MUTCD doesn't govern the placement of a crosswalk, just the application of the crosswalk markings.

I don't think "yield to pedestrians" signage is necessary, due to the "yield" sign that currently exists. An FYA could be appropriate in certain circumstances, but the pork chop island design here would seem to promote a situation in which this right turn would be constantly flashing yellow and never need to turn to red (thus the yield is more appropriate, since it is effectively the same meaning).

I do, however, agree that this situation is not optimal and such designs should be avoided.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on April 10, 2016, 09:19:52 AM
One of the few remaining signals in Rochester, NY that's still all incandescent. Also, this signal still has WALK/DONT WALK ped signals. Rochester is over 90% converted to LED and man/hand ped signals for quite some time.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1543562,-77.6151187,3a,75y,157.76h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1strh3k3RwUsXsN1s6OIY8Ew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on April 25, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Saw a U-Turn arrow light the other day. I've never seen one before. The particular intersection didn't allow left turns, but U-turns were permitted.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/04/ae/71/04ae7192f7e050370fe1315a3b36ce7a.jpg)

Not my picture. Credit to owner.

Are U-Turn lights allowed in the US MUTCD?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 25, 2016, 09:57:17 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on April 25, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Are U-Turn lights allowed in the US MUTCD?

Yes: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_01_longdesc.htm

Your picture appears to be an older regular bulb, which is kinda crappy, IMO.  The LED version is a bit better to see (although still small).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ekt8750 on April 25, 2016, 03:55:56 PM
Delaware loves U-Turn lights and arrow lights in general that point in all sorts of directions
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on April 25, 2016, 04:03:33 PM
I have a question about the four-section heads that appear to be widespread in eastern Massachusetts. From seeing their operation, it appears that the bottom two sections are green and yellow arrows, while the top is a red arrow. What is a the second section from the top and what is it used for?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on April 25, 2016, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 25, 2016, 04:03:33 PM
I have a question about the four-section heads that appear to be widespread in eastern Massachusetts. From seeing their operation, it appears that the bottom two sections are green and yellow arrows, while the top is a red arrow. What is a the second section from the top and what is it used for?

If they're anything like the ones along the Middlesex Turnpike (https://goo.gl/maps/QRpLbGqwpXS2) in Burlington, the section second from the top is a flashing yellow indication, for when the intersection is on flash mode during the "off hours."

I've also seen similar signals in parts of New York (especially Rockland County), except the top section is a flashing red ball that flashes during the "off hours" and the section second to top is the normal red arrow. Here's an example at the intersection of NY 59 and Middletown Road (https://goo.gl/maps/yV1whYC8pUN2) in Nanuet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on April 25, 2016, 08:24:31 PM
Quote from: Ian on April 25, 2016, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 25, 2016, 04:03:33 PM
I have a question about the four-section heads that appear to be widespread in eastern Massachusetts. From seeing their operation, it appears that the bottom two sections are green and yellow arrows, while the top is a red arrow. What is a the second section from the top and what is it used for?

If they're anything like the ones along the Middlesex Turnpike (https://goo.gl/maps/QRpLbGqwpXS2) in Burlington, the section second from the top is a flashing yellow indication, for when the intersection is on flash mode during the "off hours."

I've also seen similar signals in parts of New York (especially Rockland County), except the top section is a flashing red ball that flashes during the "off hours" and the section second to top is the normal red arrow. Here's an example at the intersection of NY 59 and Middletown Road (https://goo.gl/maps/yV1whYC8pUN2) in Nanuet.

Thanks. Those were the ones I was referring to, as several intersections on that stretch have them, but I also saw them in Lowell.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 03, 2016, 04:50:00 PM
This U-turn signal in Pierce County, Washington has a slightly different arrowhead than I usually see at U-turn lights:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtM56Ntf.jpg&hash=4bbfbc90ded862b2f5b0ccd4f4e691784d5bb6a0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: texaskdog on May 03, 2016, 04:53:14 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on April 25, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Saw a U-Turn arrow light the other day. I've never seen one before. The particular intersection didn't allow left turns, but U-turns were permitted.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/04/ae/71/04ae7192f7e050370fe1315a3b36ce7a.jpg)

Not my picture. Credit to owner.

Are U-Turn lights allowed in the US MUTCD?

Sounds like Anaheim
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 04, 2016, 11:30:14 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on April 25, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Saw a U-Turn arrow light the other day. I've never seen one before. The particular intersection didn't allow left turns, but U-turns were permitted.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/04/ae/71/04ae7192f7e050370fe1315a3b36ce7a.jpg)

Not my picture. Credit to owner.

Are U-Turn lights allowed in the US MUTCD?
Love that incandescent signal!

Quote from: jakeroot on May 03, 2016, 04:50:00 PM
This U-turn signal in Pierce County, Washington has a slightly different arrowhead than I usually see at U-turn lights:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtM56Ntf.jpg&hash=4bbfbc90ded862b2f5b0ccd4f4e691784d5bb6a0)
Might be an install from before the FHWA added U-turn arrows to the MUTCD?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 04, 2016, 01:13:43 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 04, 2016, 11:30:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 03, 2016, 04:50:00 PM
This U-turn signal in Pierce County, Washington has a slightly different arrowhead than I usually see at U-turn lights:

http://i.imgur.com/tM56Ntf.jpg

Might be an install from before the FHWA added U-turn arrows to the MUTCD?

They just installed it like three weeks ago. Brand new installation. All of the other U-turn signals along the route, which pre-date this installation, look like this (the biggest giveaway is backplate vs no backplate -- the county now uses backplates on all new installations as of ~ 2014).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQMcxY9m.jpg&hash=8fab49ed7840d77f9e2dc1e1625d0c686eb81364)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 05, 2016, 09:27:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 04, 2016, 01:13:43 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 04, 2016, 11:30:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 03, 2016, 04:50:00 PM
This U-turn signal in Pierce County, Washington has a slightly different arrowhead than I usually see at U-turn lights:

http://i.imgur.com/tM56Ntf.jpg

Might be an install from before the FHWA added U-turn arrows to the MUTCD?

They just installed it like three weeks ago. Brand new installation. All of the other U-turn signals along the route, which pre-date this installation, look like this (the biggest giveaway is backplate vs no backplate -- the county now uses backplates on all new installations as of ~ 2014).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQMcxY9m.jpg&hash=8fab49ed7840d77f9e2dc1e1625d0c686eb81364)
Ah, didn't know that. Very odd then... Looks like they took the arrow on the U-turn sign to the right and shrunk it to fit on the LEDs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on May 08, 2016, 08:06:27 PM
This signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6558871,-122.3179395,3a,75y,14.5h,92.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTAvQxHMq1UH-U1yIXWzSUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) in Seattle uses 8-inch up arrows. This is the only place in Seattle I know where 8-inch arrows are used -- even the oldest signals around that have arrows use 12-inch heads, even if only for the arrows. It seems like a very bad idea in that, from a distance, the signals look dark when the green arrow is on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on May 08, 2016, 10:26:00 PM
Quote from: jay8g on May 08, 2016, 08:06:27 PM
This signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6558871,-122.3179395,3a,75y,14.5h,92.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTAvQxHMq1UH-U1yIXWzSUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) in Seattle uses 8-inch up arrows. This is the only place in Seattle I know where 8-inch arrows are used -- even the oldest signals around that have arrows use 12-inch heads, even if only for the arrows. It seems like a very bad idea in that, from a distance, the signals look dark when the green arrow is on.

They've completely phased out the 12-inch (300mm) heads here in Perth, with the justification being (I think) that LEDs provide extra brightness to counter the loss in conspicuity. It's a bit of a step backwards IMO especially when you consider large intersections like these:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7iThyFg.png%3F1&hash=c79befb3277b6226d598dbb09a56a18a248c5426)
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9436731,115.9223701,3a,49.2y,52.12h,81.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR0gXhkSTfVX-Ahxcghfo-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.9436731,115.9223701,3a,49.2y,52.12h,81.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR0gXhkSTfVX-Ahxcghfo-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 17, 2016, 07:56:17 PM
Like left turn signals? Because if so, then you'll love this set-up in Decatur, AL at the intersection of US 31 and AL 20:
(https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7545/27126565103_7a0f7b177e.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hk5JJk)Eagle Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/Hk5JJk) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7635/27703457306_4069cb7232.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Jd4sFC)Eagle Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/Jd4sFC) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

Also, have some signals in Gardendale, AL with 8 inch LED arrows:
(https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7275/27685508266_4710325cde.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Jbtt4q)8 inch Durasig Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/Jbtt4q) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7289/27719385585_cb5221efeb.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Jet6B8)8 inch Durasig Traffic Light (https://flic.kr/p/Jet6B8) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7411/27107179954_ae67073627.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HinocC)8 inch Arrow LED (https://flic.kr/p/HinocC) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7739/27107179524_389df0c9bd.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hino5d)8 inch Durasig Traffic Lights (https://flic.kr/p/Hino5d) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7374/27719382305_37e5723bf8.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Jet5Cz)8 inch Durasig Traffic Light (https://flic.kr/p/Jet5Cz) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7053/27109030523_4fd637e061.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HiwSiZ)8 inch Arrow LED (https://flic.kr/p/HiwSiZ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on June 17, 2016, 07:57:56 PM
Now that's something I've never seen before-an 8" arrow. Every agency I've seen that uses 8" signals always goes 12" for the arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on June 17, 2016, 08:17:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 17, 2016, 07:57:56 PM
Now that's something I've never seen before-an 8" arrow. Every agency I've seen that uses 8" signals always goes 12" for the arrows.
as 12" arrows have been a MUTCD requirement for a long time.

Also, red and yellow through arrows are not allowed as shown on the first photo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on June 17, 2016, 08:48:08 PM
Quote from: Big John on June 17, 2016, 08:17:02 PM
Also, red and yellow through arrows are not allowed as shown on the first photo.

Either they used to be or New York's MUTCD allowed them before they switched to the national one, because this intersection in Queensbury, NY (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.330029,-73.6731633,3a,75y,32.94h,81.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seHAXQfk5_kdC66jDtKyJnQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) was 100% arrows before it was rebuilt to add a second left turn lane on 2 of the approaches and it wasn't the only one in the area. Definitely not the first time I've seen red and yellow through arrows.

Edit: modified to remove ambiguity
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 17, 2016, 09:05:28 PM
Eight-inch arrows are virtually extinct in New York State. 12-inch has been standard for arrows in new installations since the 1960's. I do remember as a kid seeing 8-inch arrows in the earliest installations of the late 1950's, some of which survived 'til around 1980 on Long Island. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: OracleUsr on June 17, 2016, 11:03:58 PM
NC still has some 8" arrows.  Statesville used to be overrun with them when I first moved here.  Even had two 8-8-8-8-8 5-stack signals to boot.

(EDIT TO FINISH TYPING)

I didn't notice them until one afternoon in Greensboro I was looking at the 8-8-8-8 signals near Friendly Center and the right turn signal arrow caught my eye.  Then I realized downtown had quite a few, including a few 8" up arrows where turns of any kind were prohibited.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 18, 2016, 02:34:07 AM
As long as we're talking about 8-inch arrows, I do feel obliged to mention how often British Columbia uses them. They're far less common than they used to be, but they still pop up from time to time. This (https://goo.gl/6t99FC) arrow is always the first to pop into my head, but there are many, many others. The reason they pop up is because of the BC standard of using 8-inch signals for secondary (mast-mounted) signals. I guess sometimes, the contractor incorrectly orders the arrow as 8-inch as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 18, 2016, 01:38:29 PM
There's at least two 8 inch arrows in Tennessee, one in Nashville and one near Knoxville, and there's at least one other 8 inch arrow here in Alabama. All three of the ones I mentioned are incandescent.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on June 18, 2016, 05:49:26 PM
Brockport, NY had an 8 in. green left arrow on NY 19 up until a few years ago when that stretch of road was rebuilt.

GSV of that intersection from 2007 with the old signals. The old signals there also had 8 in. 3M style green lenses for SB NY 19.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2091278,-77.9404365,3a,60y,344.24h,117.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQFwDA1zLkRzhP6YkJABqFw!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!6m1!1e1?hl=en

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 18, 2016, 09:49:22 PM
I recall that Greenville NC had what would pass for a large number of 8-inch arrays downtown and on 5th street near the ECU campus, including arrows in doghouse assemblies (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6109495,-77.371992,3a,49.5y,290.16h,89.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLCZzQT2i9JmS5MXomCP00g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  They were new when I was moving there temporarily.  There were some ancient 8-inch assemblies, including arrows in 4-high split phase setups, in other places in town then but they are gone now.

I believe they were all city installs, as I was at a city surplus auction in fall of 2001 where the old lights were being sold as two lots (duh) instead of individually to willing purchasers like me and a number of other people--one lot (11 pallets, each with 3-4 signal assemblies per pallet) went for $50 total, the other lot similarly.  They could have gotten $50 per signal assembly from me and a number of other people who were asking but were told sorry, we decided to sell them as lots and you have to take your merchandise by the end of tomorrow or be billed for us hauling it away.  I assume the high bidder was some other town or something, or some person with wherewithall to transport 11 pallets of traffic signals.  The city was stupid to not offer some singly to willing buyers. Oh well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Alex on June 22, 2016, 03:13:50 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/10_22_06_16_3_11_51.jpeg) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/gallery/10_22_06_16_3_11_51.jpeg)

Saw this "Cart Signal" within the SPUI at Nocatee and Crosswater Parkways in St. Johns County, Florida last week.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 04, 2016, 01:12:52 PM
Here's a strange signal that was posted on another thread:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2696883,-123.073468,3a,75y,190.4h,78.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxrvrXDmBjF82BRmwAAYZuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

This is the intersection of 1st Ave and Woodland Dr in Vancouver, BC.  The main street is controlled by a traditional RYG signal (but not ped signals).  The side street is controlled by a stop sign and ped signals.  Apparently, bikes and peds can push the button to stop traffic on 1st ave, but cars will always be controlled by the stop sign.

Now this intersection is in Canada, so the rules are different.  But I imagine something like this would violate MUTCD.  If main street traffic has green, the side street traffic should see a red light and not a stop sign.

There's similar signals in the US, but there are distinct differences:

At Country Club and 3rd in Tucson, AZ, the main street has a RYG, peds and bikes crossing on the minor street have unique signals and cars on the minor street are controlled by a stop sign and forced to turn right.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@32.2318613,-110.9267316,3a,75y,78.31h,82.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0mjQaTWDZta4k5oTquEjkQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e3!6m1!1e1?hl=en

At Reedie Drive and University Blvd in Wheaton, MD, the main street has a R-Y-flashing yellow signal.  While the main street is flashing yellow, the side street faces a flashing red and a stop sign.  When the main street traffic sees a red light, the side street traffic also sees a red light, no turn on red, and pedestrians may cross.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/2100+University+Blvd+W,+Silver+Spring,+MD+20902,+USA/@39.0399121,-77.0429182,3a,75y,262.06h,80.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skFOrVEGGaRxCYwK786BlJQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DkFOrVEGGaRxCYwK786BlJQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.120056%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7cf1ad0fd04ad:0xda66bcf9903e72c4!8m2!3d39.0406589!4d-77.047263?hl=en


I believe that these signals were designed in ways to discourage through traffic from using the minor streets while fully stopping the main street traffic so that bikes and peds can cross safely.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 04, 2016, 04:13:48 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 04, 2016, 01:12:52 PM
Here's a strange signal that was posted on another thread:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2696883,-123.073468,3a,75y,190.4h,78.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxrvrXDmBjF82BRmwAAYZuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

This is the intersection of 1st Ave and Woodland Dr in Vancouver, BC.  The main street is controlled by a traditional RYG signal (but not ped signals).  The side street is controlled by a stop sign and ped signals.  Apparently, bikes and peds can push the button to stop traffic on 1st ave, but cars will always be controlled by the stop sign.

Now this intersection is in Canada, so the rules are different.  But I imagine something like this would violate MUTCD.  If main street traffic has green, the side street traffic should see a red light and not a stop sign.


On those intersections in Canada, the green is flashing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 04, 2016, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 04, 2016, 04:13:48 PM
On those intersections in Canada, the green is flashing.

AFAIK, flashing green orbs for pedestrian crossings are unique to British Columbia.

Quote from: mrsman on July 04, 2016, 01:12:52 PM
This is the intersection of 1st Ave and Woodland Dr in Vancouver, BC.  The main street is controlled by a traditional RYG signal (but not ped signals).  The side street is controlled by a stop sign and ped signals.  Apparently, bikes and peds can push the button to stop traffic on 1st ave, but cars will always be controlled by the stop sign.
...

Now this intersection is in Canada, so the rules are different.  But I imagine something like this would violate MUTCD.  If main street traffic has green, the side street traffic should see a red light and not a stop sign.

Rather ubiquitous setup in some parts of Seattle, minus the flashing green. Here's a visual of one example (Eastlake @ East Boston St (https://goo.gl/RARfKe))...note the stop sign at right:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F6Raiy5d.png&hash=3ff0ddc4b57e62f462764a484e709cc6ab70fe8c)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 04, 2016, 05:17:44 PM
I have seen similar setups throughout the northeast as well. Of course, they are more common mid-block, but there are a few cases (that I can't immediately place).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on July 05, 2016, 11:25:39 PM
The talk of arrows upstream in this thread made me recall this former signal at the intersection of VA-7 and West St:
https://goo.gl/maps/cbiFA6CLKAB2

The city of Falls Church decided to minimize the cost of signal installation, and chose to use a non-regulation, green thru/right turn lens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 05, 2016, 11:34:02 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 05, 2016, 11:25:39 PM
The talk of arrows upstream in this thread made me recall this former signal at the intersection of VA-7 and West St:
https://goo.gl/maps/cbiFA6CLKAB2

The city of Falls Church decided to minimize the cost of signal installation, and chose to use a non-regulation, green thru/right turn lens.

Sandusky, OH once had a similar signal near Cedar Point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 09, 2016, 04:02:39 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 05, 2016, 11:25:39 PM
The talk of arrows upstream in this thread made me recall this former signal at the intersection of VA-7 and West St:
https://goo.gl/maps/cbiFA6CLKAB2

The city of Falls Church decided to minimize the cost of signal installation, and chose to use a non-regulation, green thru/right turn lens.

That signal appears to operate under split phasing. If that's the case, the non-standard arrow is totally unnecessary and a circular green could have been used instead. The signal is also in non-compliance with MUTCD for not having two signal heads for the through movement (even in the newer installation using a doghouse instead).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 09, 2016, 04:25:17 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 05, 2016, 11:25:39 PM
The talk of arrows upstream in this thread made me recall this former signal at the intersection of VA-7 and West St:
https://goo.gl/maps/cbiFA6CLKAB2

The city of Falls Church decided to minimize the cost of signal installation, and chose to use a non-regulation, green thru/right turn lens.

Besides roadfro's points above, that's actually a pretty cool signal. But the amount of detail in the arrow(s) suggests that placing it at the stop line, or just a few meters beyond it, would have been better, rather than above the opposite crosswalk (too much detail too far away -- I'd guess the signal looked kind of fuzzy from far away).

In other words, like this:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstaging.blueschoolofmotoring.com%2Fmedia%2Fdriving-lessons-traffic-lights.jpg&hash=058d8a11c8dbc75370f6756bfc7b4082152eda12)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2016, 10:14:28 PM
The City of Tucson has begun to install Pelican crossings along Grant Road, one of the city's main east-west arterials. The key here is that, unlike typical pedestrian crossings where the whole roadway must stop, these only stop half the roadway at a time. In the middle, the crosswalk staggers one direction or the other:

Here's the whole PDF chronicling the improvements along Grant Road: http://goo.gl/yexLtj (jump to pdf page 6 for the Pelican bit)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLoyjeYY.png&hash=5ca62c14a9467ebe27fc510ba9d7f81d0abb9145)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtpDGbNY.png&hash=0d1e4befb21eae6bc875731357bb115d5e1036a1)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on July 13, 2016, 12:44:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2016, 10:14:28 PM
The City of Tucson has begun to install Pelican crossings along Grant Road, one of the city's main east-west arterials. The key here is that, unlike typical pedestrian crossings where the whole roadway must stop, these only stop half the roadway at a time. In the middle, the crosswalk staggers one direction or the other:

Here's New Jersey's own version of that:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7224851,-74.091516,3a,36.8y,234.81h,85.77t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sM2b80Xr6re9TFAKVx6Mdog!2e0?force=lite (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7224851,-74.091516,3a,36.8y,234.81h,85.77t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sM2b80Xr6re9TFAKVx6Mdog!2e0?force=lite)

And pelican crossing?  I had to look that one up, and I'm finding there's puffin crossings, toucan crossings, panda crossings, pegasus crossings...  I love fun with acronyms and fancy ways to say a crosswalk has a traffic light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 14, 2016, 05:38:25 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on July 13, 2016, 12:44:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2016, 10:14:28 PM
The City of Tucson has begun to install Pelican crossings along Grant Road, one of the city's main east-west arterials. The key here is that, unlike typical pedestrian crossings where the whole roadway must stop, these only stop half the roadway at a time. In the middle, the crosswalk staggers one direction or the other:

Here's New Jersey's own version of that:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7224851,-74.091516,3a,36.8y,234.81h,85.77t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sM2b80Xr6re9TFAKVx6Mdog!2e0?force=lite (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7224851,-74.091516,3a,36.8y,234.81h,85.77t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sM2b80Xr6re9TFAKVx6Mdog!2e0?force=lite)

And pelican crossing?  I had to look that one up, and I'm finding there's puffin crossings, toucan crossings, panda crossings, pegasus crossings...  I love fun with acronyms and fancy ways to say a crosswalk has a traffic light.

And they all make perfect sense. Toucan crossings are combined bike/ped ("two can"), Pegasus crossings are for horses (Pegasus is a mythical horse), some of the others are acronyms, and a zebra crossing is uncontrolled (named for the paint of a crosswalk).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2016, 06:39:10 PM
Another Tucson find. Golf Links Road has a permissive dual left turn onto NB Swan Road. The single lane left turn onto SB Swan Road (from the opposite direction) is protected only. Dual permissive turns are very common in Tucson, as I have already covered extensively, but they are almost always against another permissive turn, so that makes this situation very unique, especially given that the oncoming left turn is only a single lane.

The opposite of this, where the dual turns are protected but the single turn is not, is relatively common nationwide, but the opposite .... I'm certain that this is a one-off situation.

https://goo.gl/JYGa7M

Note the cat-tracks from the right of the image, facing the 5-section signal on the left of the image; as well, note the 3-section signal on the right of the image for the single lane left turn:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8HKYKXf.png&hash=cd96eb51a5bafc64d72f1959baba88ce6be7fa46)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 01:12:35 PM
I wasn't sure where to post this, but this generically-named thread seems like an okay spot :)

There seems to be 8 variations of stoplights in Waterloo Region. Signals can either have 3 or 4 lights, signals are either all orange backing (what's the proper term for this?) or half orange half black, and they either have 30-20-20cm bulbs or 30-30-30cm bulbs.

An all orange backing, 3 bulb, 30-20-20 light at King St and Bridgeport Rd, Waterloo
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQJn78Wa.jpg&hash=8e1557be137fed954ef4b9f9df427a37046b35f2)

This time with 4 bulbs (i.e. advance green) at Bridgeport Rd and Regina St, Waterloo
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FzkxKg9x.jpg&hash=bced61c1e219127ebe1b662c5b61eb59b109ae0d)

An all orange backing, 3 bulb, 30-30-30 light at Maple Grove Rd and Speedsville Rd, Cambridge
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBftEsl0.jpg&hash=7909d5ae972a1567937275975973b1a65cb3762e)

I'm missing the 4 bulb version, but you get the idea ;)

This time with 4 bulbs, at Ottawa St and Lackner Blvd, Kitchener
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FETI7zet.jpg&hash=08e7efb894103479e5b4f45784bbabceea76a26d)

A black and orange backing, 3 bulb, 30-20-20 light at King St and Central St, Waterloo
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmJfuFU5.jpg&hash=e7aa5d3f1d6e482de95e2902cf1c3df1f95228ff)

This time with 4 bulbs, at Fairway Rd and Lackner Blvd, Kitchener
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQefYFx0.jpg&hash=8530b46f1528d34ff04cf77cfe6da2d5356c5472)

A black and orange backing, 3 bulb, 30-30-30 light at King St and Marshall St, Waterloo
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FqlGL6MG.jpg&hash=28d54a5dc1195ef1103a0718360a55dee03cf807)

This time with 4 bulbs (the one on the left), at Maple Grove Rd and Fountain St, Cambridge
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSlOpMoa.jpg&hash=ad7467ae92d8d8102d920211e4f30f2a2ad41c55)

Newer lights tend to have the black and orange backing, instead of all orange. The light bulb size roughly correlates with the speed limit of the road, higher speeds have the larger bulbs. There is also a surprising amount of mismatch of styles at some intersections.

Some of these pictures have the lights in wires, but some of these are due to construction. Normally in Ontario, lights are mounted on (generally silver) metal posts.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 01:35:56 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 01:12:35 PM
There seems to be 8 variations of stoplights in Waterloo Region. Signals can either have 3 or 4 lights, signals are either all orange backing (what's the proper term for this?) or half orange half black, and they either have 30-20-20cm bulbs or 30-30-30cm bulbs.

Newer lights tend to have the black and orange backing, instead of all orange. The light bulb size roughly correlates with the speed limit of the road, higher speeds have the larger bulbs. There is also a surprising amount of mismatch of styles at some intersection.

This is a practice that I've seen in British Columbia as well. The backplates over here are always yellow + yellow retroreflective strip around the border. The black part is just the signal housing itself, unrelated to the backplate. Most new signals installed by the BCMOT use black housings, but local municipalities still install yellow housings from time to time.

As for the size of the signal heads, new overhead signals in BC are 30-30-30, but mast-mounted signals (those mounted on the side) are most often 20-20-20, 20-20-30 if the signal is a protected left (bottom lens = arrow), or 20-20-20-30 if the left turn is protected/permissive (bottom lens = bimodal arrow).

Just like in Ontario, there is variation. Some newer mast-mounted signals are 30-30-30. And, new 20cm arrows are still installed, but it's very uncommon.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 06:44:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 01:35:56 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 01:12:35 PM
There seems to be 8 variations of stoplights in Waterloo Region. Signals can either have 3 or 4 lights, signals are either all orange backing (what's the proper term for this?) or half orange half black, and they either have 30-20-20cm bulbs or 30-30-30cm bulbs.

Newer lights tend to have the black and orange backing, instead of all orange. The light bulb size roughly correlates with the speed limit of the road, higher speeds have the larger bulbs. There is also a surprising amount of mismatch of styles at some intersection.

This is a practice that I've seen in British Columbia as well. The backplates over here are always yellow + yellow retroreflective strip around the border. The black part is just the signal housing itself, unrelated to the backplate. Most new signals installed by the BCMOT use black housings, but local municipalities still install yellow housings from time to time.

As for the size of the signal heads, new overhead signals in BC are 30-30-30, but mast-mounted signals (those mounted on the side) are most often 20-20-20, 20-20-30 if the signal is a protected left (bottom lens = arrow), or 20-20-20-30 if the left turn is protected/permissive (bottom lens = bimodal arrow).

Just like in Ontario, there is variation. Some newer mast-mounted signals are 30-30-30. And, new 20cm arrows are still installed, but it's very uncommon.

I don't think I've ever seen a 20cm arrow in Ontario.

Thanks for explaining the terminology! Does anyone know why the black signal-heads are becoming more common? Does it improve visibility? I'm not sure if I like them more or not. They look a bit more interesting, but I think having the signal-heads and back plates match looks nicer.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 07:24:58 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 06:44:28 PM
I don't think I've ever seen a 20cm arrow in Ontario.

I don't think I've seen a 20cm arrow anywhere except in BC. But that's mostly due to their propensity to install near-side signals when the left turn is protected. Exhibit A -- note the 20cm arrow in the near-side left turn signal below (compared to the signal posted above it, 30-30-30 -- another strange variation (should be 20-20-30)). Nearly all 20cm arrows are at near-side installations. But there are some that are used on the far side of the junction: https://goo.gl/5s9R2o

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlOFEhGZ.png&hash=f2e97787b49e563e7cb267ad2e4d605a392f7a36)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:48:52 PM
Why does Canada use yellow backplates, the opposite of US practice? Seems to me it defeats the purpose.........
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 09:01:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:48:52 PM
Why does Canada use yellow backplates, the opposite of US practice? Seems to me it defeats the purpose.........

I'm not sure why, TBH. Black backplates are rare in Ontario. The only one I can think of in my area is this one on Hespeler Rd and 401 in Cambridge. The only reason it uses a black backplate is to help distinguish it as a transit signal for buses.
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4129909,-80.3279015,3a,37.5y,182.98h,94.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCoPE5FvNKO1uQZ7cPfM6aA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4129909,-80.3279015,3a,37.5y,182.98h,94.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCoPE5FvNKO1uQZ7cPfM6aA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeqMizRG.png&hash=73e4246b3dbe4fff408d8dd65d2f059caeadb332)

I've seen lots of black backplates in Quebec; it varies by province.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 09:04:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:48:52 PM
Why does Canada use yellow backplates, the opposite of US practice? Seems to me it defeats the purpose.........

Parts of Canada (namely, Ontario) have used yellow backplates for some time. The idea being that a yellow backplate serves the same purpose during the day, as the retroreflective border would at night.

It's worth mentioning that the yellow retroreflective border was invented in British Columbia back in the late 90s. That's why, these days, most full-yellow backplates in Canada also have a reflective edge:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZ3iRplV.jpg&hash=6202bba6d402ba8975a98a9bf63c41ac2f13ff57)

Not all cities in Canada use yellow backplates however. Edmonton, AB uses black backplates. Black backplates are common in Banff. Manitoba uses black backplates for their left turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jwolfer on July 19, 2016, 11:04:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 09:04:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:48:52 PM
Why does Canada use yellow backplates, the opposite of US practice? Seems to me it defeats the purpose.........

Parts of Canada (namely, Ontario) have used yellow backplates for some time. The idea being that a yellow backplate serves the same purpose during the day, as the retroreflective border would at night.

It's worth mentioning that the yellow retroreflective border was invented in British Columbia back in the late 90s. That's why, these days, most full-yellow backplates in Canada also have a reflective edge:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZ3iRplV.jpg&hash=6202bba6d402ba8975a98a9bf63c41ac2f13ff57)

Not all cities in Canada use yellow backplates however. Edmonton, AB uses black backplates. Black backplates are common in Banff. Manitoba uses black backplates for their left turn signals.
New traffic light installations in Florida all have the reflective yellow backplate border
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 11:51:25 PM
More and more, the reflective border is becoming standard. The 2009 MUTCD requires backplates for new installations where the approach speed is at least 45 mph, so that part isn't too surprising.

On a different note, saw a bunch of new FYAs today on NY 30A in Johnstown. All replaced doghouses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 20, 2016, 03:57:40 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 06:44:28 PM
Does anyone know why the black signal-heads are becoming more common? Does it improve visibility? I'm not sure if I like them more or not. They look a bit more interesting, but I think having the signal-heads and back plates match looks nicer.
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2016, 09:04:13 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 19, 2016, 08:48:52 PM
Why does Canada use yellow backplates, the opposite of US practice? Seems to me it defeats the purpose.........
Parts of Canada (namely, Ontario) have used yellow backplates for some time. The idea being that a yellow backplate serves the same purpose during the day, as the retroreflective border would at night.

Count me in the camp that likes the backplate and signal housing colors to match, or at least be very similar. I like the black/black combo (or sometimes dark green housing/black backplate), but that is likely a function of what I'm used to seeing in Nevada.

Anectdotally, I think a reason for dark colored housing and backplates better help the signal heads stand out against a bright, sunlit sky. However, this combo doesn't help the signal heads stand out at night (especially during power failure). The opposite is likely true for the reason of using yellow, to have signal heads stand out more at night or in more inclement weather. I believe this rationale was part of why the yellow reflective backplate border was introduced as an option in the 2009 MUTCD, to combine the "best of both worlds". (Although it's also worth noting that the MUTCD does not specify colors of signal housings or backplates.)

Quote from: cl94 on July 19, 2016, 11:51:25 PM
More and more, the reflective border is becoming standard. The 2009 MUTCD requires backplates for new installations where the approach speed is at least 45 mph, so that part isn't too surprising.

The reflective border is listed as an Option in the 2009 MUTCD. It may just be that more agencies are tending to make this option part of their installation standards.

The 2009 MUTCD *recommends* backplates for new and reconstructed signals with speeds 45 mph or greater (it's a guidance statement, so not a requirement; see 4D.11 07 and 4D.12 18)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 20, 2016, 12:48:27 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 20, 2016, 03:57:40 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on July 19, 2016, 06:44:28 PM
Does anyone know why the black signal-heads are becoming more common? Does it improve visibility? I'm not sure if I like them more or not. They look a bit more interesting, but I think having the signal-heads and back plates match looks nicer.

Anectdotally, I think a reason for dark colored housing and backplates better help the signal heads stand out against a bright, sunlit sky. However, this combo doesn't help the signal heads stand out at night (especially during power failure). The opposite is likely true for the reason of using yellow, to have signal heads stand out more at night or in more inclement weather. I believe this rationale was part of why the yellow reflective backplate border was introduced as an option in the 2009 MUTCD, to combine the "best of both worlds". (Although it's also worth noting that the MUTCD does not specify colors of signal housings or backplates.)

That would explain having black signal heads with yellow backplates, since it theoretically has the benefits of working well both at day and night.

----

I went to Whitby, ON on Sunday and I noticed that most of the signals I saw were all yellow, 30-30-30 with long tubular signal-heads (see photo below). The tubular signal-heads are rare in KW. I only see them at angled intersections, where they don't want people to see signals from the wrong directions. But they were everywhere in Whitby.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F1fkDIyL.jpg&hash=4464ea0b9f7adff4d79f5b6e9d841d38b1e8a94b)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on July 22, 2016, 08:36:34 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 20, 2016, 03:57:40 AM

The 2009 MUTCD *recommends* backplates for new and reconstructed signals with speeds 45 mph or greater (it's a guidance statement, so not a requirement; see 4D.11 07 and 4D.12 18)

MoDOT has been adding yellow reflective tape on their black backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on July 23, 2016, 10:42:55 PM
New NYSDOT signals have black backplates with reflective yellow border strips.  I think they look pretty sharp.  Here's one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331113,-76.56324,3a,66.8y,72.4h,91.85t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sndeisFHPDyuc4QfkkjJVYQ!2e0) that was installed in Auburn last year.  It's sad to see the old signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331159,-76.5631027,3a,52.3y,96.46h,95.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWMPx8drm9asMDB4Fyn7U9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) go, but at least the replacement isn't ugly.  Something I've only ever seen on the old signal is a white circular "WALK" for pedestrians.  Note that the middle signal head is a 4-way, with one side facing the sidewalk on the right.  The "WALK" was in place of a green ball.



Last night, I saw this on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/4tw3p3/this_traffic_light_allows_senior_citizens_to_have/), and I thought I'd post it here:
(https://i.reddituploads.com/1999fd4914cd437bb238d6c45d5c4d52?fit=max&h=1536&w=1536&s=630c715c4372e7f83ef2c7ae9c4eb155)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 24, 2016, 06:27:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 14, 2016, 06:39:10 PM
Another Tucson find. Golf Links Road has a permissive dual left turn onto NB Swan Road. The single lane left turn onto SB Swan Road (from the opposite direction) is protected only. Dual permissive turns are very common in Tucson, as I have already covered extensively, but they are almost always against another permissive turn, so that makes this situation very unique, especially given that the oncoming left turn is only a single lane.

The opposite of this, where the dual turns are protected but the single turn is not, is relatively common nationwide, but the opposite .... I'm certain that this is a one-off situation.

https://goo.gl/JYGa7M

Note the cat-tracks from the right of the image, facing the 5-section signal on the left of the image; as well, note the 3-section signal on the right of the image for the single lane left turn:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8HKYKXf.png&hash=cd96eb51a5bafc64d72f1959baba88ce6be7fa46)

The single WB to SB left turn is protected only and the double EB to NB left turn is permitted/protected, right?

Do you know if the WB to SB left turn is leading and the EB to NB left turn is lagging?  If that is true, perhaps they used this singalization in order to eliminate the yellow trap.  A lagging protected/permited left turn leads to a yellow trap unless the opposite left turn is prohibited, controlled by a red arrow, or controlled by FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 25, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
Going down River Rd E to King St E (not a typo, they're both East :-D) in Kitchener, ON, you pass train tracks right before the intersection. Therefore, they decided to use the 3M-style 3M/McCain PV signals for the green lights so that you can't see the King St signals until you pass the train tracks. I find it interesting that the red and yellow lights appear to not be 3M style 3M/McCain PV, while the green lights and associated arrows are. Also, the 3M signals are inconsistent themselves; some of them have square casings while others are round. The railway crossing signal on the pole uses 3M (i.e. square casing) while the other signals use McCain PV (i.e. round casing).

The King St signals from the side:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSjEQasg.jpg&hash=5dbc7d5023d3019d614986fe62b16617b0fb46b6)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0mYnpoI.jpg&hash=38d2a6785978859f10362c1e9a204b6f645a339f)

The Railway signals:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvR2MynS.jpg&hash=47d30e5623c57a142c746772efc834a5ffdc65b4)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQxNFGBv.jpg&hash=547a84b26fec0ebcbd796815ae075cec6116ef34)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 25, 2016, 07:47:58 PM
^^Wow, that's wacky.  But I'm totally on board with that strategy!  Reinforcing reds and yellows, but limited sight of greens to err on the side of caution.  I actually like this idea!  We can use it in other situations where you cross tracks just before an intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 25, 2016, 08:02:30 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 25, 2016, 07:47:58 PM
^^Wow, that's wacky.  But I'm totally on board with that strategy!  Reinforcing reds and yellows, but limited sight of greens to err on the side of caution.  I actually like this idea!  We can use it in other situations where you cross tracks just before an intersection.

It makes sense, but it does look weird! It might be cheaper too, since the 3M/McCain PV signals are apparently pricey.

One other spot I've seen this is on University Ave at King St (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4761356,-80.5249585,3a,75y,266.16h,84.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shIvYYedLO6zq1RH_o3bBlw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and Regina St (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4765905,-80.5237838,3a,75y,92.94h,83.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXFcCYgnuyA9TT1Wfm_UqQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Waterloo, ON. The intersections are close together, so the green lights on the second intersection in each direction are 3M so you can't see them too early.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 25, 2016, 11:51:31 PM
Also, most of those are McCain PV signals. The only 3M is the mast-mounted one ahead of the crossing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 26, 2016, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 25, 2016, 11:51:31 PM
Also, most of those are McCain PV signals. The only 3M is the mast-mounted one ahead of the crossing.

Correct. If you want 3M frankensignals, come to Albany (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7401224,-73.7367613,3a,49.4y,367.28h,102.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siVDv-kkQ6-tcTKiEcaJxyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Off the top of my head, I can think of 3 intersections that have them and there are probably more. Most split intersections in the area just use full PV signals, so I don't know why NYSDOT went weird at these. Before NYSDOT started using louvers and long tunnel visors at skewed intersections, most of those were 3Ms as well. NY 149 at Warren CR 7, seen here in 2009 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3882709,-73.6463695,3a,39.8y,361.86h,89.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svwT2CiI3Zf7J-D2gKSF9tQ!2e0!7i3328!8i1664), was my first big introduction to PVs. It was replaced by standard McCains with long tunnel visors shortly thereafter when turn lanes were added on NY 149.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 26, 2016, 09:57:17 AM
Here's something for your brains to chew on...
What's wrong with this picture?  Something about this intersection was constructed incorrectly.

(https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7507/28279277740_d54671723c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39)
20160506_170253 (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 28, 2016, 03:01:48 PM
Either the non-PV signal head facing the traffic that also has PV signals, or the dual signals on the mast on the right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 30, 2016, 09:02:19 PM
Are there any areas that use a doghouse that is different from the typical red centered above the green and yellow balls and arrows?

As an example, this variant is almost exclusively used on Long Island NY. I have yet to see it anywhere that i have driven, even within NY State. The red ball is above the green and yellow ball, with the left or right arrows offset to their respective direction

https://goo.gl/maps/SYR17To2Prq
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 30, 2016, 09:15:04 PM
Hmmm.........RestrictOnTheHanger ? Sounds like Track-16 (?)  at Penn Station on the Long Island Railroad.

But anyway, that traffic signal configuration is called a side-by-side. I much prefer it over the usual doghouse; it's more intuitive. Looks better when mounted on a mast-arm than with span-wire.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 30, 2016, 09:48:15 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 30, 2016, 09:15:04 PM
Hmmm.........RestrictOnTheHanger ? Sounds like Track-16 (?)  at Penn Station on the Long Island Railroad.

But anyway, that traffic signal configuration is called a side-by-side. I much prefer it over the usual doghouse; it's more intuitive. Looks better when mounted on a mast-arm than with span-wire.

I agree, it looks better than a normal doghouse. Works better with the smaller lights too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 30, 2016, 09:55:29 PM
The smaller (8-inch) lights are almost history. Most places now use 12-inch as the standard in most installations. Except Nassau County, NY DPW on Long Island which stubbornly still installs the smaller ones where they feel it's reasonable, and NYSDOT too in some locations. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 30, 2016, 10:41:43 PM
R10 is weird in how they do that, as nobody else I know of in the northeast uses a pure side-by-side. Of course, if FYAs continue to spread, they might be phased out in upcoming years.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 30, 2016, 11:52:10 PM
The state, counties, and to a lesser extent the towns mostly install the side by side, but also use vertical 4 and 5 lights stacked. Sometimes even in the same intersection


Jericho Tpke and Marcus Ave (NYSDOT) (https://goo.gl/maps/cuE6r5YiR792)

NYCDOT still installs new 8 inch lights regularly, though they are switching to 12 inch lights for new and existing lights. Then again they do wacky stuff , and the longer I live in the NYC area the more I see.

Examples (sure there are plenty more)

Wrong placement of left turn arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/dLR9fP2tWCy)

Signalling a straight thru movement as a slight right (https://goo.gl/maps/Tj6kZNoewp62)

Sloppy Frankensignals (https://goo.gl/maps/yH6st2isJpm)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 31, 2016, 12:39:13 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 26, 2016, 09:57:17 AM
Here's something for your brains to chew on...
What's wrong with this picture?  Something about this intersection was constructed incorrectly.

(https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7507/28279277740_d54671723c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39)
20160506_170253 (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
For those playing at home, the 3M signals are on the wrong mast arm.  If the photo is facing north (which it is), the eastbound traffic should see the 3Ms, not the westbound traffic, to eliminate confusion between signals for the NB and EB approaches.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on July 31, 2016, 01:49:52 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 30, 2016, 09:02:19 PM
Are there any areas that use a doghouse that is different from the typical red centered above the green and yellow balls and arrows?

As an example, this variant is almost exclusively used on Long Island NY. I have yet to see it anywhere that i have driven, even within NY State. The red ball is above the green and yellow ball, with the left or right arrows offset to their respective direction

https://goo.gl/maps/SYR17To2Prq
Sweden uses this variant, but for left turn signals not separate from the main signal, only a green arrow is used, while the yellow and green is much more common for right turns.

Examples: Right turn (https://www.google.se/maps/@58.4259419,15.6777198,3a,36.8y,209.24h,89.13t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sm_4oNKzK-N_hICsDQeRp6A!2e0), Left turn (https://www.google.se/maps/@58.4097431,15.6097919,3a,23.7y,18.99h,88.1t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s43thl2O5tnldPnMDQUkz1Q!2e0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 31, 2016, 03:05:13 PM
Quote from: riiga on July 31, 2016, 01:49:52 PM
Sweden uses this variant, but for left turn signals not separate from the main signal, only a green arrow is used, while the yellow and green is much more common for right turns.

If only a green arrow is used, does the protected left turn follow the permissive phase (such that the through and left turn would end at the same time, and could both use the same yellow orb)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 31, 2016, 03:45:21 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 31, 2016, 12:39:13 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 26, 2016, 09:57:17 AM
Here's something for your brains to chew on...
What's wrong with this picture?  Something about this intersection was constructed incorrectly.

(https://c5.staticflickr.com/8/7507/28279277740_d54671723c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39)
20160506_170253 (https://flic.kr/p/K5WG39) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
For those playing at home, the 3M signals are on the wrong mast arm.  If the photo is facing north (which it is), the eastbound traffic should see the 3Ms, not the westbound traffic, to eliminate confusion between signals for the NB and EB approaches.

While I did see that, I also wondered if there's something just to the north of the intersection that required those 3M signals to be where they were.

That's a pretty big error not to be corrected in the field.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on July 31, 2016, 05:26:16 PM
I have seen side by side for left turns in WV such as

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2952508,-77.8417332,3a,75y,69.11h,95.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDAu54BqIOzXwrxg7TZlJvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US

Maryland at least used to install some side by side 8 inch through movement with 12 inch arrows on the near side as shown in this image below

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6009121,-75.8041842,3a,75y,51.6h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8uOxfAP_1Frcd8tLV4jl5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on July 31, 2016, 06:08:54 PM
Spotted these two on former WA 527 in downtown Bothell:

https://twitter.com/SounderBruce/status/757323914703843328

Maps link: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7608473,-122.2075804,3a,75y,176.97h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK5uSnEn6o_GZ354ly07lxg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on July 31, 2016, 07:11:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 31, 2016, 03:05:13 PM
Quote from: riiga on July 31, 2016, 01:49:52 PM
Sweden uses this variant, but for left turn signals not separate from the main signal, only a green arrow is used, while the yellow and green is much more common for right turns.

If only a green arrow is used, does the protected left turn follow the permissive phase (such that the through and left turn would end at the same time, and could both use the same yellow orb)?
Yes, they both end at the same time, but the protected turn doesn't necessarily begin as the permissive phase begins. It could also start just as light turns green and end earlier, but I don't recall seeing that. The relevant official document says (in translation) "In a traffic signal with one additional opening, the opening may only show a green arrow as the main signal is showing a green light without arrow."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on July 31, 2016, 07:14:38 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on July 31, 2016, 05:26:16 PM

Maryland at least used to install some side by side 8 inch through movement with 12 inch arrows on the near side as shown in this image below

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6009121,-75.8041842,3a,75y,51.6h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8uOxfAP_1Frcd8tLV4jl5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US

Maryland still does it. Here's an intersection that was just redone with mast arms last year down the street from my house:

https://goo.gl/maps/zkZTxDmxpAL2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 31, 2016, 07:28:33 PM
Penny-wise and pound-foolish. A main road like that should have all 12-inch signals. They sure as heck would in California or Colorado or other western states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 31, 2016, 07:53:53 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 31, 2016, 07:28:33 PM
Penny-wise and pound-foolish. A main road like that should have all 12-inch signals. They sure as heck would in California or Colorado or other western states.

Primary signals should always use 12-inch signals, but secondary and/or tertiary/auxiliary signals are appropriate applications for 8-inch signals. British Columbia (a western state, depending on your definition ;-)) still installs 8-inch (200mm) secondary and primary signals at most of their intersections. Overhead signals are always 12-inch (300mm), but secondary (mast-mounted) signals, as well as near-side (tertiary/auxiliary) signals are mostly all 8-inch. Arrows are often 8-inch as well, though this is far less common than it used to be (though it's still permitted -- see this PDF (https://goo.gl/YwywXE) page 86, section on "auxiliary").

EDIT 4.25.2017 was a mistake. Sorry for throwing anyone off. I was trying to copy something and hit save instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on July 31, 2016, 10:21:42 PM
There is a photography studio in downtown Morganton NC that always has historical photos of downtown and they are changed every so many weeks.  There was a new set up today that showed a style of traffic signal at Sterling and Avery from the 1950's that I had never seen before:  the signal head was a flat box like structure with semi circular top and bottoms it was a one signal face only deal.  and just had the weather protectors just attached to the front.  Last months pic had a an image of VE day with an US 64, US 70 AND US 64A shield on the corner lamppost.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 01, 2016, 11:42:11 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on July 31, 2016, 10:21:42 PM
There is a photography studio in downtown Morganton NC that always has historical photos of downtown and they are changed every so many weeks.  There was a new set up today that showed a style of traffic signal at Sterling and Avery from the 1950's that I had never seen before:  the signal head was a flat box like structure with semi circular top and bottoms it was a one signal face only deal.  and just had the weather protectors just attached to the front.  Last months pic had a an image of VE day with an US 64, US 70 AND US 64A shield on the corner lamppost.
Sounds like a Darley Simplex signal:
http://www.kbrhorse.net/signals/darley_d480.html

Quote from: Bruce on July 31, 2016, 06:08:54 PM
Spotted these two on former WA 527 in downtown Bothell:

https://twitter.com/SounderBruce/status/757323914703843328

Maps link: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7608473,-122.2075804,3a,75y,176.97h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK5uSnEn6o_GZ354ly07lxg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Some people call those "E.T. heads", but I personally like to call them "T-signals". I've seen a few around here in Alabama, with this set-up (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4428686,-86.7313369,3a,48.4y,148.68h,92.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT3mCn82aMdmZHbYc-4H0Ig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on US 280 being a notable one. There's actually one at an intersection here in Huntsville.
South Carolina also uses them for a lot of their left turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 02, 2016, 12:48:17 AM
This intersection outside of Victoria, BC uses an all-blue colour scheme. I've seen custom-coloured mast-arms before, but I've never seen the actual signals painted as well. If I'm being frank, I don't know if I care much for the blue/yellow backplate scheme, but seeing as the latter is unavoidable, the only other option would be to use a different colour for the mast-arms (black or brown being my favorite two, other than plain silver -- I also like a yellow wrap around the base of the mast, something seen, until recently, in Nevada, as well as Australia/NZ).

https://goo.gl/clJW1T

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fs0YhmmM.png&hash=71b8c290ffb586ea9f32ee09247ff8d1a9b73f10)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 02, 2016, 07:32:44 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 02, 2016, 12:48:17 AM
I also like a yellow wrap around the base of the mast, something seen, until recently, in Nevada, as well as Australia/NZ).

The yellow paint wrap around the lower part of the signal mast (typically the lower half of the distance between the mast arm and the ground), was only ever really a thing in the Las Vegas/Clark County area (typically coupled with a more white-silverish coating on the rest of the mast and mast arm for most entities except North Las Vegas). The yellow treatment was also given to the entirety of smaller poles used for ped heads and post-mounted signals. Most of the municipalities in Vegas used the yellow pole wrap scheme, and some outlying areas of the County as well, if I recall correctly.

However, the yellow wrap scheme hasn't been common practice for some time now–if I had to guess, it ceased in the mid-to-late 1990's. Continued refreshing of previously painted poles tends to vary: City of Las Vegas appears to not make this a priority (some casual glances on Street View show painted poles to be somewhat faded) but Clark County does seem to maintain at least some of their yellow paint still (as recent Street Views around the Strip and UNLV show seemingly fresh paint on signal poles, but not as much in other areas).


I can't think of a yellow pole wrap treatment anywhere in Reno, Sparks or Carson City. So I'm reasonably certain this was primarily a Vegas thing...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 02, 2016, 02:51:57 PM
I must say, blue signals look nice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: myosh_tino on August 02, 2016, 03:33:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 02, 2016, 07:32:44 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 02, 2016, 12:48:17 AM
I also like a yellow wrap around the base of the mast, something seen, until recently, in Nevada, as well as Australia/NZ).

The yellow paint wrap around the lower part of the signal mast (typically the lower half of the distance between the mast arm and the ground), was only ever really a thing in the Las Vegas/Clark County area (typically coupled with a more white-silverish coating on the rest of the mast and mast arm for most entities except North Las Vegas). The yellow treatment was also given to the entirety of smaller poles used for ped heads and post-mounted signals. Most of the municipalities in Vegas used the yellow pole wrap scheme, and some outlying areas of the County as well, if I recall correctly.

However, the yellow wrap scheme hasn't been common practice for some time now–if I had to guess, it ceased in the mid-to-late 1990's. Continued refreshing of previously painted poles tends to vary: City of Las Vegas appears to not make this a priority (some casual glances on Street View show painted poles to be somewhat faded) but Clark County does seem to maintain at least some of their yellow paint still (as recent Street Views around the Strip and UNLV show seemingly fresh paint on signal poles, but not as much in other areas).


I can't think of a yellow pole wrap treatment anywhere in Reno, Sparks or Carson City. So I'm reasonably certain this was primarily a Vegas thing...

San Jose used to do the same thing to it's traffic signal poles.  The poles and mast arm were painted a very dark green but the pole below the post-mounted signal was painted bright yellow.  There aren't a whole lot of these poles left in San Jose as most new poles and mast arms are either left as it (metallic silver) or are painted dark green to black.

The city of Saratoga does something similar in that they paint the lower half of the signal poles brown while leaving the upper half of the pole and the mast arm unpainted.  I suspect this is done for aesthetic purposes only.  It does match the color of their street blades.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 08, 2016, 12:23:13 PM
Here are some of the stoplights I found interesting during our trip to México last week.

While we Americans are trying to decide how many additional/redundant signals to place at an intersection, México has no problem with just one for each direction on a divided highway.  I also notice now (not when I took the picture) that the red lights are at the wrong end.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FStoplight1_zps56omzxob.jpg&hash=7600ea6f129978c8d82630374836978f1718bfd1)

How long before none of the bulbs on these stoplights even display at all?  Less than half of each red lights up.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FStoplight2_zpsyno2h67c.jpg&hash=32cd49e18e1617c06f620b2f694d88db30aa13ae)

Has anyone seen anything like this?  These lights were just installed this year in Monclova.  "Siga" means "Go ahead," and "Alto" means "Stop."  I don't remember what word shows up for yellow.  These lights do a full Green–Flashing green–Yellow–Red cycle.  There were no left turns allowed at the intersection, so no arrow lights.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FStoplight3_zpshe2tegic.jpg&hash=3a043f11eab010b846dfedc3b8da184a1b84b9ed)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FStoplight4_zpsmbmntqqd.jpg&hash=1a8973b25b8afaf8f30278068555d632d354c0e4)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on August 08, 2016, 08:28:43 PM
^ Those changeable arrow signals are kinda cool. Are those basically LED displays which change from green-yellow-red?

I've never driven in Mexico, but I was there about a year and a half ago and noticed something unique about how some (if not most/all) intersections were phased - at least in Quintana Roo. It looked like the entire intersection was using split-phasing, where each direction of a four-way intersection had a phase where all movements were fully protected in just that one direction, and the right-of-way rotated to allow each direction their turn to drive. At some places, traffic in opposing directions never went simultaneously; it was always one side at a time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 12:24:49 PM
Quote from: Ace10 on August 08, 2016, 08:28:43 PM
^ Those changeable arrow signals are kinda cool. Are those basically LED displays which change from green-yellow-red?

I've never driven in Mexico, but I was there about a year and a half ago and noticed something unique about how some (if not most/all) intersections were phased - at least in Quintana Roo. It looked like the entire intersection was using split-phasing, where each direction of a four-way intersection had a phase where all movements were fully protected in just that one direction, and the right-of-way rotated to allow each direction their turn to drive. At some places, traffic in opposing directions never went simultaneously; it was always one side at a time.

Yes, fully-protected split phasing is common.  And annoying.  An intersection I specifically posted upthread turned out to no longer have working stoplights when I was there last week.  It was basically a free-for-all, and I liked that better.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 12:43:39 PM
Is there a standard way of arranging the lights when it's horizontally mounted?  I was driving in Wichita Falls (TX) on Sunday and realized the lights weren't simply normal 5-lamp stoplights turned 90 degrees.

With five lamps vertically mounted, stoplights go /TOP/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green ball)(yellow arrow)(green arrow)/BOTTOM/

But in Wichita Falls I saw a stoplight that went /LEFT/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green arrow)(yellow arrow)(green ball)/RIGHT/ if I remember right.

Is that the normal order?  Does it vary a lot?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on August 09, 2016, 01:00:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 12:43:39 PM
Is there a standard way of arranging the lights when it's horizontally mounted?  I was driving in Wichita Falls (TX) on Sunday and realized the lights weren't simply normal 5-lamp stoplights turned 90 degrees.

With five lamps vertically mounted, stoplights go /TOP/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green ball)(yellow arrow)(green arrow)/BOTTOM/

But in Wichita Falls I saw a stoplight that went /LEFT/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green arrow)(yellow arrow)(green ball)/RIGHT/ if I remember right.

Is that the normal order?  Does it vary a lot?

IIRC, in Quebec, horizontal signals are from left to right: red ball, yellow ball, green ball, optional green/yellow arrow, and red ball again (though technically, the red lights are sometimes square and the yellow lights are sometimes diamonds to help those who are colour blind).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2016, 01:00:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 12:43:39 PM
Is there a standard way of arranging the lights when it's horizontally mounted?  I was driving in Wichita Falls (TX) on Sunday and realized the lights weren't simply normal 5-lamp stoplights turned 90 degrees.

With five lamps vertically mounted, stoplights go /TOP/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green ball)(yellow arrow)(green arrow)/BOTTOM/

But in Wichita Falls I saw a stoplight that went /LEFT/(red ball)(yellow ball)(green arrow)(yellow arrow)(green ball)/RIGHT/ if I remember right.

Is that the normal order?  Does it vary a lot?

There should be absolutely no variation whatsoever.   

Per the MUTCD...

Section 4D.10 Positions of Signal Indications Within a Horizontal Signal Face

Standard:
01 In each horizontally-arranged signal face, all signal sections that display red signal indications shall be located to the left of all signal sections that display yellow and green signal indications.

02 In horizontally-arranged signal faces, each signal section that displays a YELLOW ARROW signal indication shall be located to the left of the signal section that displays the GREEN ARROW signal indication to which it applies.

03 The relative positions of signal sections in a horizontally-arranged signal face, from left to right, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 01:16:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2016, 01:00:55 PM
03 The relative positions of signal sections in a horizontally-arranged signal face, from left to right, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW

Then all is well.  I realize now I got the order of the arrows mixed up in my memory.

I guess I just never realized till now that the lamps aren't in the same order vertical as horizontal.  Vertical, the green ball is in the middle, whereas horizontal it's at the end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on August 09, 2016, 09:46:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 09, 2016, 01:16:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 09, 2016, 01:00:55 PM
03 The relative positions of signal sections in a horizontally-arranged signal face, from left to right, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW

Then all is well.  I realize now I got the order of the arrows mixed up in my memory.

I guess I just never realized till now that the lamps aren't in the same order vertical as horizontal.  Vertical, the green ball is in the middle, whereas horizontal it's at the end.
Well if its a right turn, the green ball is in the middle still, only on permissive left turns is it at the end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 15, 2016, 01:16:53 AM
Went through this signal today, just east of Vancouver (couldn't snap a photo quick enough). All 8-inch (200 mm) arrows. 200 mm arrows aren't unheard of around here, but they're mainly used on the mast. Almost unheard of on the arm:

https://goo.gl/cIzJlK

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FpzG9ZAD.png&hash=7ad736cb3aeaa8294d8b3819266db1ff3ee75ece)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:04:20 AM
I was in New Brunswick a couple of weeks ago and saw a new signal type that was quite unexpected. In New Brunswick, 4-section protected-permissive signal heads flash the green arrow rapidly in protected mode. Kind of like a variant of Ontario's old flashing green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2016, 12:10:07 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:04:20 AM
I was in New Brunswick a couple of weeks ago and saw a new signal type that was quite unexpected. In New Brunswick, 4-section protected-permissive signal heads flash the green arrow rapidly in protected mode. Kind of like a variant of Ontario's old flashing green.

That's the standard for 4-section bi-modal protected/permissive signals across Canada, at least as far as I know. The green arrow blinks at 120 flashes per minute, switching to a solid amber arrow before expiring.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 02, 2016, 12:10:07 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:04:20 AM
I was in New Brunswick a couple of weeks ago and saw a new signal type that was quite unexpected. In New Brunswick, 4-section protected-permissive signal heads flash the green arrow rapidly in protected mode. Kind of like a variant of Ontario's old flashing green.

That's the standard for 4-section bi-modal protected/permissive signals across Canada, at least as far as I know. The green arrow blinks at 120 flashes per minute, switching to a solid amber arrow before expiring.

Definitely not the standard in Ontario. Almost everything there now follows US guidelines.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2016, 12:15:10 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 02, 2016, 12:10:07 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:04:20 AM
I was in New Brunswick a couple of weeks ago and saw a new signal type that was quite unexpected. In New Brunswick, 4-section protected-permissive signal heads flash the green arrow rapidly in protected mode. Kind of like a variant of Ontario's old flashing green.

That's the standard for 4-section bi-modal protected/permissive signals across Canada, at least as far as I know. The green arrow blinks at 120 flashes per minute, switching to a solid amber arrow before expiring.

Definitely not the standard in Ontario. Almost everything there now follows US guidelines.

Note this excerpt from the BC manual on signal design:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgbDSt5Z.png&hash=8db6081ceb72bf8eae86cebd3223ffa86e264bc6)

How does Toronto operate permissive left turns? Solid green arrow before solid yellow arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:30:13 AM
From what I've seen, Ontario uses a 4-section often with no yellow arrow, similar to this installation in Niagara Falls (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0895577,-79.0849436,3a,50.1y,161.79h,84.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHl7-qMS81QBmOqi8dEN3Mw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). I am most familiar with Niagara Region practices, but most of the GTA seems to be similar.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MisterSG1 on September 02, 2016, 12:32:46 AM
Yuppers, in Toronto it is a solid green arrow followed by a solid yellow arrow for protected-permissive turns.

In a fully protected turn situation, only the green signal gets an arrow, so from top to bottom the lights are red ball, yellow ball, green arrow.


HOWEVER, in Durham Region and Waterloo Region, the green arrows flash just like what cl94 experienced in NB. Even the fully protected left arrows flash in these two regions. I guess the whole point is to say to the driver "Look dummy, you have the right of way to make the turn"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:37:10 AM
Do note also that fully protected turns are quite rare in Ontario and are basically limited to dual left turn lanes and the one SPUI in St. Catharines. There are only a couple in Niagara Region, for example, while just across the river every major intersection has them. Typically, it's the 4-section that, depending on who installed it, may or may not be bimodal.

Didn't know that Durham and Waterloo flashed. I thought Ontario wanted to get rid of flashing greens entirely to conform more to American practices and reduce confusion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MisterSG1 on September 02, 2016, 12:45:35 AM
Quote from: cl94 on September 02, 2016, 12:37:10 AM
Do note also that fully protected turns are quite rare in Ontario and are basically limited to dual left turn lanes and the one SPUI in St. Catharines. There are only a couple in Niagara Region, for example, while just across the river every major intersection has them. Typically, it's the 4-section that, depending on who installed it, may or may not be bimodal.

Didn't know that Durham and Waterloo flashed. I thought Ontario wanted to get rid of flashing greens entirely to conform more to American practices and reduce confusion.

In fact cl94, I'm fairly sure we encountered a flashing green arrow in Durham Region on the roadmeet when i rode along with you. Could have swore we saw one in the Brooklin community that's part of Whitby.

In some intersections in Durham Region, mind you I'm not as familiar with Durham as I am with the rest of the GTA, there are five signal heads where a yellow arrow gets its own lamp rather than the common bimodal arrow.

In Windsor, 5 signal heads are almost used exclusively to my knowledge for PPLT.

As for fully protected lefts, while they are generally used for dual left turn lanes, i know plenty in the GTA that are single lane fully protected left turns. Look up Goreway and Queen in Brampton, EB Queen has a FPLT while WB Queen has a PPLT and they both have one left turn lane each.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on September 02, 2016, 04:21:58 PM
Quote from: MisterSG1 on September 02, 2016, 12:32:46 AM
HOWEVER, in Durham Region and Waterloo Region, the green arrows flash just like what cl94 experienced in NB. Even the fully protected left arrows flash in these two regions. I guess the whole point is to say to the driver "Look dummy, you have the right of way to make the turn"

I just want to add that even though left-turn green arrows flash in Waterloo Region, right-turn green arrows don't flash. It's really noticeable on the Hwy 8 off-ramp at Fairway Rd in Kitchener. It's strange considering that the left and right green arrows represent the same thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on September 02, 2016, 11:16:02 PM
I remember seeing flashing green in Honduras. The protected left would start as a solid green, but when it was getting close the changing, it would start flashing. The left turn was usually after the standard thru phase with a permissive left turn. Once red, the green arrow would appear. Also, the arrow was on all the way to the left or on top.

Sometimes, the solid green would also flash just prior to the yellow light appearing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 03, 2016, 09:25:20 AM
This signal is on Colony Blvd. in The Villages, FL, where a golf cart path meets a regular street. Carts are permitted on Colony as well (and you can see a bicyclist in the mix too). Image detection is used to detect vehicles, carts & bikes.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F0901161025a.jpg&hash=8d8b275a3b27013d30f641ce1a85d6a030332888) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/0901161025a.jpg.html)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on September 10, 2016, 11:21:00 AM
I found an upside-down pedestrian countdown signal in Ottawa, at Sussex and Rideau (https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Sussex+Dr+%26+Rideau+St,+Ottawa,+ON/@45.4255148,-75.6943794,18z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x4cce0501c2540ee9:0xad6867cb23491cc6!8m2!3d45.4255132!4d-75.6934592) (heading NB along Sussex) on Sept. 2nd. Unfortunately, by the time I took a photo, it looks like an ordinary "2", but the fact that the number is on the left instead of right is proof that it's upside-down :)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNic9QYL.jpg&hash=140556f4970a298d3037b54b466ea22611d2d4dc) (http://i.imgur.com/Nic9QYL.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on September 10, 2016, 11:42:47 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on September 10, 2016, 11:21:00 AM
Unfortunately, by the time I took a photo, the upside-down "5" looked like a "2"

An upside-down 2 is still a 2, and an upside-down 5 is still a 5.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on September 10, 2016, 11:48:19 AM
Quote from: 1 on September 10, 2016, 11:42:47 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on September 10, 2016, 11:21:00 AM
Unfortunately, by the time I took a photo, the upside-down "5" looked like a "2"

An upside-down 2 is still a 2, and an upside-down 5 is still a 5.

Good catch, thanks. I've edited my post.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 30, 2016, 01:22:39 AM
Most protected left turns over here in BC have three left turn heads. But this intersection has five. The one I find most baffling is the far-left, near-side signal. I mean, I'm all for redundant signals, especially at busy intersections, where some signals may not be visible due to other vehicles. But this placement is a little unusual, even for here (where left turns are required to have at least three signals, except where impossible). BC's heavy use of 8-inch signals does mean that, unlike other provinces and most states, there can be lots of signals at intersections, without too much "visual pollution" (if that makes any sense).

United Blvd @ Mary Hill Bypass, Coquitlam, BC (https://goo.gl/FKUZF5)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmlVKmJT.png&hash=628136322e3782a07a20436442163944275b8017)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 31, 2016, 04:54:27 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161031%2F0d9ad575426dd381bf4e990190884385.jpg&hash=f6c8ab5694237fbf526a05e00bfe8db158e8411f)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161031%2F07b4857780b78ae103235896c83fb953.jpg&hash=507173e942978c55be74f4364ef8512760438731)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161031%2F284f509af2d997ebf5aa0344d45a8d1b.jpg&hash=eec466d846a5e820d2b4574458e6d9b5ef439e15)

Here's a set of some very old 12-inch Eagle flatbacks that I found the other day, I took these photos myslef. It was worth the long walk, since these will be gone within the next five years. I like the diagnal mast-arms!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 31, 2016, 04:57:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2016, 01:22:39 AM
Most protected left turns over here in BC have three left turn heads. But this intersection has five. The one I find most baffling is the far-left, near-side signal. I mean, I'm all for redundant signals, especially at busy intersections, where some signals may not be visible due to other vehicles. But this placement is a little unusual, even for here (where left turns are required to have at least three signals, except where impossible). BC's heavy use of 8-inch signals does mean that, unlike other provinces and most states, there can be lots of signals at intersections, without too much "visual pollution" (if that makes any sense).

United Blvd @ Mary Hill Bypass, Coquitlam, BC (https://goo.gl/FKUZF5)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmlVKmJT.png&hash=628136322e3782a07a20436442163944275b8017)

For a moment, I thought that was from Illinois.  IDOT does similar regarding signals.  They require a minimum of two for each turning direction, and three for the through direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on November 16, 2016, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.

Both are actually not uncommon in New York. Little-used crossings over major roads get signals, while I can think of a ton of 8/12 doghouses throughout the state. Want to know what's weirder? This thing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7030002,-73.7979253,3a,36y,330.35h,93.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D333.5075%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 24, 2016, 02:22:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 16, 2016, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.

Both are actually not uncommon in New York. Little-used crossings over major roads get signals, while I can think of a ton of 8/12 doghouses throughout the state. Want to know what's weirder? This thing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7030002,-73.7979253,3a,36y,330.35h,93.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D333.5075%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en).

That thing is ugly. They should hve done what NYC does and stick the arrow off to the side of the 3 8" lights
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on November 25, 2016, 08:01:32 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 24, 2016, 02:22:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 16, 2016, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.

Both are actually not uncommon in New York. Little-used crossings over major roads get signals, while I can think of a ton of 8/12 doghouses throughout the state. Want to know what's weirder? This thing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7030002,-73.7979253,3a,36y,330.35h,93.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D333.5075%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en).

That thing is ugly. They should hve done what NYC does and stick the arrow off to the side of the 3 8" lights

Colonie has a ton of those things. I actually lost count.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
How often do you guys notice mast arms that extend past the outer-most signal head? I seem to see this mostly when the mast arm has pre-cast wiring holes to support a dedicated left turn signal, but one is not installed immediately (i.e. pro/per 4/5-section signal installed in lieu of a dedicated left turn signal). But I'm starting to see this an awful lot, even when the signal is installed with a dedicated left turn signal straight-away.

Initially, my suspicion was that the mast arm extended past the outer-most signal to counter-balance the weight of the signal heads, but if that were true, wouldn't almost all mast arms extend past the outer-most signal?

Realistically, this isn't a problem -- it only bugs me because it looks lazy. Some agencies, such as those in British Columbia and California, seem to rarely do it. But others, like here in Washington or Oregon, seem to do it almost religiously. It's almost like they use pre-set mast arm lengths, and they just don't bother to shorten them.

Another observation: older mast arms don't seem to demonstrate this overhang as much as newer mast arms.

Here's several new-ish examples from various agencies here in Washington:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F03DSORY.png&hash=ba3f9da61ddba886cda9e55ba5f52c34f7d049ba)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F6t8ObtC.png&hash=1f7104cad87c6a95459550ba138b3ca5de96bef8)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FpqyKSy2.png&hash=1a5c1f674d1a34f3d695c72a966adaca62d0e0c3)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FB0dArYI.png&hash=c04716a110e514bad0fa845120fbc7aee2c1b709)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
How often do you guys notice mast arms that extend past the outer-most signal head?

In northeastern Illinois, at least outside of Chicago, it is standard to have at least two feet of mast arm beyond the centerline of the outer-most signal head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 20, 2017, 09:57:50 PM
I'm with you Jakeroot. I think it looks sloppy and unprofessional when the arm extends past the left-most signal head. As you said, some states custom-cut them; others do not. California and Nevada are among those with smart-looking configurations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on January 20, 2017, 10:07:03 PM
New York often cuts masts to length or within a foot or two, but it's not uncommon for an intersection with a permissive left turn and a dedicated LT lane to have some extra space to allow for future installation of a protected signal or allow for widening. In some cases, this extra length has been used to install an FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on January 20, 2017, 10:19:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
Initially, my suspicion was that the mast arm extended past the outer-most signal to counter-balance the weight of the signal heads, but if that were true, wouldn't almost all mast arms extend past the outer-most signal?

Huh?? I must be missing something when you say "counter-balance the weight". The longer the arm, the greater the moment force the support pole has to endure. A counter-balance would have to be on the exact opposite side of the pole to do anything (think teeter-totter).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 10:36:49 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 20, 2017, 10:19:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
Initially, my suspicion was that the mast arm extended past the outer-most signal to counter-balance the weight of the signal heads, but if that were true, wouldn't almost all mast arms extend past the outer-most signal?

Huh?? I must be missing something when you say "counter-balance the weight". The longer the arm, the greater the moment force the support pole has to endure. A counter-balance would have to be on the exact opposite side of the pole to do anything (think teeter-totter).

Counter-balance may not be the correct term. My thinking was that too much weight on the left edge of the arm might cause the arm to sag (if that makes any sense), so you extend the arm past the left-most signal to keep the signals more centered along the arm (due to all the dead space on the right edge of the arm where it connects to the mast).

A couple years ago, I asked WSDOT to replace a protected-only left turn signal with an FYA (S 272 St @ I-5 north of Federal Way, WA). They said they couldn't because the FYA was too heavy for the arm to support. I thought that was horse shit, but I'm not an engineer. Up until then, I was under the impression that signals weren't all that heavy (never having seen one up close). My thought here, then, was that signal placement along an arm is important because those suckers are heavy, and could cause the arm to sag if installed in the wrong place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on January 20, 2017, 11:07:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 10:36:49 PM
A couple years ago, I asked WSDOT to replace a protected-only left turn signal with an FYA (S 272 St @ I-5 north of Federal Way, WA). They said they couldn't because the FYA was too heavy for the arm to support. I thought that was horse shit, but I'm not an engineer. Up until then, I was under the impression that signals weren't all that heavy (never having seen one up close). My thought here, then, was that signal placement along an arm is important because those suckers are heavy, and could cause the arm to sag if installed in the wrong place.

It's not just the weight of the signal that's the issue, it's the overall loading of the structure. The further out the point load is on the arm, the greater the moment force. Do the math: http://wisconsindot.gov/dtsdManuals/traffic-ops/manuals-and-standards/tsdm/06/06-01-11.pdf (http://wisconsindot.gov/dtsdManuals/traffic-ops/manuals-and-standards/tsdm/06/06-01-11.pdf) (see page 3).

FWIW, a typical poly signal weighs around 24-pounds for three sections (https://www.tapconet.com/store/product-detail/jWab/sg-polycarbonate-signal-housing-for-12-leds?c=ykab&sku=122-101BST) + lenses & mounting hardware.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 11:13:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 10:36:49 PM
A couple years ago, I asked WSDOT to replace a protected-only left turn signal with an FYA (S 272 St @ I-5 north of Federal Way, WA). They said they couldn't because the FYA was too heavy for the arm to support. I thought that was horse shit, but I'm not an engineer.

Does WSDOT not allow any bimodal indications?  Granted a quick search is not providing an answer to how much more a bimodal green arrow/flashing yellow arrow LED indication would weigh compare to a green arrow LED indication, but I would think the indication plus any extra wiring would not overload the mast arm.

I was also going to mention this corner as a location to try the new bimodal flashing yellow arrow/steady yellow arrow design, but it appears from FHWA's listing of agencies which have gotten interim approvals (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ialistreq.htm#ia17) WSDOT does not want to use this on their signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 21, 2017, 01:02:42 AM
You'd probably hate some of Huntsville's latest signal installs then! Though, to be fair, IIRC, the first link is planned to have a fourth leg added to the intersection in the future.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7113187,-86.5887652,3a,32.2y,265.31h,90.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXjIxWigKto7-8fNAHW3Aw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6453434,-86.4841455,3a,60y,326.32h,95.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11xvVViliWpWsFmtaHGURw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

It can also be found on older installs too:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.73009,-86.6001663,3a,43.3y,140.91h,80.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv9AJ0oOlHrtyWJ_stx1kPQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Though in a slightly opposite direction, there is this one in downtown Huntsville where there used to be a few extra signal heads at one point, but all but one of them were removed:
2013:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7270325,-86.594868,3a,36.2y,221.44h,95.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sph5VXNCB05LiKoTF0dP67g!2e0!5s20130801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
2016:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7269908,-86.5949795,3a,60y,207.35h,95.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Z0kyJDjC8YSzGFjLkOuLw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

IIRC, I remember hearing that there is (or at least was) some kind of recommendation made by the MUTCD or FHWA saying that extra space should be left on mast-arms so extra signals could easily be added if necessary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 02:21:28 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 11:13:01 PM
Does WSDOT not allow any bimodal indications?  Granted a quick search is not providing an answer to how much more a bimodal green arrow/flashing yellow arrow LED indication would weigh compare to a green arrow LED indication, but I would think the indication plus any extra wiring would not overload the mast arm.

Besides below, WSDOT is not quick to approach the FYA in any capacity, regardless. I figured it was a stretch to ask them. Glad the only issue was mechanical. The turn lane is only like three cars long for the WB to SB (onto the 5), and the left turners back up into the left through lane constantly. Total mess. Needs to be fixed. I asked them to install a "left turn on red okay after stop" sign, because Washington permits lefts onto one way roads on red (and nobody knows about the law), but they never got back to me.

As for bimodal indications, WSDOT does use bimodal green/yellow right turn filters (instead of the 5-section towers utilized in most other states). Not sure why they're scared of bimodal FYAs...

Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 11:13:01 PM
I was also going to mention this corner as a location to try the new bimodal flashing yellow arrow/steady yellow arrow design, but it appears from FHWA's listing of agencies which have gotten interim approvals (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ialistreq.htm#ia17) WSDOT does not want to use this on their signals.

I see the three-head FYAs around the area, but indeed, never on a state highway. Most of the one's I see are in the city of Lakewood, and occasionally Seattle (including one location (Mercer @ Queen Anne) where there is a three-head FYA with no protected movement (I guess the signal is just for emphasis)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JMAN_WiS&S on January 21, 2017, 01:46:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 10:36:49 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 20, 2017, 10:19:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
Initially, my suspicion was that the mast arm extended past the outer-most signal to counter-balance the weight of the signal heads, but if that were true, wouldn't almost all mast arms extend past the outer-most signal?

Huh?? I must be missing something when you say "counter-balance the weight". The longer the arm, the greater the moment force the support pole has to endure. A counter-balance would have to be on the exact opposite side of the pole to do anything (think teeter-totter).

Counter-balance may not be the correct term. My thinking was that too much weight on the left edge of the arm might cause the arm to sag (if that makes any sense), so you extend the arm past the left-most signal to keep the signals more centered along the arm (due to all the dead space on the right edge of the arm where it connects to the mast).

A couple years ago, I asked WSDOT to replace a protected-only left turn signal with an FYA (S 272 St @ I-5 north of Federal Way, WA). They said they couldn't because the FYA was too heavy for the arm to support. I thought that was horse shit, but I'm not an engineer. Up until then, I was under the impression that signals weren't all that heavy (never having seen one up close). My thought here, then, was that signal placement along an arm is important because those suckers are heavy, and could cause the arm to sag if installed in the wrong place.

An intersection downtown in Eau Claire WI got brand new signals a year or so ago, and they used dual arms mounted kitty corner, so the arms for the side streets were extended from the left vs the right. The arms are extremely beefy and extend past their needed point, but I think this is to balance the mast since one pole is holding two masts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 03:02:10 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
How often do you guys notice mast arms that extend past the outer-most signal head?

In northeastern Illinois, at least outside of Chicago, it is standard to have at least two feet of mast arm beyond the centerline of the outer-most signal head.

Any idea why that's the standard? It's one thing to do it because the agency is (perhaps) lazy, but it's another thing to do it intentionally.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on January 21, 2017, 03:10:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 03:02:10 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
How often do you guys notice mast arms that extend past the outer-most signal head?

In northeastern Illinois, at least outside of Chicago, it is standard to have at least two feet of mast arm beyond the centerline of the outer-most signal head.

Any idea why that's the standard? It's one thing to do it because the agency is (perhaps) lazy, but it's another thing to do it intentionally.

Allow room to place a sign?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 03:39:57 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 21, 2017, 03:10:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 03:02:10 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2017, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 20, 2017, 09:43:08 PM
How often do you guys notice mast arms that extend past the outer-most signal head?

In northeastern Illinois, at least outside of Chicago, it is standard to have at least two feet of mast arm beyond the centerline of the outer-most signal head.

Any idea why that's the standard? It's one thing to do it because the agency is (perhaps) lazy, but it's another thing to do it intentionally.

Allow room to place a sign?

I usually see "left turn yield on flashing yellow/green" or left turn only signs posted to the right of the signal (if one is used at all). Though in cases where the arm extends past the farthest signal, I have seen the sign posted to the left (though I often see the sign posted to the right even when the arm extends to the left a considerable distance).

I'm not overly familiar with Illinois, but I don't seem to recall an abundance of R3-series signs on overhead mast arms in my time cruising around Street View (though IIRC, "yield on flashing yellow arrow" is used at least in St Charles).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 23, 2017, 09:23:32 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 25, 2016, 08:01:32 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 24, 2016, 02:22:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 16, 2016, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.

Both are actually not uncommon in New York. Little-used crossings over major roads get signals, while I can think of a ton of 8/12 doghouses throughout the state. Want to know what's weirder? This thing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7030002,-73.7979253,3a,36y,330.35h,93.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D333.5075%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en).

That thing is ugly. They should hve done what NYC does and stick the arrow off to the side of the 3 8" lights

Colonie has a ton of those things. I actually lost count.

And if those wasn't ugly enough for you....
http://maps.google.com/maps?layer=c&panoid=2vBfkrstVfMK8lU_ZFoRcQ&cbp=1%2C59.19576%2C%2C3.0%2C5.5681143&cbll=37.575326%2C-77.480413
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 25, 2017, 10:06:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 21, 2017, 03:39:57 PM
I usually see "left turn yield on flashing yellow/green" or left turn only signs posted to the right of the signal (if one is used at all). Though in cases where the arm extends past the farthest signal, I have seen the sign posted to the left (though I often see the sign posted to the right even when the arm extends to the left a considerable distance).

I'm not overly familiar with Illinois, but I don't seem to recall an abundance of R3-series signs on overhead mast arms in my time cruising around Street View (though IIRC, "yield on flashing yellow arrow" is used at least in St Charles).

Unfortunately, the FYA's you saw in St. Charles are a bold exception, rather than a rule.  Those FYA's are county installs and a very new thing for Kane County, the only county in the area to use them.  FYA's are never seen on a state or municipal level in northeast Illinois, unless I'm missing something.

From my time contributing to IDOT roadway plans, I recall that mast arms are manufactured at lengths that differ by two-foot increments (34', 36', 38', etc.).  I imagine that the idealized extra space of two feet is enacted to ensure a two-foot tolerance for lateral placement, of both signal heads and the signal mast itself.  Sometimes you might have to shift the foundation of the mast, about 2' in diameter IIRC, in case you dig down and encounter utilities, bedrock, shifty soil, or some other unsuitable condition for mast arm placement.  You can try, but you can't always predict what you'll strike when you dig down to try and establish a position for the mast arm.  Remember, the requirement of two extra feet is written down on paper, as in it's something that engineers plan for.  In practice, I've seen plenty of signals here in Illinois with no extra mast arm space to speak of, because adjustments to the plans were made in the field.  This might not be 100% correct, but I hope that this at least made sense.

Edit:  ALSO-- dodging suspended power lines.  That also can shift things around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 26, 2017, 12:24:39 AM
Quote from: plain on January 23, 2017, 09:23:32 PM
And if those wasn't ugly enough for you....
http://maps.google.com/maps?layer=c&panoid=2vBfkrstVfMK8lU_ZFoRcQ&cbp=1%2C59.19576%2C%2C3.0%2C5.5681143&cbll=37.575326%2C-77.480413
I'm gonna say those are cool rather than ugly. Especially since they use Crouse-hinds Type-M sections! Wonder if they were originally going to have all 12 inch indications, but didn't have enough clearance to get away with it, which then makes me wonder why it was the green that was made 8 inch and not the yellow...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jlwm on January 26, 2017, 12:35:58 AM
Quote from: plain on January 23, 2017, 09:23:32 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 25, 2016, 08:01:32 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 24, 2016, 02:22:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 16, 2016, 11:34:44 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 16, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 16, 2016, 08:06:46 PM
Came across this in Canandaigua, NY on NY 332. Featuring doghouse signals with 8 in. balls and 12 in. arrows.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8879846,-77.2815768,3a,37.5y,137h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3RE-1UZARniCHugp-38wmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Also has a railroad crossing in the background with traffic signals instead of the usual crossing flashers.

Both are actually not uncommon in New York. Little-used crossings over major roads get signals, while I can think of a ton of 8/12 doghouses throughout the state. Want to know what's weirder? This thing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7030002,-73.7979253,3a,36y,330.35h,93.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrLqJrNepZMhxDZKRtSVwtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D333.5075%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en).

That thing is ugly. They should hve done what NYC does and stick the arrow off to the side of the 3 8" lights

Colonie has a ton of those things. I actually lost count.

And if those wasn't ugly enough for you....
http://maps.google.com/maps?layer=c&panoid=2vBfkrstVfMK8lU_ZFoRcQ&cbp=1%2C59.19576%2C%2C3.0%2C5.5681143&cbll=37.575326%2C-77.480413

That isn't ugly. THIS is ugly. When the mast arm is drooping so much that they have to replace the signal to maintain clearance. This is a City of Houston maintained signal.

Before (2010): https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7040035,-95.3958256,3a,22.1y,36.54h,87.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRE24lupBwD2z1PQLYCQ_xA!2e0!5s20100301T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Current: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.704032,-95.3958085,3a,21.1y,35.54h,87.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sf6XHRU8FnObFVAguCEtFKg!2e0!5s20140401T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on February 05, 2017, 10:49:59 AM
Are flashing green arrows legal? Check out this video at 11 seconds in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3-UugI0JoA

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 05, 2017, 11:22:11 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on February 05, 2017, 10:49:59 AM
Are flashing green arrows legal?

Not in the United States. They don't have a meaning prescribed in the MUTCD and are specifically prohibited.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on February 05, 2017, 11:53:49 AM
Quote from: roadfro on February 05, 2017, 11:22:11 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on February 05, 2017, 10:49:59 AM
Are flashing green arrows legal?

Not in the United States. They don't have a meaning prescribed in the MUTCD and are specifically prohibited.
The video I posted was shot in Massachusetts I think.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on February 05, 2017, 12:55:35 PM
Could have sworn flashing green arrows were in the Massachusetts RMV manual when I was a kid.  Thought it was really weird.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 05, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
- How can a fire department not know of the low clearance???

- The last guy who's truck caught fire after it was eaten by the bridge was seemed to be walking around as if this happens to him all the time.  (!?!??)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 16, 2017, 08:29:02 PM
Found some newly installed 8 inch left turn arrows in NYC buy LaGuardia airport on streetview

94th St

https://goo.gl/maps/EK2J52kn4Uo
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on February 16, 2017, 08:51:41 PM
Those of you who don't like extra arm length past the last signal head probably hate this setup. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039635,-97.4201019,3a,18.9y,164.59h,93.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcjrq_ZOT4_ggR5VFOqRvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2017, 09:09:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 16, 2017, 08:51:41 PM
Those of you who don't like extra arm length past the last signal head probably hate this setup. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039635,-97.4201019,3a,18.9y,164.59h,93.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcjrq_ZOT4_ggR5VFOqRvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Indeed. It's painful!

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 16, 2017, 08:29:02 PM
Found some newly installed 8 inch left turn arrows in NYC buy LaGuardia airport on streetview

That's excellent! I love me some 8-inch arrows. I'm accustomed to seeing both new and old 8 inch arrows in Vancouver, but not the US. I know there are plenty out there, but a new 8-inch arrow? Interesting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 16, 2017, 09:37:06 PM
RestrictOnTheHanger? Hmmm.........sounds like something a LIRR conductor would announce to his engineer on Track-16 in Penn Station........

But back on topic, even in NYC which uses mostly 8-inch signals, the 8-inch arrow is unusual today. I wonder if it's something they just did real quick and sloppy to address the crisis level traffic congestion around LaGuardia Airport during the reconstruction.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on February 17, 2017, 01:36:01 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 16, 2017, 08:51:41 PM
Those of you who don't like extra arm length past the last signal head probably hate this setup. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039635,-97.4201019,3a,18.9y,164.59h,93.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcjrq_ZOT4_ggR5VFOqRvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Yikes! Here's some of the crapola that's been installed in Tulsa lately:

Admiral & Memorial:  https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1607569,-95.8866269,3a,66.8y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s1puze8Y_L3V4Jf3o4-gQAg!2e0

I-44 & Peoria:  https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0899789,-95.9756687,3a,66.8y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sEd_-u_kcZLKccxqbxqG1MA!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SidS1045 on February 17, 2017, 04:05:04 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 05, 2017, 12:55:35 PMCould have sworn flashing green arrows were in the Massachusetts RMV manual when I was a kid.  Thought it was really weird.

I don't remember flashing green arrows, but I definitely remember flashing green balls, defined in the manual as "proceed with caution, light may turn to red-and-yellow for pedestrians to cross the roadway."  There are a few of those left, including one a few minutes' drive from my house.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on February 17, 2017, 04:48:33 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7379345,-95.4606878,3a,75y,178.58h,104.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBszKvsPTdhWX-6hAKETfpw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) is just weird. Oval backplates? Chrome mastarms? (Massive, oval) backplates on the pedestrian signals? The double red circles on the left turn signal hardly warrant a mention!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 17, 2017, 08:48:03 PM
Virginia also has a lot of signal installations like those Tulsa ones that Rick1962 posted above. Looks ridiculous when the mast-arms are excessively long and not trimmed to required length. Some states just have no class.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 18, 2017, 12:15:09 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 16, 2017, 09:37:06 PM
RestrictOnTheHanger? Hmmm.........sounds like something a LIRR conductor would announce to his engineer on Track-16 in Penn Station........

But back on topic, even in NYC which uses mostly 8-inch signals, the 8-inch arrow is unusual today. I wonder if it's something they just did real quick and sloppy to address the crisis level traffic congestion around LaGuardia Airport during the reconstruction.

NYCDOT's signal setups, regular and temporary, seem very sloppy and inconsistent at times, but they get the job done. The intersection that is across the bridge from the one I posted is also sloppy.

Although I don't take the LIRR anymore, I remember that announcement very clearly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on February 18, 2017, 12:49:25 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 16, 2017, 09:37:06 PM
RestrictOnTheHanger? Hmmm.........sounds like something a LIRR conductor would announce to his engineer on Track-16 in Penn Station........

But back on topic, even in NYC which uses mostly 8-inch signals, the 8-inch arrow is unusual today. I wonder if it's something they just did real quick and sloppy to address the crisis level traffic congestion around LaGuardia Airport during the reconstruction.

If there is truck traffic in the area, then it is possible there may have been an issue with the clearance level. There is another signalized intersection in Brooklyn that has an 8" arrow (LED) in use, too. Formerly an 8-8-12 Marbelite head, the new traffic signal was installed by the DOT a couple of years ago. It is under the Gowanus Expressway before the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6760158,-74.0011188,3a,15y,71.47h,95.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPVVr_Z66BYQuDeAieNmk1Q!2e0!5s20140901T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jlwm on February 21, 2017, 12:48:42 AM
Quote from: jay8g on February 17, 2017, 04:48:33 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7379345,-95.4606878,3a,75y,178.58h,104.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBszKvsPTdhWX-6hAKETfpw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) is just weird. Oval backplates? Chrome mastarms? (Massive, oval) backplates on the pedestrian signals? The double red circles on the left turn signal hardly warrant a mention!

Most of the signal installations around the Galleria in Houston have that setup. They started that around 20 years ago. The intersection of Westheimer and Post Oak has a halo like, cable supported street sign hanging over the intersection which you can see here: https://goo.gl/maps/6LDakBohC3r.



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on February 21, 2017, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 17, 2017, 08:48:03 PM
Virginia also has a lot of signal installations like those Tulsa ones that Rick1962 posted above. Looks ridiculous when the mast-arms are excessively long and not trimmed to required length. Some states just have no class.

Sad thing is, under the previous City Engineer, traffic signal installations were typically done neatly, such as this one at 41st & Yale:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1043535,-95.9224008,3a,66.8y,89.01h,87.77t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sT50eBnnsq4Z9ZSWtu0DQGQ!2e0

Under the New Guy, however, the signal installations suck as badly as the streets.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Aerobird on February 22, 2017, 04:15:43 AM
Quote from: jay8g on February 17, 2017, 04:48:33 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7379345,-95.4606878,3a,75y,178.58h,104.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBszKvsPTdhWX-6hAKETfpw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) is just weird. Oval backplates? Chrome mastarms? (Massive, oval) backplates on the pedestrian signals? The double red circles on the left turn signal hardly warrant a mention!
It looks like somebody read an Art Deco design book and then went nuts.

That said, I actually really like the oval backplates on the traffic signals - they add a bit of class and break up the rectangles-everywhere. (On the pedestrian signals, not so much...)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 22, 2017, 07:36:07 PM
They used to have round back-plates that made the traffic lights look like railroad signals on Market St. in downtown San Francisco. Don't know if they are still there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 22, 2017, 07:47:41 PM
^^ Yes, they are still there: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7822701,-122.4103965,3a,75y,262.14h,99.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFYAdXdfQ1vm1Zwfdwz-CFw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 23, 2017, 09:46:32 PM
Quote from: Rick1962 on February 17, 2017, 01:36:01 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 16, 2017, 08:51:41 PM
Those of you who don't like extra arm length past the last signal head probably hate this setup. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039635,-97.4201019,3a,18.9y,164.59h,93.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcjrq_ZOT4_ggR5VFOqRvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Yikes! Here's some of the crapola that's been installed in Tulsa lately:

Admiral & Memorial:  https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1607569,-95.8866269,3a,66.8y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s1puze8Y_L3V4Jf3o4-gQAg!2e0


What are the upward-facing rectangular items at the end of the arms?  Could the arm be long to accommodate whatever those are?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: lordsutch on February 23, 2017, 10:01:07 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 23, 2017, 09:46:32 PM
What are the upward-facing rectangular items at the end of the arms?  Could the arm be long to accommodate whatever those are?

They're usually old signs that have been repurposed to act like a wing to better stabilize the mast arm in the wind.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
Not interesting for most of you, I'd reckon. But the sort of setup below is extremely rare in Washington, because

a) there's two turn signals (not required but ubiquitous in Spokane);
b) they're mounted in the median (extremely rare in Spokane, unheard of elsewhere in Washington); but mostly because
c) the secondary left turn head is mounted both near-side and at eye-level.

N Monroe St @ Wall St, Spokane, WA. (https://goo.gl/jsSGt6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 02, 2017, 10:17:04 PM
Actually this was quite effective. Puts the heads right in the driver's line-of-sight. But too easily knocked down in auto accidents. Used to be commonly seen in California on wide boulevards with center malls, but not anymore. Replaced with overhead and far-left corner heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 02, 2017, 10:53:33 PM
Virginia has a few median mounted turn signals similar to those, most of them in and installed by Virginia Beach. Henrico County had many of them at one point but very few remains today. Here's one of the Henrico intersections that still has them

https://goo.gl/maps/U9c1vnGEAA12
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on March 02, 2017, 11:37:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
Not interesting for most of you, I'd reckon. But the sort of setup below is extremely rare in Washington, because

a) there's two turn signals (not required but ubiquitous in Spokane);
b) they're mounted in the median (extremely rare in Spokane, unheard of elsewhere in Washington); but mostly because
c) the secondary left turn head is mounted both near-side and at eye-level.

N Monroe St @ Wall St, Spokane, WA. (https://goo.gl/jsSGt6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)

Damn, that's short. And here I thought these were the shortest [non-ramp meter] signals I've seen: :pan: :no: 
Randall Ave @ Campus Dr: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0725002,-89.4090569,3a,75y,36.87h,75.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRttAW-hjjtBvmXd36tgl9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
N Park St @ Johnson St: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0723249,-89.4007221,3a,75y,189.91h,86.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.56659%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Whitney Way @ Old Middleton Rd: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0744768,-89.4677049,3a,75y,152.69h,76.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK6e66Ms7HQltQRQoKDzMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on March 03, 2017, 06:15:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)

Looks very familiar to the standard setup here, though we don't mount the traffic light as low. Didn't know that kind of layout was ever used in the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 03, 2017, 07:53:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
Not interesting for most of you, I'd reckon. But the sort of setup below is extremely rare in Washington, because

a) there's two turn signals (not required but ubiquitous in Spokane);
b) they're mounted in the median (extremely rare in Spokane, unheard of elsewhere in Washington); but mostly because
c) the secondary left turn head is mounted both near-side and at eye-level.

N Monroe St @ Wall St, Spokane, WA. (https://goo.gl/jsSGt6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)
Why would the traffic signal be mounted that low, somebody could punch it's lights out, deface it, or steal it
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 03, 2017, 08:25:37 PM
Well that might be one reason why California phased them out over time, besides that they probably get knocked down all the time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on March 03, 2017, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 02, 2017, 11:37:04 PM
Damn, that's short. And here I thought these were the shortest [non-ramp meter] signals I've seen: :pan: :no: 
Randall Ave @ Campus Dr: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0725002,-89.4090569,3a,75y,36.87h,75.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRttAW-hjjtBvmXd36tgl9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
N Park St @ Johnson St: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0723249,-89.4007221,3a,75y,189.91h,86.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.56659%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Whitney Way @ Old Middleton Rd: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0744768,-89.4677049,3a,75y,152.69h,76.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK6e66Ms7HQltQRQoKDzMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The extremely low signals seem to be considered frequently for pre-signals at railroad crossings, such as on  IL 47 has one in Huntley (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1690369,-88.4281848,3a,39.4y,160.32h,82.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sitINeQyvnLmZmSDEcscvPw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and there's one on Wood Dale Road in Wood Dale, Illinois. (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9639527,-87.9787265,3a,19.4y,221.02h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Mu1myV-KKJI77suoF27Pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 03, 2017, 10:14:30 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 03, 2017, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 02, 2017, 11:37:04 PM
Damn, that's short. And here I thought these were the shortest [non-ramp meter] signals I've seen: :pan: :no: 
Randall Ave @ Campus Dr: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0725002,-89.4090569,3a,75y,36.87h,75.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRttAW-hjjtBvmXd36tgl9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
N Park St @ Johnson St: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0723249,-89.4007221,3a,75y,189.91h,86.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.56659%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Whitney Way @ Old Middleton Rd: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0744768,-89.4677049,3a,75y,152.69h,76.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK6e66Ms7HQltQRQoKDzMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The extremely low signals seem to be considered frequently for pre-signals at railroad crossings, such as on  IL 47 has one in Huntley (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1690369,-88.4281848,3a,39.4y,160.32h,82.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sitINeQyvnLmZmSDEcscvPw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and there's one on Wood Dale Road in Wood Dale, Illinois. (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9639527,-87.9787265,3a,19.4y,221.02h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Mu1myV-KKJI77suoF27Pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Damn I thought that first one was low but these are LOW
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 03, 2017, 11:17:02 PM
There are some low mounted signals here at the intersection of Darby and Marple Roads in Havertown, PA (https://goo.gl/maps/bQp236h9ggF2), although these aren't really low considering they're sitting on ground that's already higher than the roadway. If you pan to the left, you'll also see that the mast arm of the overhead signals is slightly shorter for the same reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 03, 2017, 11:18:36 PM
Quote from: Ian on March 03, 2017, 11:17:02 PM
There are some low mounted signals here at the intersection of Darby and Marple Roads in Havertown, PA (https://goo.gl/maps/bQp236h9ggF2), although these aren't really low considering they're sitting on ground that's already higher than the roadway. If you pan to the left, you'll also see that the mast arm of the overhead signals is slightly shorter for the same reason.

Whoever lives on that property has fun touching the traffic lights
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on March 03, 2017, 11:29:29 PM
Quote from: Ian on March 03, 2017, 11:17:02 PM
There are some low mounted signals here at the intersection of Darby and Marple Roads in Havertown, PA (https://goo.gl/maps/bQp236h9ggF2), although these aren't really low considering they're sitting on ground that's already higher than the roadway. If you pan to the left, you'll also see that the mast arm of the overhead signals is slightly shorter for the same reason.

Those have to be a maintenance worker's dream to have to work on. Out of traffic, no ladders needed... only thing missing are some shade trees.  :cool:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 04, 2017, 12:51:01 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 03, 2017, 11:29:29 PM
Quote from: Ian on March 03, 2017, 11:17:02 PM
There are some low mounted signals here at the intersection of Darby and Marple Roads in Havertown, PA (https://goo.gl/maps/bQp236h9ggF2), although these aren't really low considering they're sitting on ground that's already higher than the roadway. If you pan to the left, you'll also see that the mast arm of the overhead signals is slightly shorter for the same reason.

Those have to be a maintenance worker's dream to have to work on. Out of traffic, no ladders needed... only thing missing are some shade trees.  :cool:

"Easy like Sunday Morning oooh ooh ooooh oooooh..."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 04, 2017, 02:00:53 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 03, 2017, 07:53:27 PM
Why would the traffic signal be mounted that low, somebody could punch it's lights out, deface it, or steal it
Quote from: SignBridge on March 03, 2017, 08:25:37 PM
Well that might be one reason why California phased them out over time, besides that they probably get knocked down all the time.

It's meant to be posted at eye-level (so you can see it directly out your driver's window). I'm not aware of vandalism being a problem.

British Columbia posts near-side protected left signals at eye level by matter of policy. They don't get knocked down that often because they're not posted near the turn radius. California often posted theirs right at the crosswalk. BC's are posted back from the junction, so very few vehicles are in danger of knocking them over.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlOFEhGZ.png&hash=f2e97787b49e563e7cb267ad2e4d605a392f7a36)

Quote from: riiga on March 03, 2017, 06:15:39 PM
Looks very familiar to the standard setup here, though we don't mount the traffic light as low. Didn't know that kind of layout was ever used in the US.

It's a pretty rare setup, depending on where you are (Washington, for example). Places like BC (in Canada, above) post signals in the medians all the time, as do places like Wisconsin (or at least they used to). Near-side signals are pretty uncommon in the US as a whole, though right-side near-side signals are becoming more common.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 04, 2017, 08:25:16 PM
Ian and others re: those post-mounted signals at T-intersections in Pennsylvania. That's a common configuration for T-intersections in that state. It's good because the heads are at eye level for drivers at the stop-line. But bad because a large truck or bus passing by could block your view of both signal heads. A better arrangement would be for one eye-level post-mounted head and one high mast-arm head. Either that or add a near-right corner supplemental signal to the existing set-up. I'm surprised traffic engineers in Penna. aren't concerned with that potential problem.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 04, 2017, 08:39:27 PM
^^ While panning around that intersection, it shows that it has that near-side signal for the side street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 04, 2017, 08:49:53 PM
Oh yes, so it does! I stand corrected. Surprised to see that though. Don't know what county that is, but at least in Bucks County where I've done a lot of driving, such near-right supplemental's are not commonly seen. Thanks Big John.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on March 04, 2017, 10:09:24 PM
Another short pole signal in Holyoke Mass, although it is at eye-level as well. Just mounted up on a wall.....
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1698596,-72.6323385,3a,75y,176.31h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sngfgSuppC3XfylAcP_FqbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 04, 2017, 10:59:57 PM
On the topic of short signals; railway crossing near Coquitlam, BC (https://goo.gl/UkyoA0). Two supplementary signals on the sides, with two additional signals (mounted about a metre off the ground) pointed at the stop lines (so that drivers can see). Reminds me of a ramp meter setup:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwJHbzFj.png&hash=398d67d5385df18c664bbb9f6ec32f110c356470)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 05, 2017, 04:39:28 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on March 04, 2017, 10:09:24 PM
Another short pole signal in Holyoke Mass, although it is at eye-level as well. Just mounted up on a wall.....
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1698596,-72.6323385,3a,75y,176.31h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sngfgSuppC3XfylAcP_FqbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That's a rather crazy intersection and set-up there, especially from this angle with arrows pointing in every direction it seems:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1700947,-72.6321318,3a,22y,204.07h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7NzTgZRGqqwUKjZgNAwYWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on March 06, 2017, 02:38:04 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
Not interesting for most of you, I'd reckon. But the sort of setup below is extremely rare in Washington, because

a) there's two turn signals (not required but ubiquitous in Spokane);
b) they're mounted in the median (extremely rare in Spokane, unheard of elsewhere in Washington); but mostly because
c) the secondary left turn head is mounted both near-side and at eye-level.

N Monroe St @ Wall St, Spokane, WA. (https://goo.gl/jsSGt6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)


Quite a common setup on major thoroughfares throughout New York City; however, the DOT does not use short poles for its vehicular signals. While I agree that would be benefical for visibility, that is definitely prone to an accident.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on March 06, 2017, 12:15:11 PM
A new signal in Fort Smith seems to be having some problems:

(https://scontent.fmci1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/17155908_10210629387323303_3559734622682877003_n.jpg?oh=451fc66f520991b561328287babea9d9&oe=5929D0D0)

(https://scontent.fmci1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/17190462_10210629387243301_7010994275759711084_n.jpg?oh=2790707a4ae3ee2f73c80925917574a3&oe=5970DA93)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on March 06, 2017, 12:26:47 PM
It has six lights, no wonder it's broken.  :biggrin:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 06, 2017, 12:56:25 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 06, 2017, 12:26:47 PM
It has six lights, no wonder it's broken.  :biggrin:
Count again, there's only 5.

It appears the red was wired through the yellow terminal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on March 06, 2017, 01:00:42 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotel-r.net%2Fim%2Fhotel%2Fasia%2Fth%2Fthe-four-lights-10.jpg&hash=3c36d7e4664e54e19cd74a5c5a205b3376264aa9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 06, 2017, 01:29:29 PM
Quote from: M3019C LPS20 on March 06, 2017, 02:38:04 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2017, 09:33:09 PM
Not interesting for most of you, I'd reckon. But the sort of setup below is extremely rare in Washington, because

a) there's two turn signals (not required but ubiquitous in Spokane);
b) they're mounted in the median (extremely rare in Spokane, unheard of elsewhere in Washington); but mostly because
c) the secondary left turn head is mounted both near-side and at eye-level.

N Monroe St @ Wall St, Spokane, WA. (https://goo.gl/jsSGt6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuhM6yZG.png&hash=bade52c25ceba7d45e7fc3a5e19a921ded42a903)


Quite a common setup on major thoroughfares throughout New York City; however, the DOT does not use short poles for its vehicular signals. While I agree that would be benefical for visibility, that is definitely prone to an accident.

What is also unusual about this...and probably can't be done today, is that it's just a pole stuck in the ground.  Almost all posts are the break-away type where if you hit it, it breaks away fairly easily.  This could do some serious damage if you hit it and it snaps higher up...if it breaks at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 06, 2017, 01:49:16 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 06, 2017, 12:26:47 PM
It has six lights, no wonder it's broken.  :biggrin:

You just have to get a little creative!  :D

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F6%2520Traffic%2520Light.jpg&hash=fb134bd094c1a453569a44a831bd72c1e766dfe6) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/6%20Traffic%20Light.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 06, 2017, 07:17:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 06, 2017, 01:49:16 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 06, 2017, 12:26:47 PM
It has six lights, no wonder it's broken. 

You just have to get a little creative!  :D

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F6%2520Traffic%2520Light.jpg&hash=fb134bd094c1a453569a44a831bd72c1e766dfe6) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/6%20Traffic%20Light.jpg.html)
No, it only has five
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 06, 2017, 07:40:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 06, 2017, 07:17:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 06, 2017, 01:49:16 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 06, 2017, 12:26:47 PM
It has six lights, no wonder it's broken. 

You just have to get a little creative!  :D

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F6%2520Traffic%2520Light.jpg&hash=fb134bd094c1a453569a44a831bd72c1e766dfe6) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/6%20Traffic%20Light.jpg.html)
No, it only has five
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: epzik8 on March 08, 2017, 09:09:04 PM
At least three signals along Route 24 in the area of Bel Air, Maryland are being upgraded to mast-arms. The new lights have yet to be switched on as of this post. This alignment of Route 24, between U.S. Route 1 and I-95, opened around Thanksgiving 1987, but not all of its signals were immediately placed; the last one didn't arrive until late 1998.

These are the lights being upgraded:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fj3VJ99m.jpg&hash=100c042ff7a29b16a6805ea30c5ce9171676b9a3)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrTX364z.jpg&hash=e80cb2aef0a3c57bf6eb84d7bfc0202dafcdf046)
This signal, at U.S. Route 1 Business in the area of the Harford Mall and Tollgate Marketplace, was the only light along "new 24" at the time of its November 1987 opening. (The light at Boulton Street, the northernmost one prior to the U.S. 1 interchange, was activated that December.)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FItNlx7f.jpg&hash=6693cc7884915cbcfac155ea321c3e5881664cb7)
This signal sits at Marketplace Drive. Marketplace Drive is a street that was constructed in 1996, coinciding with the opening of a Target store on the east side of Route 24. It is named after the aforementioned Tollgate Marketplace, which opened in 1979 as the Tollgate Mall.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FadRUGab.jpg&hash=ac3f54a85816a849e8afdb7940af946017fdbf8f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fv8n9mVq.jpg&hash=d034ec436aa5e741d5376cf43e5688b0a4941762)
The next signal after Marketplace is MacPhail Road. This light serves the Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, the local MVA complex, a senior citizen activities center, and a small retail center anchored by a Weis grocery store. The original light was placed around 1993. The MVA had opened at the same time as new 24 in 1987. Upper Chesapeake opened in the fall of 2000.

All photos were taken March 8, 2017.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on March 09, 2017, 09:24:38 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 06, 2017, 07:40:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 06, 2017, 07:17:29 PM
No, it only has five


Thank you so much for posting that video clip.  I grovel before you, sir.  :-D :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 14, 2017, 06:46:15 PM
Noticed this temporary signal today outside of Tacoma, WA. Do temporary signals usually have full yellow backplates? I didn't think the MUTCD permitted anything other than black.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FcnGli3T.jpg&hash=f833e97e975e198a8bcab1d634f8387b3e36f56f)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 14, 2017, 08:02:47 PM
Those temporary signals are a surprise as the Manual recommends yellow signal heads. So usually you have a yellow head and dark backplate.

Backplates come in various dark colors including green, brown, etc. Nassau County, N.Y. used yellow ones about 45 years ago for a short time. And I believe yellow is the norm for backplates in Canada.

Also, I don't think the U.S. MUTCD mandates any specific color for backplates, but if anyone knows different, please correct me and advise the section number.

 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 14, 2017, 08:23:59 PM
^^ Section 4D.12 MUTCD:

20 The inside of signal visors (hoods), the entire surface of louvers and fins, and the front surface of backplates shall have a dull black finish to minimize light reflection and to increase contrast between the signal indication and its background.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 14, 2017, 08:29:13 PM
Excellent; thank-you Big John. I knew the inside of the visors had to be black, (though I've seen them yellow on the inside too), but I wasn't sure about the backplates. I'm almost positive I've seen dark-green and brown ones somewhere, but I don't remember where.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 14, 2017, 09:40:29 PM
2009 MUTCD also says nothing about signal head color. In fact, at least in a good portion of the northeast, signal faces are typically black and the rear (facing away from traffic) may be any color, especially with state DOTs (with the notable exceptions of NJ and PA). MD also uses black with yellow backs and Ohio changed to all-black when they adopted reflective backplates.

That being said, blackplates must indeed be all-black excluding an optional reflective strip.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 14, 2017, 09:59:06 PM
Cl94 you may be right about the 2009 Manual not addressing signal head color, but I knew I'd seen it somewhere so I checked my old 1988 edition and sure enough, Sec. 4B-24 of that older Manual requires the black backplates and states: To obtain the best possible contrast with the visual background, it is desirable that signal head housings be highway yellow.

I wonder if the FHWA intended to eliminate that recommendation in 2009, or if it was a mistaken omission. Both yellow and dark colors have their pros and cons largely depending on the visual background. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 14, 2017, 10:54:34 PM
The yellow recommendation was removed in the 2003 MUTCD. Based on the list of changes and it not being included in any of the 4 editions since (the 2 2003 revisions, 2009 R0 and the current 2009 R 1/2), we can probably assume it was intentional.

At least in these parts, I have heard that black is used for contrast in snow. NYSDOT and a ton of other state agencies, most notably MassDOT, have started using reflective backplates for all new installations, so these bring some of the best of both worlds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 17, 2017, 11:42:40 PM
On Long Island NY, more specifically Nassau and Suffolk counties, NYSDOT signals are all black with newer signals installed in the past few years having black backplates with reflective yellow tape on the edge. County and town maintained signals are mainly all yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 18, 2017, 08:35:05 PM
Sorry to quibble over a minor point; NYSDOT's signal heads are dark green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 18, 2017, 08:52:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 18, 2017, 08:35:05 PM
Sorry to quibble over a minor point; NYSDOT's signal heads are dark green.

Many of their newer installations, at least Upstate, have indeed been black.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 18, 2017, 09:09:15 PM
Hmmm........that's interesting news. I've not seen any black ones on Long Island but I will keep an eye out for new installations. Anyone know of any specific ones here that I could check out, especially in Nassau County?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on March 18, 2017, 10:43:59 PM
Taking this thread in a somewhat different direction, does anyone know of any intersections that have any of the following items:

1) Pedestrian signals with an animated eyes display?

2) Unusual/uncommon cluster arrangements, such as:

       (<R)(R>)                                  (<R)(R>)                             (R)
            (Y)                       or                 (Y)              or                (Y)   
       (<G)(G>)                                      (G)                          (<G)(^G)(G>)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 18, 2017, 10:58:55 PM
I have seen some with two red arrows in the same direction. One is solid, one flashes. A couple of these are along NY 104 in Wayne County (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227269,-77.2814597,3a,47.1y,301.99h,87.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbX7Tu0mZ3VnppaikmMbBDw!2e0!5s20160101T000000!7i13312!8i6656). No idea why they didn't use FYAs here, as these were installed relatively recently. I have not seen another signal with multiple reds in person.

That being said, I have seen some with two opposite-direction green arrows and doghouses with opposite-direction arrows. Cannot remember where. Most T-intersections I have ever seen just use balls with maybe a doghouse for the right turn movement if there's a protected left on the main road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 20, 2017, 05:07:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 18, 2017, 10:58:55 PM
I have seen some with two red arrows in the same direction. One is solid, one flashes. A couple of these are along NY 104 in Wayne County (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227269,-77.2814597,3a,47.1y,301.99h,87.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbX7Tu0mZ3VnppaikmMbBDw!2e0!5s20160101T000000!7i13312!8i6656). No idea why they didn't use FYAs here, as these were installed relatively recently. I have not seen another signal with multiple reds in person.

There were several intersections in Delaware along US 13 that had these signals but I didn't see them anymore the last time I was there
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on March 20, 2017, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: plain on March 20, 2017, 05:07:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 18, 2017, 10:58:55 PM
I have seen some with two red arrows in the same direction. One is solid, one flashes. A couple of these are along NY 104 in Wayne County (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227269,-77.2814597,3a,47.1y,301.99h,87.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbX7Tu0mZ3VnppaikmMbBDw!2e0!5s20160101T000000!7i13312!8i6656). No idea why they didn't use FYAs here, as these were installed relatively recently. I have not seen another signal with multiple reds in person.

There were several intersections in Delaware along US 13 that had these signals but I didn't see them anymore the last time I was there

Delaware has a lot of these signals around the state. Older ones use a red ball verses a red arrow for the solid red phase, but newer ones use arrows for both the red indications.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 22, 2017, 12:32:54 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 18, 2017, 08:35:05 PM
Sorry to quibble over a minor point; NYSDOT's signal heads are dark green.

That is true, but mainly for the older installations. Anything in R10 installed by the state in the past 15 or so years has been black.

This one on NY25 was installed around 15 years ago as a replacement and is black, as an example

https://goo.gl/maps/tcP45ppaGso

Older dark green and newer black signals mixed on this installation, also on NY25

https://goo.gl/maps/wBRtDXigGCr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 22, 2017, 03:27:35 AM
Quote from: Ian on March 20, 2017, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: plain on March 20, 2017, 05:07:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 18, 2017, 10:58:55 PM
I have seen some with two red arrows in the same direction. One is solid, one flashes. A couple of these are along NY 104 in Wayne County (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227269,-77.2814597,3a,47.1y,301.99h,87.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbX7Tu0mZ3VnppaikmMbBDw!2e0!5s20160101T000000!7i13312!8i6656). No idea why they didn't use FYAs here, as these were installed relatively recently. I have not seen another signal with multiple reds in person.

There were several intersections in Delaware along US 13 that had these signals but I didn't see them anymore the last time I was there

Delaware has a lot of these signals around the state. Older ones use a red ball verses a red arrow for the solid red phase, but newer ones use arrows for both the red indications.

The solid red versus flashing red arrow operation was introduced with the 2009 MUTCD, simultaneously with FYA operations. The FRA was put in to allow permitted left turn operation in places where sight distance or other engineering factors determine that each vehicle must come to a complete stop before making the permissive left turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on March 22, 2017, 01:03:12 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 22, 2017, 12:32:54 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 18, 2017, 08:35:05 PM
Sorry to quibble over a minor point; NYSDOT's signal heads are dark green.

That is true, but mainly for the older installations. Anything in R10 installed by the state in the past 15 or so years has been black.

This one on NY25 was installed around 15 years ago as a replacement and is black, as an example

https://goo.gl/maps/tcP45ppaGso

Older dark green and newer black signals mixed on this installation, also on NY25

https://goo.gl/maps/wBRtDXigGCr
Same with region 4 and 5, many older signals are dark green but has been mostly black for around 20 years. Also, all new signals installed in the past two or three years have back plates. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 22, 2017, 03:14:40 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on March 22, 2017, 01:03:12 PM
Also, all new signals installed in the past two or three years have back plates.

Backplates are required by the 2009 MUTCD for locations with an 85th percentile speed or speed limit 45 mph or higher and are recommended for all locations. NYSDOT has generally taken the recommendation and most regions have begun using them everywhere. You won't be seeing many new installations without backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 22, 2017, 03:50:34 PM
^^ That is not exactly true as it says "should" rather than "shall"

2009 MUTCD 4D.12

Guidance:
18 If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on an approach to a signalized location is 45 mph or higher, signal backplates should be used on all of the signal faces that face the approach. Signal backplates should also be considered for use on signal faces on approaches with posted or statutory speed limits or 85th-percentile speeds of less than 45 mph where sun glare, bright sky, and/or complex or confusing backgrounds indicate a need for enhanced signal face target value.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on March 23, 2017, 12:20:51 PM
As far as dark green vs yellow, the New York supplement includes this paragraph:

QuoteSection 4D.12 Visibility, Aiming, and Shielding of Signal Faces

Standard:
19A Signal heads shall be dark green or yellow.

Support:
19B Visibility of signal indications, particularly red indications, is usually more important than visibility of the signal heads themselves. Green signal heads offer greater contrast to the signal indications. Yellow signal heads have application where contrast with the background is considered more important than contrast with the signal indications.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on March 23, 2017, 03:14:04 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 18, 2017, 10:43:59 PM
Taking this thread in a somewhat different direction, does anyone know of any intersections that have any of the following items:

1) Pedestrian signals with an animated eyes display?

2) Unusual/uncommon cluster arrangements, such as:

       (<R)(R>)                                  (<R)(R>)                             (R)
            (Y)                       or                 (Y)              or                (Y)   
       (<G)(G>)                                      (G)                          (<G)(^G)(G>)

Standard Doghouse but unusual indications
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA4j7cxx3fI
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 23, 2017, 04:24:06 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on March 23, 2017, 03:14:04 PM
Standard Doghouse but unusual indications
[youtube video]

Great clip! What a strange setup. How long has the signal been setup this way? Seems awfully redundant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 23, 2017, 10:01:18 PM
RestrictOnTheHanger, re: those two photos you posted (a few posts back) from NY-25. In the first one in Commack, where you say the heads are black, they look distinctly dark green to me in the photo, just like the ones in your other photo at Rts. 25A/107. Can't tell for sure about the second photo in Woodbury. And BTW, (not being sarcastic here) I have been recently tested for color-blindness with no deficiencies found.

Also are you guys sure you're talking about the head color and not the backplates?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 23, 2017, 11:54:32 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 23, 2017, 10:01:18 PM
RestrictOnTheHanger, re: those two photos you posted (a few posts back) from NY-25. In the first one in Commack, where you say the heads are black, they look distinctly dark green to me in the photo, just like the ones in your other photo at Rts. 25A/107. Can't tell for sure about the second photo in Woodbury. And BTW, (not being sarcastic here) I have been recently tested for color-blindness with no deficiencies found.

Also are you guys sure you're talking about the head color and not the backplates?

Hmm, next time I drive into Nassau or Suffolk I'll have a second look at the NYSDOT setups. Its been a few months.

Quote from: jakeroot on March 23, 2017, 04:24:06 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on March 23, 2017, 03:14:04 PM
Standard Doghouse but unusual indications
[youtube video]

Great clip! What a strange setup. How long has the signal been setup this way? Seems awfully redundant.

I wonder if the extra arrows were circular at one point? I agree with Jakeroot,  very strange
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on March 24, 2017, 10:08:44 AM
This was an installation on a temporary bypass when the wye at County 61 and 101 (old US 169 and 212) was replaced with a roundabout. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on March 29, 2017, 05:29:35 PM
About NYSDOT's traffic signal color from a few posts back.

I took a closer look at the color of signal heads today on newer signals (being a nice clear day) and they are more of a dark olive color rather than black. Many older signals are dark green/hunter green.

In Rochester, NY most of the signals owned by Monroe County are yellow and are otherwise installed to NYSDOT standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on April 09, 2017, 10:14:30 PM
These traffic signal poles (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7764334,-122.4860651,3a,68.9y,182.64h,92.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9kcEHd_s0PybE-SmOkaIzQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) and several street light poles in the area seem to have been intentionally installed at a serious angle. The signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7751371,-122.486046,3a,75y,176.56h,89.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sazXjDFPkmtC2SR0u0JWsbg!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) and side-mounted signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7771116,-122.4859714,3a,75y,25.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stsWkXYzkE1_BvXnelGLk1Q!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) have actually been installed specifically to counter the angle, which is what makes me think it is actually intentional. I'm not sure what effect they were going for here... but it definitely bothers me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on April 09, 2017, 11:25:59 PM
Quote from: jay8g on April 09, 2017, 10:14:30 PM
These traffic signal poles (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7764334,-122.4860651,3a,68.9y,182.64h,92.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9kcEHd_s0PybE-SmOkaIzQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) and several street light poles in the area seem to have been intentionally installed at a serious angle. The signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7751371,-122.486046,3a,75y,176.56h,89.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sazXjDFPkmtC2SR0u0JWsbg!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) and side-mounted signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7771116,-122.4859714,3a,75y,25.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stsWkXYzkE1_BvXnelGLk1Q!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) have actually been installed specifically to counter the angle, which is what makes me think it is actually intentional. I'm not sure what effect they were going for here... but it definitely bothers me.

That is definitely intentional. I guess I'm not mad at the design really but at the intersection in your first example that one mast arm over the wider street seems to be low and too close to the edge of the street. Idk it just seems like a rig could hit it if any ever go down that street. That could've been installed a bit further away from it
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2017, 07:47:45 PM
Was browsing around Street View in the Phoenix area, when I came upon this mast arm near Sky Harbor airport....

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkH84XKx.png&hash=d5118e5515ff7f775baf3b51adea7a138e0b06bd)

It appears to be modelled after those extendable monopods that you might use for a camera (as opposed to a tripod). I doubt it actually extends in a similar manner, but it got me thinking. Are there any mast arms that actually work in this manner (i.e. they extend like a monopod)? Has anyone else seen a mast arm designed like this before? I've posted before (in this thread about four pages back) about mast arms that are way too long relative to the signals mounted to them. This has always been a pet peeve of mine (I'm sure I possess a mild form of OCD), so I love to see mast arms like this, where the intent was clearly to end the mast arm at the farthest signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 17, 2017, 08:24:53 PM
Probably not quite what you had in mind, but I do know some crossing signal cantilevers were designed to be extendable:
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Georgia/Atlanta/Constitution/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Georgia/Lindale/Park/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Alabama/Decatur/Moulton/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Alabama/Verbena/Depot/
http://www.rxrsignals.com/Alabama/Scottsboro/Willow/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 17, 2017, 09:03:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2017, 07:47:45 PM
Was browsing around Street View in the Phoenix area, when I came upon this mast arm near Sky Harbor airport....

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkH84XKx.png&hash=d5118e5515ff7f775baf3b51adea7a138e0b06bd)

It appears to be modelled after those extendable monopods that you might use for a camera (as opposed to a tripod). I doubt it actually extends in a similar manner, but it got me thinking. Are there any mast arms that actually work in this manner (i.e. they extend like a monopod)? Has anyone else seen a mast arm designed like this before? I've posted before (in this thread about four pages back) about mast arms that are way too long relative to the signals mounted to them. This has always been a pet peeve of mine (I'm sure I possess a mild form of OCD), so I love to see mast arms like this, where the intent was clearly to end the mast arm at the farthest signal.

It could just be a two piece mast arm.  IIRC some states do allow those, but have requirements for a minimum length of overlap between the two pieces.  I don't know though whether as part of the process the two parts are permanently welded together or permanently attached in some other manner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on April 20, 2017, 10:37:55 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 17, 2017, 09:03:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2017, 07:47:45 PM
Was browsing around Street View in the Phoenix area, when I came upon this mast arm near Sky Harbor airport....

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkH84XKx.png&hash=d5118e5515ff7f775baf3b51adea7a138e0b06bd)

It appears to be modelled after those extendable monopods that you might use for a camera (as opposed to a tripod). I doubt it actually extends in a similar manner, but it got me thinking. Are there any mast arms that actually work in this manner (i.e. they extend like a monopod)? Has anyone else seen a mast arm designed like this before? I've posted before (in this thread about four pages back) about mast arms that are way too long relative to the signals mounted to them. This has always been a pet peeve of mine (I'm sure I possess a mild form of OCD), so I love to see mast arms like this, where the intent was clearly to end the mast arm at the farthest signal.

It could just be a two piece mast arm.  IIRC some states do allow those, but have requirements for a minimum length of overlap between the two pieces.  I don't know though whether as part of the process the two parts are permanently welded together or permanently attached in some other manner.

If this is near an airport, they may have had to modify a typical model to shorten the height of the street lamp, with planes flying overhead and whatnot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ajlynch91 on April 20, 2017, 11:10:29 PM
One of the more unique traffic signals in the Chicagoland area is at Naper Blvd and Plank Rd in Naperville. The standard heads have two reds. This was apparently done to improve visibility as both the North and South approaches to the intersection curve, leading to a number of accidents before the signals were installed. As to how much they've helped, I cannot say for sure as I don't work for Naperville, but they are certainly much more attention grabbing than a traditional 3 section head.
(https://s3.postimg.org/etry1q8lf/naperandplank.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 21, 2017, 11:07:03 AM
Quote from: ajlynch91 on April 20, 2017, 11:10:29 PM
One of the more unique traffic signals in the Chicagoland area is at Naper Blvd and Plank Rd in Naperville. The standard heads have two reds. This was apparently done to improve visibility as both the North and South approaches to the intersection curve, leading to a number of accidents before the signals were installed. As to how much they've helped, I cannot say for sure as I don't work for Naperville, but they are certainly much more attention grabbing than a traditional 3 section head.
(https://s3.postimg.org/etry1q8lf/naperandplank.png)

Is there still an advance warning sign as well, with flashing lights?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ajlynch91 on May 04, 2017, 01:05:54 AM
Yes, immediately before each curve north and south of the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Super Mateo on May 04, 2017, 06:48:08 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 03, 2017, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 02, 2017, 11:37:04 PM
Damn, that's short. And here I thought these were the shortest [non-ramp meter] signals I've seen: :pan: :no: 
Randall Ave @ Campus Dr: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0725002,-89.4090569,3a,75y,36.87h,75.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRttAW-hjjtBvmXd36tgl9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
N Park St @ Johnson St: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0723249,-89.4007221,3a,75y,189.91h,86.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DjR-5x_meFaAqR1YtZ6dCiQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.56659%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Whitney Way @ Old Middleton Rd: Madison, WI (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0744768,-89.4677049,3a,75y,152.69h,76.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK6e66Ms7HQltQRQoKDzMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The extremely low signals seem to be considered frequently for pre-signals at railroad crossings, such as on  IL 47 has one in Huntley (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1690369,-88.4281848,3a,39.4y,160.32h,82.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sitINeQyvnLmZmSDEcscvPw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and there's one on Wood Dale Road in Wood Dale, Illinois. (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9639527,-87.9787265,3a,19.4y,221.02h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Mu1myV-KKJI77suoF27Pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

This one I found in Washington Court House, OH (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.5324131,-83.4442526,3a,36.6y,16.56h,79.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVlHxAg-lGylKITZRlkUwJw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) is unusual not only due to its low mounting, but also because it's in Ohio, where I can't recall encountering any stop bar lights.  There's also a sidewalk in front of it, so it wouldn't be hard for a pedestrian to block the view.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on May 05, 2017, 11:59:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2017, 07:47:45 PM
Was browsing around Street View in the Phoenix area, when I came upon this mast arm near Sky Harbor airport....

It's homemade! Up until 1980 or so, Tulsa fabricated their own truss arm installation out of oil pipe. Did a darn fine job of it, too. Those mast arms in Phoenix (and most of their double-guys) were fabricated in a shop, too.

Here's an example of one of the few remaining truss-arm installations in Tulsa. Zoom in for home-brewed goodness.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1043597,-96.0116321,3a,66.8y,86.87h,86.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sxWUpvbNNA7ViUxh6nvbDnA!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 08, 2017, 10:07:53 PM
Plenty of videos of this around, but I decided to go out and make my own. Here's a HAWK signal in Mill Creek, WA. AFAIK, it was installed in 2011. While observing the signal, I noticed that very few drivers proceeded on flashing red, as is permitted. Perhaps a "proceed after stop on flashing red" sign is in order.

Here's a Street View of this particular HAWK in real life: https://goo.gl/maps/Q17ZrQzTVyv

https://youtu.be/87k7EVo8KkQ
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2017, 01:41:25 AM
Quote from: Rick1962 on May 05, 2017, 11:59:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2017, 07:47:45 PM
Was browsing around Street View in the Phoenix area, when I came upon this mast arm near Sky Harbor airport....

It's homemade! Up until 1980 or so, Tulsa fabricated their own truss arm installation out of oil pipe. Did a darn fine job of it, too. Those mast arms in Phoenix (and most of their double-guys) were fabricated in a shop, too.

Nice! Thanks for the information. I think they look really clean (though not as clean when used in truss-style). Any idea why a city might use this style over the typical steel mast arm? FWIW, the PHX example was installed in 2005/2006.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on May 09, 2017, 09:27:33 AM
Just wanted to jump in and share this traffic signal photo from the entrance to Arches NP in Moab, UT.  It's a combination of a constant-burning green and an FYA, which I hadn't seen before.  The photo is taken facing south. Left-turning traffic from the left ends up on a left-hand merge ramp that takes up the center lane until it dissipates farther ahead.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN)
UT-US191-ArchesS (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 09, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
^^  Thanks for posting that.  I should be there in six weeks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 02:34:08 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 18, 2017, 10:43:59 PM
Taking this thread in a somewhat different direction, does anyone know of any intersections that have any of the following items:

1) Pedestrian signals with an animated eyes display?

2) Unusual/uncommon cluster arrangements, such as:

       (<R)(R>)                                  (<R)(R>)                             (R)
            (Y)                       or                 (Y)              or                (Y)   
       (<G)(G>)                                      (G)                          (<G)(^G)(G>)

Today, I finally got around to getting a picture of this signal, which is your third example (sort of, it's a vertical five stack, not a cluster):

(https://i.imgur.com/umvI1UG.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/umvI1UG.jpg)

This is the signal for the WB I-35/80 offramp to 86th St in Urbandale. Once I get it uploaded I'll add a video of it in operation, too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 09, 2017, 04:39:55 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 02:34:08 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 18, 2017, 10:43:59 PM
Taking this thread in a somewhat different direction, does anyone know of any intersections that have any of the following items:

1) Pedestrian signals with an animated eyes display?

2) Unusual/uncommon cluster arrangements, such as:

       (<R)(R>)                                  (<R)(R>)                             (R)
            (Y)                       or                 (Y)              or                (Y)   
       (<G)(G>)                                      (G)                          (<G)(^G)(G>)

Today, I finally got around to getting a picture of this signal, which is your third example (sort of, it's a vertical five stack, not a cluster):

(https://i.imgur.com/umvI1UG.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/umvI1UG.jpg)

This is the signal for the WB I-35/80 offramp to 86th St in Urbandale. Once I get it uploaded I'll add a video of it in operation, too.

I've seen one of these back in the day  and I'm almost certain it was in Newport News, Va... obviously LED's wasn't out yet and also I think the Newport News one was wire hung instead of mast arm mounted. And thanks for posting this because I didn't know any agency was still doing this
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 04:58:36 PM
The video I promised:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: intelati49 on May 09, 2017, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 09, 2017, 09:27:33 AM
Just wanted to jump in and share this traffic signal photo from the entrance to Arches NP in Moab, UT.  It's a combination of a constant-burning green and an FYA, which I hadn't seen before.  The photo is taken facing south. Left-turning traffic from the left ends up on a left-hand merge ramp that takes up the center lane until it dissipates farther ahead.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN)
UT-US191-ArchesS (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

Never seen these in action. I'm interested in the safety/crash rate of the turning movements.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2017, 05:22:25 PM
I think this may be the thickest mast arm I've ever encountered:

212 St @ Hwy 9 east of Maltby, Washington (https://goo.gl/E8UeBR):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtplsT43.jpg&hash=e2a859c1de6e1cb68ed4b7b2a8dabaf0becd50d5)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2017, 05:26:08 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on May 09, 2017, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 09, 2017, 09:27:33 AM
Just wanted to jump in and share this traffic signal photo from the entrance to Arches NP in Moab, UT.  It's a combination of a constant-burning green and an FYA, which I hadn't seen before.  The photo is taken facing south. Left-turning traffic from the left ends up on a left-hand merge ramp that takes up the center lane until it dissipates farther ahead.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg

Never seen these in action. I'm interested in the safety/crash rate of the turning movements.

Which is it that you haven't seen:

1) a seagull intersection with permissive phasing; or
2) a seagull intersection with a flashing yellow arrow; or
3) this particular signal?

As far as the safety/crash rate, I doubt it's any worse (at this particular intersection) than it was before. It replaced a free left w/o a signal at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 09, 2017, 06:05:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2017, 05:22:25 PM
I think this may be the thickest mast arm I've ever encountered:

212 St @ Hwy 9 east of Maltby, Washington (https://goo.gl/E8UeBR):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtplsT43.jpg&hash=e2a859c1de6e1cb68ed4b7b2a8dabaf0becd50d5)

Oh wow... that's past fat... that's all out obese. I saw a couple of half spans around here that I thought was fat but not quite like that

US 60 (Midlothian Tpk just SW of Richmond)
https://goo.gl/maps/JSBm9AEZdNB2

US 250 (Broad St, NW of Richmond)
https://goo.gl/maps/agwwKropRKF2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 09, 2017, 08:36:57 PM
Wow, seven heads on the same arm on Midlothian Turnpike. That must be a record. And the arm even extends beyond the last head. Must be like maybe a 60 foot long arm?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 08:48:45 PM
If we're going for the most heads on a single mast arm, this signal in Des Moines has eight heads on one arm (though they're for three directions of travel).

(https://i.imgur.com/mO6RItx.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/mO6RItx.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 09, 2017, 09:19:36 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 08:48:45 PM
If we're going for the most heads on a single mast arm, this signal in Des Moines has eight heads on one arm (though they're for three directions of travel).

(https://i.imgur.com/mO6RItx.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/mO6RItx.jpg)

There are a ton of 4-way intersections around here with all 8 heads on one arm. That doesn't impress me. I can't think of any with more than 8 heads, though. THAT would be interesting to see.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 09, 2017, 09:43:18 PM
Given that the signal on the opposite corner (https://i.imgur.com/pUi54fv.jpg) has one with seven heads, perhaps they should've just gone for gold and just used one massive arm that carries all fifteen heads. :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 10, 2017, 01:39:34 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2017, 08:36:57 PM
Wow, seven heads on the same arm on Midlothian Turnpike. That must be a record. And the arm even extends beyond the last head. Must be like maybe a 60 foot long arm?

Not sure the length but sounds about right.
The city of Hampton also squeezed 7 on this one on US 258 Mercury Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/ttSSauhXH4C2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 11, 2017, 02:18:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2017, 08:36:57 PM
Wow, seven heads on the same arm on Midlothian Turnpike. That must be a record. And the arm even extends beyond the last head. Must be like maybe a 60 foot long arm?

If you assume one signal head centered over each lane, and assume each lane is 12 feet wide, that mast arm would have to be at least 84 feet long. It's probably closer to 90 or even 100 feet, when you consider the mast pole setback from curb and that the arm extends past the last signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 11:25:13 AM
Quote from: roadfro on May 11, 2017, 02:18:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2017, 08:36:57 PM
Wow, seven heads on the same arm on Midlothian Turnpike. That must be a record. And the arm even extends beyond the last head. Must be like maybe a 60 foot long arm?

If you assume one signal head centered over each lane, and assume each lane is 12 feet wide, that mast arm would have to be at least 84 feet long. It's probably closer to 90 or even 100 feet, when you consider the mast pole setback from curb and that the arm extends past the last signal.

The arm that extends past the last signal wouldn't really count. The 84-feet measurement was based on the mast arm being at least as long as the number of lanes (i.e. right edge of roadway to left edge of roadway). First signal to last signal probably around 72-74 feet. The bit that would make it longer than 84 feet would be the distance between the edge of the road and mast arm mount. I'm thinking the total length is close to around 90-92 feet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 11, 2017, 11:45:48 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.

Many jurisdictions place the signals so there are one over each lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 11:56:41 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.

You wouldn't want them any closer together. Most states have a minimum distance allowed between signals. One per lane is generally a minimum separation.

VA should have mounted one signal over the centerline of the two left turn lanes, and used only three overhead signals: one between the #1 and #2 lanes, one centered above the #3 lane, and one between the #4 and #5 lanes. Then, add secondary signals on the left and right masts. They have seven overhead signals, yet none are visible if a truck is in front of you. That's crappy signalization in my book, even if it's VA standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 11, 2017, 12:13:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 11:56:41 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.

You wouldn't want them any closer together. Most states have a minimum distance allowed between signals. One per lane is generally a minimum separation.

VA should have mounted one signal over the centerline of the two left turn lanes, and used only three overhead signals: one between the #1 and #2 lanes, one centered above the #3 lane, and one between the #4 and #5 lanes. Then, add secondary signals on the left and right masts. They have five overhead signals, yet none are visible if a truck is in front of you. That's crappy signalization in my book, even if it's VA standards.

Hampton does this... well sort of...
W Mercury Blvd
https://goo.gl/maps/LecxCwujeV52
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 02:37:50 PM
Quote from: plain on May 11, 2017, 12:13:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 11:56:41 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.

You wouldn't want them any closer together. Most states have a minimum distance allowed between signals. One per lane is generally a minimum separation.

VA should have mounted one signal over the centerline of the two left turn lanes, and used only three overhead signals: one between the #1 and #2 lanes, one centered above the #3 lane, and one between the #4 and #5 lanes. Then, add secondary signals on the left and right masts. They have seven overhead signals, yet none are visible if a truck is in front of you. That's crappy signalization in my book, even if it's VA standards.

Hampton does this... well sort of...
W Mercury Blvd
https://goo.gl/maps/LecxCwujeV52

Getting there....something like this would be superior (from my Imgur archives, Federal Way, WA)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FjHw548f.png&hash=82ed3bf0eaf22c5d386f4663176b80760a4ae19b)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 11, 2017, 03:01:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 11, 2017, 11:56:41 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 11, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
What is with spacing of traffic lights? Like, they wouldn't have to make the mast so long if they snuggled them in closer to each other.

You wouldn't want them any closer together. Most states have a minimum distance allowed between signals. One per lane is generally a minimum separation.
MUTCD calls for a 8' minimum between signals performing the same function.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 11, 2017, 06:12:36 PM
I need to get a picture of this in action, but I spotted something this afternoon. 4th Street (US 4 NB) in Troy, NY (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.715377,-73.6930965,3a,66.6y,34.31h,92.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9BS7Qau8dosIxF-wVigcsQ!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656). The yellow lens of this signal has "CAUTION" written on it. Nothing on the green or red. I drive through here a couple times a week and just noticed it today.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 11, 2017, 07:50:14 PM
Re: the MUTCD spacing standard, it actually requires a minimum of 8 feet between the two required heads for each approach. There does not seem to be a minimum spacing for all other heads. New York City has some left/right turn heads mounted immediately adjacent to the circular-green heads. I mean just a couple of feet apart. And just to clarify, the measurement is center-of-lens to center-of-lens.

I would prefer a minimum spacing requirement of 12 feet. That is, a lane-width apart. If you've ever seen a mast-arm with 8 ft. spacing between heads, they look too close together. Common in Pennsylvania.

That photo from Federal Way, Washington looks very good and is almost identical to California's standard configuration which I've always liked.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on May 14, 2017, 12:31:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 11, 2017, 06:12:36 PM
I need to get a picture of this in action, but I spotted something this afternoon. 4th Street (US 4 NB) in Troy, NY (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.715377,-73.6930965,3a,66.6y,34.31h,92.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9BS7Qau8dosIxF-wVigcsQ!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656). The yellow lens of this signal has "CAUTION" written on it. Nothing on the green or red. I drive through here a couple times a week and just noticed it today.

Neat to see some command lenses still being used. Those are hard to come by in the field nowadays!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on May 14, 2017, 06:48:19 PM
So can someone raise the bar and find an Adler lens in use?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on May 14, 2017, 07:43:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 11, 2017, 07:50:14 PM

I would prefer a minimum spacing requirement of 12 feet. That is, a lane-width apart. If you've ever seen a mast-arm with 8 ft. spacing between heads, they look too close together.

A 12 feet minimum wouldn't work if the lanes are less than 12 feet wide.  The 8 foot minimum also helps for signals where two heads are being provided on the mast arm for a single through lane, but both an adjacent left turn lane and adjacent right turn lane are using all-arrow heads.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 14, 2017, 08:13:22 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 14, 2017, 07:43:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 11, 2017, 07:50:14 PM

I would prefer a minimum spacing requirement of 12 feet. That is, a lane-width apart. If you've ever seen a mast-arm with 8 ft. spacing between heads, they look too close together.

A 12 feet minimum wouldn't work if the lanes are less than 12 feet wide.  The 8 foot minimum also helps for signals where two heads are being provided on the mast arm for a single through lane, but both an adjacent left turn lane and adjacent right turn lane are using all-arrow heads.

Yeah, 12 feet wouldn't work here in Troy if you expect each approach to have 2 heads. Most of the streets are too narrow. With the 8 foot requirement, a ton of the narrow one-way streets have the signal heads on opposite sides of the lane. 12 feet would place at least one of them over the parking lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 14, 2017, 08:22:49 PM
In the situation that Revive 755 illustrated, he has a point, but that's a rare scenario. In most cases if you only have a single thru lane the best practice might be one overhead and one far-right pole mounted head.

My objection to 8 ft. spacing is where it's used over two thru lanes and they're both over the left lane. I've seen this a lot in the Philadelphia, Pa. suburbs. In that situation, one head over the center of each 12 ft. lane would be the best practice and would result in 12 ft. spacing and could still be done with 8 or 10 ft. lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 14, 2017, 09:11:39 PM
Quote from: cl94 on May 14, 2017, 08:13:22 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 14, 2017, 07:43:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 11, 2017, 07:50:14 PM

I would prefer a minimum spacing requirement of 12 feet. That is, a lane-width apart. If you've ever seen a mast-arm with 8 ft. spacing between heads, they look too close together.

A 12 feet minimum wouldn't work if the lanes are less than 12 feet wide.  The 8 foot minimum also helps for signals where two heads are being provided on the mast arm for a single through lane, but both an adjacent left turn lane and adjacent right turn lane are using all-arrow heads.

Yeah, 12 feet wouldn't work here in Troy if you expect each approach to have 2 heads. Most of the streets are too narrow. With the 8 foot requirement, a ton of the narrow one-way streets have the signal heads on opposite sides of the lane. 12 feet would place at least one of them over the parking lanes.
Quote from: SignBridge on May 14, 2017, 08:22:49 PM
In the situation that Revive 755 illustrated, he has a point, but that's a rare scenario. In most cases if you only have a single thru lane the best practice might be one overhead and one far-right pole mounted head.

My objection to 8 ft. spacing is where it's used over two thru lanes and they're both over the left lane. I've seen this a lot in the Philadelphia, Pa. suburbs. In that situation, one head over the center of each 12 ft. lane would be the best practice and would result in 12 ft. spacing and could still be done with 8 or 10 ft. lanes.

You could still have a twelve-foot minimum spacing, with exceptions for narrow lanes, etc. The eight-foot minimum has resulted in some terrible signal placement here in Washington (mostly state-maintained signals). You'll have this gigantic mast arm, and the signals are right on top of each other. Spread them out, for God's sake....

There are ways that you could have 8-foot wide lanes, with dedicated left/right/straight signals with only one lane in each direction, and still have at least twelve feet between each signal. I'll mock something up when I get home. Hint: it does involve using the mast to mount signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 14, 2017, 09:22:21 PM
Jakeroot, you nailed it with your point about Washington area signals. It seems like some installations they just mount the first signal as far left as possible and then just mount the second one, eight feet to the right because that's the default standard. And it looks terrible.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 14, 2017, 11:38:32 PM
I was driving through Buffalo, MN yesterday, and found this signal design at the very recently reconstructed MN-25/55 junction. My goodness they are fugly (IMO).

(https://i.imgur.com/6MOaXp6.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/6MOaXp6.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 15, 2017, 12:45:44 PM
The truss-type mast-arm with those thick pipes may be ugly, but the spacing and configuration looks about right to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 15, 2017, 01:56:38 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 14, 2017, 07:43:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 11, 2017, 07:50:14 PM

I would prefer a minimum spacing requirement of 12 feet. That is, a lane-width apart. If you've ever seen a mast-arm with 8 ft. spacing between heads, they look too close together.

A 12 feet minimum wouldn't work if the lanes are less than 12 feet wide.  The 8 foot minimum also helps for signals where two heads are being provided on the mast arm for a single through lane, but both an adjacent left turn lane and adjacent right turn lane are using all-arrow heads.

So here's a quick mock-up of a 12-foot minimum spacing with 8-foot lanes.

There are some obvious caveats...

1) there is no possible way to center the signals above each lane, so the two overhead signals have to be scooted away from each other; and
2) through signals have to have up arrows because the right turn lane points directly at the through signals (which could be confusing).

But overall, I think this works. The situation you describe is extremely unusual, so I don't think maintaining the 8-foot requirement would be necessary just to please these rarities. A 12-foot minimum would work, the agency just has to be a little clever (if for some reason, dedicated L/R/S signals ever became necessary).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FreZCk0A.png&hash=dee559db606496a09ed56f55fe04e13ede0226da)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 15, 2017, 05:45:57 PM
Here's some examples of how the 8-foot minimum requirement can result in some hideous signal placement. WSDOT is entirely to blame.

The first set of signals (with the unpainted mast arms) were installed in 2016 (167 Valley Freeway @ 8 Street south of Auburn). The last signal (with the black mast arm) was installed in 2013 (Hwy 161 @ Taylor Street, Edgewood).

Don't get me started on the protected lefts in the first set. Flashing yellow arrows would have been great here.



This first signal isn't too bad, because of the secondary, far right post-mounted signal. But the overhead signals are really close together:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fx0Ww1kZ.jpg&hash=602b22e5317483623f60eae82daaa6a898c7f501)

The next signal (same junction, opposite off-ramp) also has closely-spaced signals, but no secondary, far-right signal head:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FU3nXFXb.jpg&hash=78b830beacc9472aabf47cde92e3941944b7f591)

The through signals are fine, but a secondary, mast-mounted signal would have been a good fit here. Not pictured: this approach has two lanes (one straight, one right):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtGUSWyy.jpg&hash=66879ac74c0646413a5e104cf4661497ed75faa7)

This approach (8 Street EB) is particularly maddening. The left turn originally had a secondary, post-mounted signal on the far left (https://goo.gl/5AltwL) (mounted on the same post where the off-ramp's secondary signal head is located). For some reason, they did away with the secondary signal when they removed the pork-chop island. Most annoyingly, the replaced signal was only added in 2007. What standard changed between '07 and '16 that dictated fewer signals be used?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXnr1uLS.jpg&hash=83e13467b02d5a2a3bf2f031cc2aba26f68d39a0)

One intersection over is a signal maintained by the city of Pacific. This signal is unusal in that a five-section signal is mounted over the left turn lane (instead of to the right of it), but it results in good (nigh, great!) spacing. Also odd (though not necessarily related to the signal): the cross-street (Thornton) has a "left turn yield on green" sign, instead of typical "left turn must yield" sign typically used at junctions without left turn arrows (at least here in Washington):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlwRl206.jpg&hash=bb726c614d918d6e80590b7d08d6082f26fe87cf)

Finally, the last signal, several miles away. Gigantic mast arm, signals right on top of each other :sigh:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fg6mAtol.jpg&hash=f60df78eaeffa48189ae5ed32f482df7afb7f3e0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 15, 2017, 09:39:16 PM
Good Jakeroot. Your graphic showing the two adjacent heads on the pole for thru and right turns works for me. I've actually seen overhead adjacent-heads like that in New York City.

Interesting photos. Some of them are good examples of 8 ft. spacing being too little of a spread IMO.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 16, 2017, 12:16:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 15, 2017, 05:45:57 PM
Here's some examples of how the 8-foot minimum requirement can result in some hideous signal placement. WSDOT is entirely to blame.

The first set of signals (with the unpainted mast arms) were installed in 2016 (167 Valley Freeway @ 8 Street south of Auburn). The last signal (with the black mast arm) was installed in 2013 (Hwy 161 @ Taylor Street, Edgewood).

Don't get me started on the protected lefts in the first set. Flashing yellow arrows would have been great here.



This first signal isn't too bad, because of the secondary, far right post-mounted signal. But the overhead signals are really close together:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fx0Ww1kZ.jpg&hash=602b22e5317483623f60eae82daaa6a898c7f501)

The next signal (same junction, opposite off-ramp) also has closely-spaced signals, but no secondary, far-right signal head:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FU3nXFXb.jpg&hash=78b830beacc9472aabf47cde92e3941944b7f591)

The through signals are fine, but a secondary, mast-mounted signal would have been a good fit here. Not pictured: this approach has two lanes (one straight, one right):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtGUSWyy.jpg&hash=66879ac74c0646413a5e104cf4661497ed75faa7)

This approach (8 Street EB) is particularly maddening. The left turn originally had a secondary, post-mounted signal on the far left (https://goo.gl/5AltwL) (mounted on the same post where the off-ramp's secondary signal head is located). For some reason, they did away with the secondary signal when they removed the pork-chop island. Most annoyingly, the replaced signal was only added in 2007. What standard changed between '07 and '16 that dictated fewer signals be used?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXnr1uLS.jpg&hash=83e13467b02d5a2a3bf2f031cc2aba26f68d39a0)

One intersection over is a signal maintained by the city of Pacific. This signal is unusal in that a five-section signal is mounted over the left turn lane (instead of to the right of it), but it results in good (nigh, great!) spacing. Also odd (though not necessarily related to the signal): the cross-street (Thornton) has a "left turn yield on green" sign, instead of typical "left turn must yield" sign typically used at junctions without left turn arrows (at least here in Washington):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlwRl206.jpg&hash=bb726c614d918d6e80590b7d08d6082f26fe87cf)

Finally, the last signal, several miles away. Gigantic mast arm, signals right on top of each other :sigh:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fg6mAtol.jpg&hash=f60df78eaeffa48189ae5ed32f482df7afb7f3e0)

In regards to the botom picture. Are those even aligned center to the corresponding lane?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2017, 12:40:36 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 16, 2017, 12:16:35 AM
In regards to the botom picture. Are those even aligned center to the corresponding lane?

Tip: You can cut out all the irrelevant bits of my post, just leaving the last photo. It helps reduce load times.

The two signals, which appear to be 12-feet wide, are placed inwards from the left and right edge of the straight/right lane by about two feet, so:

EDGE OF LANE : 2 FOOT BUFFER : LEFT SIGNAL : 8 FOOT BUFFER : RIGHT SIGNAL : 2 FOOT BUFFER : EDGE OF LANE

A better setup would have been to just use one overhead signal, between the left turn and straight/right lanes, and one on the left mast. Or if that's not allowed, one overhead and one on a pole to the right. WSDOT kind of handicapped themselves by only using two masts for the entire junction. Makes secondary signals harder to place, since masts have conduit inside of them that would allow easier placement of secondary signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 16, 2017, 01:49:43 PM
I agree, those installations are completely ridiculous. I've never seen anything like that. When NYSDOT or one of the nearby agencies has a multi-lane approach like that, same-movement signals are at least one lane width apart. What might be better here is a spacing requirement tied to number of lanes/roadway width. 8 feet is fine for a single-lane approach, but for more, it's ridiculous. So you can get where I'm coming from,
this is a standard NYSDOT installation for multiple lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6958362,-73.8495221,3a,39.5y,348.16h,91.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbK7GECNrdvNcdlbeve3M5A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and this  is one for a narrow street (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7309941,-73.6875547,3a,49.2y,287.32h,84.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sswCM8AcdfJkH9mCzCdCPAw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). 8 feet is fine for the latter, but definitely not the former. Given the on-street parking, you can't really have supplemental signals here because they'd be blocked (Troy does indeed use supplementals in several locations).

Most of the agencies in this part of the country use 12' spacing unless lane width or some other weird condition dictates otherwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 16, 2017, 09:37:14 PM
cl94, if that is a NYSDOT installation, it's the first time I've ever seen them use a box-span configuration. In the downstate region and on Long Island they only use diagonal-span. But you're right about NYS using generally good spacing on their signals, unlike some other states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 16, 2017, 09:53:35 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2017, 09:37:14 PM
cl94, if that is a NYSDOT installation, it's the first time I've ever seen them use a box-span configuration. In the downstate region and on Long Island they only use diagonal-span. But you're right about NYS using generally good spacing on their signals, unlike some other states.

They've been switching to that Upstate in recent years, probably so signals aren't hanging in the middle of the intersection. Quite a few cases of signals falling in the middle of intersections on diagonal spans in recent years. Installs within the past year or two are generally either box span or mast arm.

But yeah, except for not having one head/lane until recently if there are more than 2 lanes/direction (quite a few intersections around with 2 heads for 4 straight lanes), NYSDOT has had nice installations for a long time, as do several of the larger local municipalities. Bad spacing is practically unheard of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 16, 2017, 09:59:12 PM
In recent years, NYSDOT has been using more mast-arms on Long Island than they used to, but still in a diagonal-span configuration. I only know of one incident here in Nassau County about 10 years ago, (a County installed signal) where a whole span-wire of 4 or 5 heads dropped into the street during a severe storm. Luckily with no casualties.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2017, 10:39:15 PM
Here are some newer, much better installations from other areas of the Washington (installed/maintained by WSDOT). How exactly we've gone from these, to what ended up being installed in my photos above, really confuses me...WSDOT: seek help.

Curiously, the second and third photos are not MUTCD-compliant. The images are of off-ramps. Both feature double lefts, yet both only have one green orb (left signal is green arrow, right signal is green orb/green arrow). I know these used to be MUTCD-compliant, but recent changes require two through heads, even when the major movement is a left turn.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FR0bDJdD.png&hash=cecae21337c3e1cd284e88af91287d44a2a017b4)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwEiiKMn.png&hash=b3a63b16887f067667b87784a53a35b2cef14ca0)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZ0u8AHW.png&hash=848340c39024713add034fb3b971a014bf1d86e6)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUjD21jC.png&hash=24941fbaa5c266180d36424daa12456e3136f02e)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 16, 2017, 10:44:06 PM
Yes, those look like very good installations, and they all look very new which might be a factor. New being more up-to-date with current practices. Maybe like with Calif. and New York DOT's, does it depend on the engineers in the particular regional office of WSDOT? And each office kind of does its own thing? And some do better than others?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2017, 10:53:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2017, 10:44:06 PM
Yes, those look like very good installations, and they all look very new which might be a factor. New being more up-to-date with current practices. Maybe like with Calif. and New York DOT's, does it depend on the engineers in the particular regional office of WSDOT? And each office kind of does its own thing? And some do better than others?

WSDOT is split into six regions: (clockwise from Whatcom County) Northwest, North Central, Eastern, South Central, Southwest, and Olympic.

The first and second photos are from the Southwest Region (Dollar Corner and Ridgefield, respectively). The third and fourth are from the Eastern region (Spokane Valley and Fairwood, respectively). The set of photos I posted above are from the Northwest Region. Which is annoying, because the Northwest Region is usually pretty good at signalization.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 20, 2017, 03:04:03 AM
Washington continuing its fine tradition of placing signals right on top of each other. This isn't a state install, but seriously, what the fuck....(brand new signal, too)

https://goo.gl/RmN5db -- the right mast has no signal, so I'm not sure why they couldn't move one of the through heads over there.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvsNWg93.png&hash=44990e8ed5307e6a175dbb91ca1a6b28ffd6d9bc)



Another atrocious setup, this time in Longview. This might be a state install, but I'm not sure (it's along Hwy 4).

https://goo.gl/uLVgMk -- This signal was installed in the age of good signal placement, so I'm not sure how this setup slipped through the cracks.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGMVbDqz.png&hash=384e1cdad3838c7be1e3e29b2cade86c1ce34e0f)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 20, 2017, 01:43:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 20, 2017, 03:04:03 AM
Washington continuing its fine tradition of placing signals right on top of each other. This isn't a state install, but seriously, what the fuck....(brand new signal, too)

https://goo.gl/RmN5db -- the right mast has no signal, so I'm not sure why they couldn't move one of the through heads over there.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvsNWg93.png&hash=44990e8ed5307e6a175dbb91ca1a6b28ffd6d9bc)

I can somewhat understand this one though, given the positioning of the lanes and other poles in comparison to the signal heads. The left through signal appears to align with the center of the through lane...

It's interesting to note that this mast arm already has other tenons on it already, so it wouldn't be hard to move the overhead through signals over to get decent separation (and then maybe turn the heads a bit to help with visibility).

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on May 20, 2017, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 20, 2017, 01:43:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 20, 2017, 03:04:03 AM
Washington continuing its fine tradition of placing signals right on top of each other. This isn't a state install, but seriously, what the fuck....(brand new signal, too)

https://goo.gl/RmN5db -- the right mast has no signal, so I'm not sure why they couldn't move one of the through heads over there.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvsNWg93.png&hash=44990e8ed5307e6a175dbb91ca1a6b28ffd6d9bc)

I can somewhat understand this one though, given the positioning of the lanes and other poles in comparison to the signal heads. The left through signal appears to align with the center of the through lane...

It's interesting to note that this mast arm already has other tenons on it already, so it wouldn't be hard to move the overhead through signals over to get decent separation (and then maybe turn the heads a bit to help with visibility).

The problem here is with the mast arm itself - it's not long enough. The turn signal should be about 8 feet to the left. The right through signal is over the right edge line - any further right and you'd have difficulty seeing it at a distance because of the other mast arms at the intersection (see GSV from 200 feet back (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5786902,-122.1288816,3a,58.4y,314.45h,81.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swnunZJo8Tr_eMMWa_weRPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 25, 2017, 12:52:54 AM
Jakeroot, in your photos I noticed that the street signs seem to either: be level or they are not. But, if so what would they be leveled to? The straitest portion of a cured mast? It must be like hanging a picture frame where one DOT worker is in a bucket truck and one is on the groud saying, "Up a little more. No, no, no, down and to the right just a hair!"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 25, 2017, 03:30:36 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 25, 2017, 12:52:54 AM
Jakeroot, in your photos I noticed that the street signs seem to either: be level or they are not. But, if so what would they be leveled to? The straitest portion of a cured mast? It must be like hanging a picture frame where one DOT worker is in a bucket truck and one is on the groud saying, "Up a little more. No, no, no, down and to the right just a hair!"

I would think, ideally, the sign should be parallel to the flat ground below. Attaching a magnetic level to the sign during mounting should make accomplishing that easy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 25, 2017, 03:39:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 25, 2017, 03:30:36 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on May 25, 2017, 12:52:54 AM
Jakeroot, in your photos I noticed that the street signs seem to either: be level or they are not. But, if so what would they be leveled to? The straitest portion of a cured mast? It must be like hanging a picture frame where one DOT worker is in a bucket truck and one is on the groud saying, "Up a little more. No, no, no, down and to the right just a hair!"

I would think, ideally, the sign should be parallel to the flat ground below. Attaching a magnetic level to the sign during mounting should make accomplishing that easy.

Indeed. Street blades (well, any sign) should always be parallel with the ground. I've only seen one street blade that was mounted parallel to the mast arm, but it only lasted three days before being aligned to the street (as it should have). Perhaps there are jurisdictions that mount them parallel to the mast arm, but I've never heard of, or seen such a thing.

Arkansas Roadgeek, which image above was it that had the crooked street blade? All the images that I posted have street blades parallel to the ground.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on May 26, 2017, 08:36:30 PM
[qoute](https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN)
UT-US191-ArchesS (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
[/quote]

If I am not mistaken,  these are very new lights.  I drove thru there right after Easter and I didn't recall seeing them then.  We visted Arches today and unfortunately we came and went from the south. 

One interesting factoid:  Despite a long frontage road leading up to the "toll booths" for the park, if traffic backs up to and onto US-191, you are required to pass the entrance, turn around and try to enter again.  Problem is, if coming from the south, you must go north 5 MILES before you can (legally) turn around.  Coming in from the north, you only have to go about a mile or less.

We got there about 11am today, and the frontage road was lined up 3/4th of the way -- stI'll took us between 30-45 minutes to get up to the 2 entry toll booths.

My Mom-in-law was with us so instead of paying the $25 entry fee, she bought the $10 lifetime senior pass.  I mention this that if you are, or have access to a senior, the $10 lifetime pass is slated to jump to $80 by year end.  Since my mom-in-law doesn't drive, she will be our passage into the area parks!!!

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 26, 2017, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on May 26, 2017, 08:36:30 PM
If I am not mistaken,  these are very new lights.  I drove thru there right after Easter and I didn't recall seeing them then.  We visted Arches today and unfortunately we came and went from the south.

Are you talking about this post, from two pages back? I think it's safe to say you are, but please insert the relevant quote next time. thanks!

Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 09, 2017, 09:27:33 AM
Just wanted to jump in and share this traffic signal photo from the entrance to Arches NP in Moab, UT.  It's a combination of a constant-burning green and an FYA, which I hadn't seen before.  The photo is taken facing south. Left-turning traffic from the left ends up on a left-hand merge ramp that takes up the center lane until it dissipates farther ahead.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN)
UT-US191-ArchesS (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on May 27, 2017, 11:00:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2017, 09:03:54 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on May 26, 2017, 08:36:30 PM
If I am not mistaken,  these are very new lights.  I drove thru there right after Easter and I didn't recall seeing them then.  We visted Arches today and unfortunately we came and went from the south.

Are you talking about this post, from two pages back? I think it's safe to say you are, but please insert the relevant quote next time. thanks!

Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 09, 2017, 09:27:33 AM
Just wanted to jump in and share this traffic signal photo from the entrance to Arches NP in Moab, UT.  It's a combination of a constant-burning green and an FYA, which I hadn't seen before.  The photo is taken facing south. Left-turning traffic from the left ends up on a left-hand merge ramp that takes up the center lane until it dissipates farther ahead.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34312408082_8007978a12_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN)
UT-US191-ArchesS (https://flic.kr/p/Uh54uN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

Sorry, I hit the REPLY tab instead of the QUOTE tab.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification. This installation (https://goo.gl/maps/S2EztMvkxuS2) seems silly and overkill to me as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 02, 2017, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2

Something tells me that's not MUTCD approved.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 02, 2017, 11:38:42 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification.

Yeah this setup is crazy from every way I look at it...

In that older street view image the turn signals had red balls instead of red arrows with only the lone up green one on the right side of the one way street. I can see the confusion it caused with drivers unfamiliar with that intersection (especially at night) with so many left turn signals. At least the red arrows alone are a huge improvement.

That 4 head signal in the current image though is ridiculously dumb. To me it would've been better if the permanent greens (either one or two, wouldn't matter in this case) were mounted over the lanes via mast arm and the left turn signals remain ground mounted. The next signal in the background is mast mounted anyway
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2017, 12:50:41 PM
Quote from: plain on June 02, 2017, 11:38:42 AM
That 4 head signal in the current image though is ridiculously dumb. To me it would've been better if the permanent greens (either one or two, wouldn't matter in this case) were mounted over the lanes via mast arm and the left turn signals remain ground mounted. The next signal in the background is mast mounted anyway

I disagree. The signals seem very well placed to me. Overhead signals are vastly over-rated. The four signal heads together ensure excellent visibility not only for those approaching the left turn, but also for those waiting at the stop line. The perma-green arrows are a point of contention already, so I'm not sure why they'd need to be on a mast arm.

As for what I might change, I'd replace the perma-green arrows with a standard three-head signal. There's a crosswalk right where the perma-green signal is. They signalized the other two crosswalks. Are they expecting people to cross against that perma-green arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on June 02, 2017, 02:19:12 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 02, 2017, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2

Something tells me that's not MUTCD approved.

I have no idea why they decided to put the green arrow second from the top.  I don't think that makes sense no matter what your guidelines are.  The powerlines above the intersection kind of mess up the potential for an overhead signal (and trying to get ComEd to move their infrastructure is always a fiasco that you avoid if possible).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 04:13:31 PM
Get a chainsaw and cut down one of their utility poles. I'm sure that'd get them to move. :awesomeface:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on June 02, 2017, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 02, 2017, 02:19:12 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 02, 2017, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2

Something tells me that's not MUTCD approved.

I have no idea why they decided to put the green arrow second from the top.  I don't think that makes sense no matter what your guidelines are.  The powerlines above the intersection kind of mess up the potential for an overhead signal (and trying to get ComEd to move their infrastructure is always a fiasco that you avoid if possible).

Actually, although it's odd, it is MUTCD compliant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 02, 2017, 08:54:45 PM
Re: Jakeroot's comment that "overhead signals are vastly over-rated", I respectfully disagree, BUT I think post/pole mounted signals are equally useful. I've always thought the most effective signal configurations were a combination of overhead and post/pole mounts as commonly seen in California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2017, 10:03:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 02, 2017, 08:54:45 PM
Re: Jakeroot's comment that "overhead signals are vastly over-rated", I respectfully disagree, BUT I think post/pole mounted signals are equally useful. I've always thought the most effective signal configurations were a combination of overhead and post/pole mounts as commonly seen in California.

I may have, err, definitely misspoke. Overhead signals certainly have their place. In this particular situation, however, I feel that post-mounted signals alone work really well. Especially considering the odd angles of the intersection. At most intersections, a combination of overhead and post-mounted signals are best.

Perhaps unrelated; I do feel as though we jump to overhead signals too quickly. In many situations, post-mounted signals alone work exceptionally well. In most (all?) jurisdictions, post-mounted signals are considered secondary to the overhead primary signal heads. I've always felt this was backwards. There are no situations where overhead signals alone get the job done. They can often be unsightly and hard to see if there's too many vehicles in front or maybe a tall vehicle. There are certainly situations where post-mounted signals are hard to see (cheifly at 2+ lane approaches). In those situations, you'd have both. But like small, two lane intersections, post-only works just fine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 10:19:10 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 02, 2017, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 02, 2017, 02:19:12 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 02, 2017, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2

Something tells me that's not MUTCD approved.

I have no idea why they decided to put the green arrow second from the top.  I don't think that makes sense no matter what your guidelines are.  The powerlines above the intersection kind of mess up the potential for an overhead signal (and trying to get ComEd to move their infrastructure is always a fiasco that you avoid if possible).

Actually, although it's odd, it is MUTCD compliant.

Holy crap, your right. Except in some ramp meters or toll plazas, I always thought a red indication could not be right next to (or on top of) a green one.

Quote from: MUTCD 4D.09.03The relative positions of signal sections in a vertically-arranged signal face, from top to bottom, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW

Regardless, even though it would require additional brackets, I would have rather seen the two directions split into separate stacks, similar to this.

Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2017, 12:50:41 PM


As for what I might change, I'd replace the perma-green arrows with a standard three-head signal. There's a crosswalk right where the perma-green signal is. They signalized the other two crosswalks. Are they expecting people to cross against that perma-green arrow?

Agree on the ped xing conflict. I don't think I've ever seen anyone actually wait for the light to cross here, but at least they have legal accommodations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on June 09, 2017, 08:10:55 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 10:19:10 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 02, 2017, 05:05:40 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 02, 2017, 02:19:12 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 02, 2017, 10:03:16 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2

Something tells me that's not MUTCD approved.

I have no idea why they decided to put the green arrow second from the top.  I don't think that makes sense no matter what your guidelines are.  The powerlines above the intersection kind of mess up the potential for an overhead signal (and trying to get ComEd to move their infrastructure is always a fiasco that you avoid if possible).

Actually, although it's odd, it is MUTCD compliant.

Holy crap, your right. Except in some ramp meters or toll plazas, I always thought a red indication could not be right next to (or on top of) a green one.

Quote from: MUTCD 4D.09.03The relative positions of signal sections in a vertically-arranged signal face, from top to bottom, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW

Regardless, even though it would require additional brackets, I would have rather seen the two directions split into separate stacks, similar to this.

Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2017, 12:50:41 PM


As for what I might change, I'd replace the perma-green arrows with a standard three-head signal. There's a crosswalk right where the perma-green signal is. They signalized the other two crosswalks. Are they expecting people to cross against that perma-green arrow?

Agree on the ped xing conflict. I don't think I've ever seen anyone actually wait for the light to cross here, but at least they have legal accommodations.

I agree there should be a full 3-section for the crosswalk. But if they don't want to fully signalize the crosswalk, I think a lopsided dolly would be suitable here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on June 11, 2017, 06:28:20 AM
 
Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 09, 2017, 08:10:55 AM
I agree there should be a full 3-section for the crosswalk. But if they don't want to fully signalize the crosswalk, I think a lopsided dolly would be suitable here.

We have a setup like that here in Perth - the sighting board makes it look a bit less off-balance:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGYOIDcu.png&hash=9bc158b0439272e19f7db962a7427f1811cb87a8)
https://www.google.com/maps/@-31.8678268,115.8015741,3a,50.5y,79.44h,89.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-DtEM88kz867otrGwlkIYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@-31.8678268,115.8015741,3a,50.5y,79.44h,89.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-DtEM88kz867otrGwlkIYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 11, 2017, 07:39:00 AM
OkDOT appears to have discovered the reflective border option and is deploying it on all of their signals, replacing the backplates. The new backplates have little vent slits in them to reduce wind resistance. It makes it easy to spot which signals are state-maintained and which are city-maintained, as Norman has only used reflective borders on a few of their newer signals, and OKC doesn't use them at all, as far as I know.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 12, 2017, 11:57:14 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification. This installation (https://goo.gl/maps/S2EztMvkxuS2) seems silly and overkill to me as well.
I would love the opportunity to ask a DOT what their thought process was behind something, just to see what they have to say about it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 12, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 12, 2017, 11:57:14 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification. This installation (https://goo.gl/maps/S2EztMvkxuS2) seems silly and overkill to me as well.

I would love the opportunity to ask a DOT what their thought process was behind something, just to see what they have to say about it.

If your local agencies are transparent enough, there's usually contact information provided online for those heading the projects. They could usually answer your questions.

I've taken this route before, and I've always gotten a response.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 13, 2017, 01:25:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 12, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 12, 2017, 11:57:14 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification. This installation (https://goo.gl/maps/S2EztMvkxuS2) seems silly and overkill to me as well.

I would love the opportunity to ask a DOT what their thought process was behind something, just to see what they have to say about it.
If your local agencies are transparent enough, there's usually contact information provided online for those heading the projects. They could usually answer your questions.

I've taken this route before, and I've always gotten a response.
Well, I was thinking about just walking up and being like, "Guys, what the hell is that green upside down stop sign doing there?" So, I have actually contacted "A Pirate's favorite DOT" (Now) and asked them about a few things, before. But, really there was truth and a bit of sarcasm to my statement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 13, 2017, 02:27:43 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 13, 2017, 01:25:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 12, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 12, 2017, 11:57:14 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 02, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 02, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Do those two right lanes really even need a signal? And if so, why not just use a separate signal head (or two)?

I would agree...perma-green installations seem silly to me. They also already have the solo up arrow on the right side (https://goo.gl/maps/Ehxd5LZ9MTK2) In any case, if they're going to have it, and insist on including it in the same stack, it should be just above the left green arrow, not just below the red indication. Based on the Google imagery dates, it looks like the signal in the island was a "recent" modification. This installation (https://goo.gl/maps/S2EztMvkxuS2) seems silly and overkill to me as well.

I would love the opportunity to ask a DOT what their thought process was behind something, just to see what they have to say about it.
If your local agencies are transparent enough, there's usually contact information provided online for those heading the projects. They could usually answer your questions.

I've taken this route before, and I've always gotten a response.

Well, I was thinking about just walking up and being like, "Guys, what the hell is that green upside down stop sign doing there?" So, I have actually contacted "A Pirate's favorite DOT" (Now) and asked them about a few things, before. But, really there was truth and a bit of sarcasm to my statement.

:thumbsup:

I would be a bit cautious approaching a group of workers. Mostly because they aren't the ones who make the calls. They are usually just following orders (though sometimes they cock up, resulting in what we see in the various bad/ugly/erroneous threads). Though you could ask whether it's a city, county, or state project, to narrow down who it is that you need to contact. Or you could just ask who their boss is, so that you could contact them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 13, 2017, 08:19:07 AM
Very true! Fort Smith uses federal money to build highways within city limits, so I guess they have (ARDOT) come out and inspect the work to make sure it is up to state standards. So, signage would fall under the same realm? Maybe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 13, 2017, 08:34:28 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 13, 2017, 08:19:07 AM
Very true! Fort Smith uses federal money to build highways within city limits, so I guess they have (ARDOT) come out and inspect the work to make sure it is up to state standards. So, signage would fall under the same realm? Maybe.

It all depends where that money is coming from and flowing thru.  If Fort Smith applied for and received that money directly from the feds, there's little state oversight involved.  The city will use their policies (which should mirror the state and fed policies and MUTCD) to do the work.  If ARDOT grants or loans the money to the city, they may have more oversight as to how that money is spent.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 13, 2017, 09:19:30 PM
In past years I've written letters to Nassau County DPW re: traffic signal installations and issues, and I've usually gotten a reasonable response. Actually got a few minor changes done too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 13, 2017, 09:44:12 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 13, 2017, 09:19:30 PM
In past years I've written letters to Nassau County DPW re: traffic signal installations and issues, and I've usually gotten a reasonable response. Actually got a few minor changes done too.

I've had similar success. Just recently, I emailed a town near me, to inform them that one of their installations lacked the required two through signals (this was a main street, nothing to do with off-ramps). I told them to install a new through signal on the mast. Several weeks and emails later, up pops a new through signal, and on the mast, as I suggested.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 13, 2017, 11:01:58 PM
Quote from: MUTCD 4D.09.03The relative positions of signal sections in a vertically-arranged signal face, from top to bottom, shall be as follows:
CIRCULAR RED
Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
CIRCULAR YELLOW
CIRCULAR GREEN
Straight-through GREEN ARROW
Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
Left-turn GREEN ARROW
Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
Right-turn GREEN ARROW

The writers of the MUTCD probably never imagined that the specific setup pictured would actually occur, without the yellow circular that would be expected with stop-and-go for the straight-thru movement.  The continuous green for straight ahead is a unique situation that makes for a pretty unique setup.

It also means that this MDC legacy setup on Revere Beach Parkway is actually not in the MUTCD-compliant order, even though it sure looks more normal--it operates in exactly the same manner as the Illinois one above: straight green arrow always on, green-yellow-red-green left arrows.






Doesn't the MDC one actually look more normal than the Illinois one, even though the Illinois one is apparently right?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 13, 2017, 11:09:08 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 13, 2017, 11:01:58 PM
Doesn't the MDC one actually look more normal than the Illinois one, even though the Illinois one is apparently right?

It does, although I still think the straight arrow should be on another signal head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 13, 2017, 11:34:13 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:09:08 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 13, 2017, 11:01:58 PM
Doesn't the MDC one actually look more normal than the Illinois one, even though the Illinois one is apparently right?

It does, although I still think the straight arrow should be on another signal head.

You'd end up with a single perma-green up arrow on a pole, which in my opinion, looks rather bizarre. I'd almost prefer a standard three head signal, where the yellow and red didn't operate.

IMO, both the MDC and Illinois installs look just fine (though a pedestrian signal might be better for the Illinois example, as discussed upthread by DaBigE and myself). Signals mounted in the center, visible from both the left and straight lanes, should contain information pertaining to both movements. This is why, in the IL example, the far left and far right signals aren't combo signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 13, 2017, 11:34:13 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:09:08 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 13, 2017, 11:01:58 PM
Doesn't the MDC one actually look more normal than the Illinois one, even though the Illinois one is apparently right?

It does, although I still think the straight arrow should be on another signal head.

You'd end up with a single perma-green up arrow on a pole, which in my opinion, looks rather bizarre. I'd almost prefer a standard three head signal, where the yellow and red didn't operate.

IMO, both the MDC and Illinois installs look just fine (though a pedestrian signal might be better for the Illinois example, as discussed upthread by DaBigE and myself). Signals mounted in the center, visible from both the left and straight lanes, should contain information pertaining to both movements. This is why, in the IL example, the far left and far right signals aren't combo signals.

The perma-green doesn't sound so bad to me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 12:40:42 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.

I believe something like this violates the MUTCD (2nd Ave, Seattle), but without overhead signals, you sometimes have to use combo signals due to a limited number of mounting places.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyM93oyS.jpg&hash=1d5edc40a879a66f24ca22a4ab3d4ad4d280d84b)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 14, 2017, 12:59:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 12:40:42 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.

I believe something like this violates the MUTCD (2nd Ave, Seattle), but without overhead signals, you sometimes have to use combo signals due to a limited number of mounting places.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyM93oyS.jpg&hash=1d5edc40a879a66f24ca22a4ab3d4ad4d280d84b)

That is indeed what I was thinking. I like the bike signal, though.

Which reminds me, there is a doghouse bike signal on South Jordan Parkway westbound at UT-85 north. Has anyone ever seen anything like that before?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 01:10:44 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 12:59:01 AM
Which reminds me, there is a doghouse bike signal on South Jordan Parkway westbound at UT-85 north. Has anyone ever seen anything like that before?

I've never heard of such a thing. I checked Street View, but it's not available on that section of roadway yet. Have you observed its operation? Bikes typically perform hook turns at intersections (crossing one leg at a time) so I'm curious to see what fills the five signals. Is it like a combo signal that combines bike and vehicle signals?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 14, 2017, 01:56:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 01:10:44 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 12:59:01 AM
Which reminds me, there is a doghouse bike signal on South Jordan Parkway westbound at UT-85 north. Has anyone ever seen anything like that before?

I've never heard of such a thing. I checked Street View, but it's not available on that section of roadway yet. Have you observed its operation? Bikes typically perform hook turns at intersections (crossing one leg at a time) so I'm curious to see what fills the five signals. Is it like a combo signal that combines bike and vehicle signals?

I wasn't there long enough to see how it worked, since I was turning right. It was in the median on the opposite side of 85 north, facing westbound traffic. When the through light was red, the top light (which was a bicycle) of the doghouse was red.

All the cross streets to SR-85 use 2 intersections to cross it (going east, there is a light for southbound 85, and then a few hundred feet away, there is a separate light for 85 north. The lanes on that road now will be exits of a future freeway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 14, 2017, 02:09:04 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 12:59:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 12:40:42 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.

I believe something like this violates the MUTCD (2nd Ave, Seattle), but without overhead signals, you sometimes have to use combo signals due to a limited number of mounting places.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyM93oyS.jpg&hash=1d5edc40a879a66f24ca22a4ab3d4ad4d280d84b)

That is indeed what I was thinking. I like the bike signal, though.

Which reminds me, there is a doghouse bike signal on South Jordan Parkway westbound at UT-85 north. Has anyone ever seen anything like that before?
That Bike sign is extremely small, it seems.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 14, 2017, 02:45:46 PM
Here's a link to a photo of that sign (https://flic.kr/p/VcQUeJ).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 14, 2017, 04:40:34 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 02:45:46 PM
Here's a link to a photo of that sign (https://flic.kr/p/VcQUeJ).

I would love to see how that doghouse bike signal works. I've never seen anything like that. I wonder what the reasoning behind that design is
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 05:04:05 PM
Quote from: plain on June 14, 2017, 04:40:34 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 02:45:46 PM
Here's a link to a photo of that sign (https://flic.kr/p/VcQUeJ).

I would love to see how that doghouse bike signal works. I've never seen anything like that. I wonder what the reasoning behind that design is

Looks like the bike lane is on the left, too. What the hell, Utah!?

The photo is great, but I think we need video now.  :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 14, 2017, 05:30:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 12:40:42 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.

I believe something like this violates the MUTCD (2nd Ave, Seattle), but without overhead signals, you sometimes have to use combo signals due to a limited number of mounting places.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyM93oyS.jpg&hash=1d5edc40a879a66f24ca22a4ab3d4ad4d280d84b)

Or they could use longer and/or separate mounting brackets to get more separation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 08:20:50 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 14, 2017, 05:30:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 12:40:42 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 13, 2017, 11:52:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought combo signals violated the MUTCD.

I believe something like this violates the MUTCD (2nd Ave, Seattle), but without overhead signals, you sometimes have to use combo signals due to a limited number of mounting places.

http://i.imgur.com/yM93oyS.jpg

Or they could use longer and/or separate mounting brackets to get more separation.

The use of a single mounting bracket is a bit odd. In this sort of situation, you'd typically see the signals mounted on either side of the mast. The signals appear to be weighing down the mounting bracket.

Seattle's new solution was to go overhead. Seems like the obvious solution here, but I really hate to see post-mounted signals go.

Image (below) from Seattle Bike Blog (https://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2016/01/19/new-2nd-ave-traffic-signals-clear-up-confusion/) (also this thread a dozen pages back). Note that the old post-mounted signals were a single, 6-aspect assembly, not two frankensteined together (like above).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1p40p3gwj70rhpc423s8rzjaz-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F01%2Fbeforeafter2ndwd.jpg&hash=a3f81c957b4c863382712e978d6433d2db336bf8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 14, 2017, 09:13:13 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7920071,-122.4092106,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbluzpIHMBNKiZOkgAO3ZMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7921185,-122.409002,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soJh0rxuRM8Qg7rHbySltfg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7920071,-122.4092106,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbluzpIHMBNKiZOkgAO3ZMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This signal at California and Powell Streets in SF is the strangest looking signal I have ever seen. No yellow or no green.

I take the booth on the corner the heads are sticking out of were once used for manual signal operations way back.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 09:49:10 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 14, 2017, 09:13:13 PM
This signal at California and Powell Streets in SF is the strangest looking signal I have ever seen. No yellow or no green.

Judging by the mannerisms of the cars in Street View, it appears to be a four-way stop with no stop signs. Which is unusual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 14, 2017, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 09:49:10 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 14, 2017, 09:13:13 PM
This signal at California and Powell Streets in SF is the strangest looking signal I have ever seen. No yellow or no green.

Judging by the mannerisms of the cars in Street View, it appears to be a four-way stop with no stop signs. Which is unusual.

That would suck to get a ticket for not stopping at an implied stop sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 15, 2017, 12:57:39 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 14, 2017, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2017, 09:49:10 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 14, 2017, 09:13:13 PM
This signal at California and Powell Streets in SF is the strangest looking signal I have ever seen. No yellow or no green.

Judging by the mannerisms of the cars in Street View, it appears to be a four-way stop with no stop signs. Which is unusual.

That would suck to get a ticket for not stopping at an implied stop sign.

Well, a flashing red light is still a stop sign. But me thinks a stop sign gets more attention than a flashing red. Maybe...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on June 15, 2017, 08:29:18 AM
If I remember right, those lights in SF can go to solid red to allow for cable car movements. Since a stop sign would contradict a red light, they probably can't install them here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 15, 2017, 08:38:37 AM
Its against the MUTCD to not have a stop sign installed with a flashing red beacon.  Even in the NJ Shore back when the cities there were only summer time resorts, STOP signs had to be erected when signals were in flash mode from September to May and even in Kissimmee where three stop lights are permanently flashing.  The red flasher on the signals cannot be sole traffic control device.

In NYC they used to use two section lights lacking a yellow.  It was allowed as the MUTCD did grandfather them in like side mount signals in Washington, DC and here in San Fran. 

I will bet this has to do with the cable cars having total right of way through this here intersection, as all cable cars must coast across it due to the two cable lines meeting at grade with crisscrossing cables.  The grip would have to be removed from the cable to avoid tangling with the other cross cable so it would have to free flow for sure.

  I would think that Sebastian would know the answer to this one or some other local Bay Area road enthusiasts.  I am anxious to know what controls the traffic here being no standard traffic control devices at this intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 15, 2017, 11:32:51 PM
Quote from: Jet380 on June 15, 2017, 08:29:18 AM
If I remember right, those lights in SF can go to solid red to allow for cable car movements. Since a stop sign would contradict a red light, they probably can't install them here.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 15, 2017, 08:38:37 AM
Its against the MUTCD to not have a stop sign installed with a flashing red beacon.

If so, the flashing red beacons should go, four stop signs should go up, and an advisory "cable cars do not stop" sign should be placed facing the relevant directions.

Or, a normal signal with cable-car pre-emption should be installed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 16, 2017, 08:40:21 AM
They might as well install a signal and have it set up like a regular railroad through the intersection.  When the cable cars reach the intersection it sets off a trip switch (like trains do approaching a grade crossing) that preempts the signal operation. 

In fact sooner or later SF is going to have to do that with all their preexisting signals as the side mounts are no longer approved by the MUTCD hence why DC has been installing mast arms as they once had all side mount signals within the district.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 16, 2017, 05:30:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 16, 2017, 08:40:21 AM
side mounts are no longer approved by the MUTCD hence why DC has been installing mast arms as they once had all side mount signals within the district.

Hang on, what? I didn't know about this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 16, 2017, 07:55:19 PM
Roadman65, where does the MUTCD say that side-mounts are not permitted?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Technically incorrect. The guidance is that pole-mounted signals should not be used by themselves. Guidance here is a number of overhead signals equal to the number of lanes minus 1, with a minimum of 1. MUTCD recommends having ALL primary faces overhead, with only supplementals pole-mounted. Primary faces governing turn movements should be always be overhead. See Table 4D-1 and the surrounding section (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/part4.pdf). Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 16, 2017, 11:03:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.

It still absolutely boggles my mind that both overhead and side-mounted signals, together, aren't a requirement. There are certainly scenarios where I think side-mount only works just fine, but overhead signals can easily be blocked by a tall vehicle. The MUTCD really needs to re-work the signals section to require both overhead and side-mounted signals. It just makes sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 16, 2017, 11:33:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2017, 11:03:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.

It still absolutely boggles my mind that both overhead and side-mounted signals, together, aren't a requirement. There are certainly scenarios where I think side-mount only works just fine, but overhead signals can easily be blocked by a tall vehicle. The MUTCD really needs to re-work the signals section to require both overhead and side-mounted signals. It just makes sense.

There are very few side mounted signals in my area, and I agree that having more of them would greatly increase signal visibility. More than half the time I'm at a light more than a few cars back, I can't see the signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on June 17, 2017, 12:12:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2017, 11:03:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.

It still absolutely boggles my mind that both overhead and side-mounted signals, together, aren't a requirement. There are certainly scenarios where I think side-mount only works just fine, but overhead signals can easily be blocked by a tall vehicle. The MUTCD really needs to re-work the signals section to require both overhead and side-mounted signals. It just makes sense.

I think it varies by state.  Here In Colorado, most major and secondary intersections will have overhead and side mounted (right side, left side or both sides).  Not as often at minor intersections, or on side streets at larger intersectiins (the main road will have them, though). 

Definitely helpful when you are stopped at an Intersection and can't see the overheads due to the vehicles in front of you. Also helpful if you.are driving right into the sunlight, side mounted lights are a great way to see the signal without having to position your hands to block the sun.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 17, 2017, 09:32:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 16, 2017, 07:55:19 PM
Roadman65, where does the MUTCD say that side-mounts are not permitted?
Not exactly  not permitted, but solely no. 
Quote from: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Technically incorrect. The guidance is that pole-mounted signals should not be used by themselves. Guidance here is a number of overhead signals equal to the number of lanes minus 1, with a minimum of 1. MUTCD recommends having ALL primary faces overhead, with only supplementals pole-mounted. Primary faces governing turn movements should be always be overhead. See Table 4D-1 and the surrounding section (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/part4.pdf). Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.
I am for having both, but if a place already has them and they work fine than why fix what is not broken.  It is what it is though unfortunately.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 17, 2017, 09:53:10 AM
QuoteIts against the MUTCD to not have a stop sign installed with a flashing red beacon.  Even in the NJ Shore back when the cities there were only summer time resorts, STOP signs had to be erected when signals were in flash mode from September to May and even in Kissimmee where three stop lights are permanently flashing.  The red flasher on the signals cannot be sole traffic control device.
Hahaha,you're funny! Arkansas does it all the time it seems. Either that or they don't replace the stop sign! I saw an intersection on a stretch of state highway that had a beacon, but no stop. Come to think of it, I have seen several setups like that in the state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 17, 2017, 03:44:36 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on June 17, 2017, 12:12:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2017, 11:03:01 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 16, 2017, 08:09:58 PM
Basically, studies have shown that overhead signals are superior because they're harder to block.

It still absolutely boggles my mind that both overhead and side-mounted signals, together, aren't a requirement. There are certainly scenarios where I think side-mount only works just fine, but overhead signals can easily be blocked by a tall vehicle. The MUTCD really needs to re-work the signals section to require both overhead and side-mounted signals. It just makes sense.

I think it varies by state.  Here In Colorado, most major and secondary intersections will have overhead and side mounted (right side, left side or both sides).  Not as often at minor intersections, or on side streets at larger intersectiins (the main road will have them, though). 

Definitely helpful when you are stopped at an Intersection and can't see the overheads due to the vehicles in front of you. Also helpful if you.are driving right into the sunlight, side mounted lights are a great way to see the signal without having to position your hands to block the sun.

Oh, no I understand that. Colorado has excellent signal-placement standards. As does California, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada, Arizona, and Illinois, amongst several other places.

My issue is that these states are technically going "above and beyond" the MUTCD. I'm not even sure what the MUTCD says on secondary signals, but it's definitely only a recommendation, and not a requirement. The only requirement is that two heads are provided for the through movement. That is not sufficient at all, and you end up getting a lot of really closely spaced signals like those I posted three pages back.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 17, 2017, 08:45:00 PM
If you read the Manual carefully, it does not specify either overhead or pole mounted heads. Sec. 4D.13 addresses lateral placement of required heads. At least one and preferably both (only one actually reqd.) heads must be in the driver's so called "cone-of-vision". See Figure 4D-4. If that requirement can be met with post/pole mounted heads, it is acceptable under the standard.

However, Sec. 4D.11.06 (Support) recommends one overhead signal-face per lane on the far side of the intersection (as compared to diagonal span). But that is only a strong suggestion, not a standard.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 18, 2017, 12:41:33 AM
One thing that annoys me is you get behind a truck in FL and being our signal heads are paired so close together you cannot see them.


NJ had them in many places on the sides and almost always one over the opposing traffic lane. NYC does too. So you will see around any semi or small truck.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 18, 2017, 12:49:46 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 17, 2017, 08:45:00 PM
If you read the Manual carefully, it does not specify either overhead or pole mounted heads. Sec. 4D.13 addresses lateral placement of required heads. At least one and preferably both (only one actually reqd.) heads must be in the driver's so called "cone-of-vision". See Figure 4D-4. If that requirement can be met with post/pole mounted heads, it is acceptable under the standard.

However, Sec. 4D.11.06 (Support) recommends one overhead signal-face per lane on the far side of the intersection (as compared to diagonal span). But that is only a strong suggestion, not a standard.
I always wonder whether a DOT sits down to read the MUTCD or if it is like any other ToS Agreements out there (i.e. skimmed and agreed to or not read at all and agreed to it anyway). :hmmm:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 18, 2017, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 18, 2017, 12:49:46 AM
I always wonder whether a DOT sits down to read the MUTCD or if it is like any other ToS Agreements out there (i.e. skimmed and agreed to or not read at all and agreed to it anyway). :hmmm:

It seems to depend vary on the particular DOT - some of them seem to since they take the national MUTCD and adapt it into a state version. 

Generally though I think most of the DOT's try to follow all of the should statements as well as the shall statements due to liability concerns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 18, 2017, 08:32:52 PM
Roadman65, you're right about New Jersey. Almost all signalized intersections there have either the second required head, or a 3rd head on the near side over the opposing lane on the back of the mast-arm for the opposing direction. Very smart on their part. Eliminates the problem of being behind a large truck blocking the view of both closely spaced heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 18, 2017, 08:49:08 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 18, 2017, 08:32:52 PM
Roadman65, you're right about New Jersey. Almost all signalized intersections there have either the second required head, or a 3rd head on the near side over the opposing lane on the back of the mast-arm for the opposing direction. Very smart on their part. Eliminates the problem of being behind a large truck blocking the view of both closely spaced heads.
As far as I have seen, Little Rock is the only city with such a signal setup in Arkansas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 18, 2017, 11:45:41 PM
Another weird Utah signal I have seen is this one (https://goo.gl/maps/dfMfqPbiu6M2).

Basically, it's a four-section head with red ball, red right arrow, yellow ball, green ball. The two red indications are only ever on at the same time, and it seems to emphasize that there is no right turn on red at this intersection because it's a CFI. It was a bit odd when I saw it at first, because it was a four section head with one green ball at the bottom.

This setup is installed at several of the CFI's along Bangerter. Has anyone seen this anywhere else, and is it allowed by the MUTCD? Wouldn't a setup with only right arrows be better, as the left turns here are already protected only?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 19, 2017, 10:59:32 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 18, 2017, 11:45:41 PM
This setup is installed at several of the CFI's along Bangerter. Has anyone seen this anywhere else, and is it allowed by the MUTCD? Wouldn't a setup with only right arrows be better, as the left turns here are already protected only?
Remember: The MUTCD is merely guidelines for how an intersection or other TCD should be configured and is not necessarily a requirement.

I personally have not seen this signal type in my state. We use the MUTCD, but we have policies that allow for flexibility (in that case I don't know why Arkansas doesn't use it's own).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 19, 2017, 06:25:48 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 18, 2017, 11:45:41 PM
Has anyone seen this anywhere else, and is it allowed by the MUTCD? Wouldn't a setup with only right arrows be better, as the left turns here are already protected only?

Seems rather pointless. The extra signal reminds me of this signal near my home. I don't see the reason why a three-head arrow couldn't have been used here. Right-on-red is still allowed with red arrows in Washington:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLg9ZOZIWx4
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 19, 2017, 06:54:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 19, 2017, 06:25:48 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 18, 2017, 11:45:41 PM
Has anyone seen this anywhere else, and is it allowed by the MUTCD? Wouldn't a setup with only right arrows be better, as the left turns here are already protected only?

Seems rather pointless. The extra signal reminds me of this signal near my home. I don't see the reason why a three-head arrow couldn't have been used here. Right-on-red is still allowed with red arrows in Washington:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLg9ZOZIWx4

Right-on-red is not allowed on red arrows in UT. To add to the overkill, there is an electronic no right turn sign (https://goo.gl/maps/FeJctJWjsA72) which turns off when the light is green/yellow. Seems like a waste when you could just put a "no turn on red" sign there, which is usually what is done at intersections where RTOR isn't allowed.

The reason right-on-red isn't allowed here is because this is a CFI, and a right on red here would conflict with the left turn movement from northbound Bangerter to 5400 S westbound, and the same goes for the opposite side.

If right turn is allowed on red, they will use a 3-head signal with a red ball and yellow/green arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 19, 2017, 07:41:32 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 19, 2017, 06:54:48 PM
Right-on-red is not allowed on red arrows in UT. To add to the overkill, there is an electronic no right turn sign (https://goo.gl/maps/FeJctJWjsA72) which turns off when the light is green/yellow. Seems like a waste when you could just put a "no turn on red" sign there, which is usually what is done at intersections where RTOR isn't allowed.

There is a similar electronic "No turn on red" sign (https://goo.gl/StFzy2) in Seattle, which is only displayed when the perpendicular crosswalk has a walk sign. Unlike the Bangerter example (where turning on red would require you to cross an entire carriageway before yielding to traffic from the left), this intersection could allow right turn on red because it's just a normal intersection. RTOR is only disallowed to prevent pedestrian conflicts.

The left turn signal should definitely just be a three-head arrow signal. I see no reason to use the four-head, red ball/red arrow setup. Seems to just be emphasis, at best.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 19, 2017, 08:54:18 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 18, 2017, 11:45:41 PM
Another weird Utah signal I have seen is this one (https://goo.gl/maps/dfMfqPbiu6M2).

Basically, it's a four-section head with red ball, red right arrow, yellow ball, green ball. The two red indications are only ever on at the same time, and it seems to emphasize that there is no right turn on red at this intersection because it's a CFI. It was a bit odd when I saw it at first, because it was a four section head with one green ball at the bottom.

This setup is installed at several of the CFI's along Bangerter. Has anyone seen this anywhere else, and is it allowed by the MUTCD? Wouldn't a setup with only right arrows be better, as the left turns here are already protected only?

Delaware has a vaguely similar setup; see Page 54/118 of http://deldot.gov/information/pubs_forms/manuals/de_mutcd/pdf/Part4-Highway-Traffic-Signals-December-2012-FINAL.pdf (http://deldot.gov/information/pubs_forms/manuals/de_mutcd/pdf/Part4-Highway-Traffic-Signals-December-2012-FINAL.pdf)

Quote from: Delaware MUTCD
Option:
01A
(DE Revision) On state-maintained roads, in locations where right turns may be prohibited during special circumstances, a shared signal face may be used consisting of the following signal indications: a CIRCULAR GREEN, CIRCULAR YELLOW, CIRCULAR RED  and right-turn RED ARROW. For additional emphasis, the NO TURN ON RED ARROW (R10-11-DE) sign may be used.

In the process of finding this, I did find a memo indicating that Delaware is no longer using the R10-11-DE sign.

As to compliance with the National MUTCD, I'm not seeing anything so far that would prohibit using both a a circular red and red arrow in the same head - probably something that will not be specifically address until someone brings it to FHWA's attention.

Going back to the Utah signal, I would certainly like to know the thought process behind the design there.  Seems to me if they wanted emphasis they could have gone with two red arrows and should have also used a far side head for the right turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 19, 2017, 09:35:26 PM
I remember the Delaware R10-11-DE sign and always disliked that the arrow depicted was a regular arrow; it seemed possibly confusing that the sign means "no right turn on red arrow" vs. "no turn on red to the right" (the latter of which isn't that sensible but you don't know what people will interpret signs as--plenty of drivers probably make off-the-wall interpretations).

That is why I liked this sign in Boulder, Colorado so much that when I noticed it last summer, I took a picture (as I waited dutifully for a green arrow).  It's totally obvious that the sign means no turn on red arrow--it says the word AND depicts a signal head arrow.
(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13892215_10106638211687498_9091063553009657908_n.jpg?oh=ea8b9d852c0ab50a31384a3168007303&oe=599DA316)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on June 19, 2017, 09:43:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 15, 2017, 08:38:37 AMIn NYC they used to use two section lights lacking a yellow.  It was allowed as the MUTCD did grandfather them in like side mount signals in Washington, DC and here in San Fran. 

I would not necessarily say the two-color traffic signals were exempt from new standards established in the early-1950s in New York City, because of the fact that the city's then Department of Traffic had a limited budget to modernize existing signalized intersections with three-color traffic signals. It was frankly a lengthy process, in which took around 54 years to complete.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 19, 2017, 09:50:40 PM
By the 1970's most traffic signals in NYC had been changed over to 3-color type.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: M3019C LPS20 on June 19, 2017, 09:58:04 PM
Yes, I would agree. That was mainly because the city's D.O.T. was in the process of modernizing major roads with computerized signal controllers. Queens was the first borough to have the technology first implented in 1969. Even so, quiet neighborhoods in areas of the city (with the exception of Staten Island) still had two-color traffic signals fully operable. They remained until their ultimate demise around 2006, and the last vehicular Ruleta traffic signals of the early-20th century remained until the beginning of the new millenium.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 19, 2017, 10:10:47 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 19, 2017, 09:35:26 PM
I remember the Delaware R10-11-DE sign and always disliked that the arrow depicted was a regular arrow; it seemed possibly confusing that the sign means "no right turn on red arrow" vs. "no turn on red to the right" (the latter of which isn't that sensible but you don't know what people will interpret signs as--plenty of drivers probably make off-the-wall interpretations).

There's also this non-standard version used in Lincoln, Nebraska:  Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8204577,-96.635481,3a,43.8y,44.02h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9dcA_xJpJJVC3ajZQt_Zyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 20, 2017, 12:57:10 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 19, 2017, 06:54:48 PM
Right-on-red is not allowed on red arrows in UT. To add to the overkill, there is an electronic no right turn sign (https://goo.gl/maps/FeJctJWjsA72) which turns off when the light is green/yellow. Seems like a waste when you could just put a "no turn on red" sign there, which is usually what is done at intersections where RTOR isn't allowed.

The reason right-on-red isn't allowed here is because this is a CFI, and a right on red here would conflict with the left turn movement from northbound Bangerter to 5400 S westbound, and the same goes for the opposite side.

If right turn is allowed on red, they will use a 3-head signal with a red ball and yellow/green arrows.

What's up with those green down arrows in the background over the left lane? Is that some sort of reversible lane or something?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 20, 2017, 09:48:25 PM
^ Looks like the center two lanes become reversible farther down - or as Utah seems to call, "flex lanes". (http://digitallibrary.utah.gov/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=31414) 

Then there's also this interesting looking signal farther down. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6530615,-111.9770173,3a,75y,59.85h,84.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssT6twsAW1NlDj78UXCSrBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 20, 2017, 10:41:17 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 20, 2017, 09:48:25 PM
^ Looks like the center two lanes become reversible farther down - or as Utah seems to call, "flex lanes". (http://digitallibrary.utah.gov/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=31414) 

Then there's also this interesting looking signal farther down. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6530615,-111.9770173,3a,75y,59.85h,84.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssT6twsAW1NlDj78UXCSrBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

If you're talking about the one with two red lights on top, that is done to emphasize the red signal. My best guess for why it's done here is that there might be a lot of crashes caused by people running res lights here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on June 20, 2017, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 20, 2017, 09:48:25 PM
^ Looks like the center two lanes become reversible farther down - or as Utah seems to call, "flex lanes". (http://digitallibrary.utah.gov/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=31414) 

Then there's also this interesting looking signal farther down. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6530615,-111.9770173,3a,75y,59.85h,84.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssT6twsAW1NlDj78UXCSrBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Affectionately known as Dolly Parton signals!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on June 21, 2017, 03:28:35 AM
Recently (as of a few weeks ago, maybe 3) Fort Smith installed overhead [Turning Vehicles YIELD To Peds] and that has got to be the most ignored sign the city or AHTD has installed down Garrison Avenue! I almost got hit by a car today. Either, find a way to do more to minigate this or just make all intersections on the Avenue protected right turns (Hehe). No, but really, this is an issue to some degree.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 21, 2017, 08:18:46 AM
Being the average driver now relies on the GPS (as figuring out things for yourself is no longer the option) many ignore signs on purpose as they are now irrelevant to the needs of the driver (as the GPS tells me everything) so they will just turn freely.

Its sad that we as humans have evolved so much on not using our own minds and senses that modern technology is what leads us and guides us through driving.  If a GPS were to tell you where stores were once in side a mall, people would be right in front of that store and their own minds would not alert them that their vision can see the words on the store's sign.  They would have to hear it themselves on the device.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 21, 2017, 12:23:12 PM
roadman65, could you please stop with the constant GPS bashing? People usually ignore pedestrians because they aren't used to seeing them, especially outside of downtown areas.

Honestly, if the alternative is to try and figure out a paper map while driving, I think we're much safer with GPSs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 21, 2017, 12:38:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 21, 2017, 08:18:46 AM
If a GPS were to tell you where stores were once in side a mall, people would be right in front of that store and their own minds would not alert them that their vision can see the words on the store's sign.  They would have to hear it themselves on the device.

I think most humans can read the store name on their own without a GPS.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 21, 2017, 05:28:49 PM
I agree with Roadman65 on this one. GPS's are part of the so called "dumbing down of America" and I for one do not own a GPS. I still prefer paper road-maps so I see the "big picture." But then again, I'm an old-school guy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 21, 2017, 06:39:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 21, 2017, 05:28:49 PM
I agree with Roadman65 on this one. GPS's are part of the so called "dumbing down of America" and I for one do not own a GPS. I still prefer paper road-maps so I see the "big picture." But then again, I'm an old-school guy.

Oh please. It's all relative. No one's dumber for not having learned how to read a map, because the value of map-reading dropped off dramatically over the last ten years.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 14, 2017, 12:47:42 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8672412,-71.887515,3a,37.5y,279.75h,91.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdwbFAblkc3p4tRPxPpVtiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Interesting that all but one direction is not 12-12-12.  Its a three way installation due to it being an intersection of two one way freeway ramps, but one direction of travel on the main road here gets 8-8-8.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 05:52:33 PM
Here's something I've never seen in the US before. A partial signal: https://goo.gl/SAERDA

Northbound on Grant St in Thornton, CO, at the intersection with Thornton Pkwy, the left turn is a standard 5-head, PPLT display. There's a repeater head on the far left mast, but the only repeated part of the signal are the two arrow displays. Once the arrow is gone, that corner of the intersection goes dark.

The three head signal above the two dark displays is the repeater for the perpendicular through movement.

I've seen this in other countries (South Africa mostly, I think AUS or NZ as well), but never in the US before. Anyone else seen this practice elsewhere in the country?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwS0Hmil.gif&hash=1660d150d2dcd548db61b6a2d7d6b4670c90dc84)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on July 14, 2017, 07:16:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 05:52:33 PM
Here's something I've never seen in the US before. A partial signal: https://goo.gl/SAERDA

I've seen similar set-ups in New York before, mainly outside of the city. Here's an example in Glens Falls: https://goo.gl/maps/8aK6GmCyins
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 14, 2017, 09:17:31 PM
Quote from: Ian on July 14, 2017, 07:16:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 05:52:33 PM
Here's something I've never seen in the US before. A partial signal: https://goo.gl/SAERDA

I've seen similar set-ups in New York before, mainly outside of the city. Here's an example in Glens Falls: https://goo.gl/maps/8aK6GmCyins

Heh, we went through there on my meet, but I didn't bother pointing it out as it's extremely common in this state. But I'd say that's more like a side-by-side or add-on arrow than a completely separate thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 09:37:34 PM
There used to be a similar one on Middle Neck Rd. in Great Neck, NY on Long Island, installed by Nassau County DPW. It has since been replaced by a post-mounted 5-stack. I'm not sure if partial heads are permitted by the MUTCD, but even if they are, I think they're a dumb idea.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 14, 2017, 09:17:31 PM
Quote from: Ian on July 14, 2017, 07:16:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 05:52:33 PM
Here's something I've never seen in the US before. A partial signal: https://goo.gl/SAERDA

I've seen similar set-ups in New York before, mainly outside of the city. Here's an example in Glens Falls: https://goo.gl/maps/8aK6GmCyins

Heh, we went through there on my meet, but I didn't bother pointing it out as it's extremely common in this state. But I'd say that's more like a side-by-side or add-on arrow than a completely separate thing.

Yeah. It's in the spirit of the Thornton signal (although it appears to be older), but it's not quite the same thing. It doesn't help that much of the country doesn't specify far left supplemental mast signals.

Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 09:37:34 PM
I'm not sure if partial heads are permitted by the MUTCD, but even if they are, I think they're a dumb idea.

The only use for them, as I see it, would be when a state DOT nominally doesn't permit green orb signals left of the median (WSDOT has this rule), but some sort of secondary signal is considered helpful for the approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 14, 2017, 10:31:39 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 09:37:34 PM
There used to be a similar one on Middle Neck Rd. in Great Neck, NY on Long Island, installed by Nassau County DPW. It has since been replaced by a post-mounted 5-stack. I'm not sure if partial heads are permitted by the MUTCD, but even if they are, I think they're a dumb idea.

The partial heads are not permitted by the national edition of the MUCTD:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/part4.pdf
Quote from: MUTCD 4D.08 Paragraphes 02 and 03Unless otherwise provided in this Manual for a particular application, each signal face at a signalized location shall have three, four, or five signal sections.   Unless otherwise provided in this Manual for a particular application, if a vertical signal face includes a cluster (see Section 4D.09), the signal face shall have at least three vertical positions.

A single-section signal face shall be permitted at a traffic control signal if it consists of a continuously-displayed GREEN ARROW signal indication that is being used to indicate a continuous movement.

Quote from: jakerootThe only use for them, as I see it, would be when a state DOT nominally doesn't permit green orb signals left of the median (WSDOT has this rule), but some sort of secondary signal is considered helpful for the approach.

If they don't want a circular green left of the median, but still want to have protected indications for the left turn, they need to go with flashing yellow arrow or flashing red arrow heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 10:38:27 PM
Jakeroot, Wisconsin seems to have a lot of unique rules. Don't they also require that there be a near-right corner signal head at all signalized locations? Or is that just a common practice? I like that idea btw!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 14, 2017, 11:03:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 10:38:27 PM
Jakeroot, Wisconsin seems to have a lot of unique rules. Don't they also require that there be a near-right corner signal head at all signalized locations? Or is that just a common practice? I like that idea btw!
That used to be the rule, but is more optional now but are still mostly installed everywhere except in Eau Claire.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 11:33:06 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 14, 2017, 10:31:39 PM
Quote from: jakerootThe only use for them, as I see it, would be when a state DOT nominally doesn't permit green orb signals left of the median (WSDOT has this rule), but some sort of secondary signal is considered helpful for the approach.

If they don't want a circular green left of the median, but still want to have protected indications for the left turn, they need to go with flashing yellow arrow or flashing red arrow heads.

Certainly now that's the case. An FYA is an easy fix to any odd PPLT setup (one that requires supplemental signal heads, where lead/lag is helpful, etc). But before the advent of the FYA, agencies were limited in their options (I think the Thornton signal pre-dates the FYA). You could convert to a protected-only signal, but studies may have shown that phasing to be unnecessary. What Thornton did here was unnecessary (far left green orbs are ubiquitous in Colorado and are very much permitted), but it's clever nonetheless.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2017, 11:50:25 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 14, 2017, 11:03:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2017, 10:38:27 PM
Jakeroot, Wisconsin seems to have a lot of unique rules. Don't they also require that there be a near-right corner signal head at all signalized locations? Or is that just a common practice? I like that idea btw!

That used to be the rule, but is more optional now but are still mostly installed everywhere except in Eau Claire.

While Eau Claire seems to be the "traffic control leader" in WI (they seem to be the first to do everything), I do feel like excluding near-side right and median-mounted signals is a mistake (for various reasons).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 15, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.

We refer to that as a bimodal arrow. VERY common in New York and I have seen it used somewhat-commonly elsewhere (think NJ was one place). NYSDOT generally stopped installing them when they adopted the national MUTCD in 2009 (Region 9 [Central New York] being a huge exception here), but Erie and Monroe Counties still put them up for all PPLT situations. Main rationales given were cost and reduced load on span wires. NYSDOT switched to exclusively doghouses around 2010 or so (and recently, there has been a shift to FYAs in much of the state), but there are still quite a few bimodals around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 15, 2017, 07:56:15 PM
^^
They are exceptionally common in the Pacific Northwest as well. Snohomish County, WA used them exclusively until conversion to FYA. They are the most common right-turn filter signal in Western Washington as well (far more common than 5-section towers, outside of Tacoma).

EDIT: To extend on cl94's comments, doghouses are most common with span wire installations around here. Bimodal signals seem to be used at mast-arm installations almost exclusively.

EDIT 2: They are also still being installed with alarming regularity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2017, 12:05:28 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 15, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.

We refer to that as a bimodal arrow. VERY common in New York and I have seen it used somewhat-commonly elsewhere (think NJ was one place). NYSDOT generally stopped installing them when they adopted the national MUTCD in 2009 (Region 9 [Central New York] being a huge exception here), but Erie and Monroe Counties still put them up for all PPLT situations. Main rationales given were cost and reduced load on span wires. NYSDOT switched to exclusively doghouses around 2010 or so (and recently, there has been a shift to FYAs in much of the state), but there are still quite a few bimodals around.

Some towns in Suffolk County NY are still installing new bimodal arrows. Suffolk county itself was installing them up until about 4 or 5 years ago, either as a 4 stack or an arrow next to the green ball, with the other balls directly above the green ball.

Are bimodal arrows allowed in the MUTCD outside of 3 stack FYA applications?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on July 16, 2017, 12:14:49 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.

This is the most common type of PPLT signal in Ontario. I have seen a few signals with separate yellow and green arrows, but they're a lot less common. In the Region of Waterloo, left green arrows flash, and we don't have FYA's, so this helps with colour blindness. I agree though that separate heads would be better for your first point. Your second point doesn't apply to Ontario since most 4-head signals are PPLT.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on July 16, 2017, 12:47:48 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.

Hawaii uses bimodal arrows exclusively for protected/permissive left turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2017, 12:49:44 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2017, 12:05:28 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 15, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on July 15, 2017, 07:12:36 PM
I was recently in the Kalispell/Whitefish area of MT and saw several PPLT signals where yellow and green arrows were combined into a single arrow. The order was from top to bottom, red ball-yellow ball-green ball-arrows.

Is this allowed, and has anyone seen it anywhere else? I would think it shouldn't be, for two reasons:
1. Color blind people might not be able to distinguish the yellow and green arrows, and
2. It could be confused with a fully split phased intersection, since that is what the four-light arrangement is usually used for.

We refer to that as a bimodal arrow. VERY common in New York and I have seen it used somewhat-commonly elsewhere (think NJ was one place). NYSDOT generally stopped installing them when they adopted the national MUTCD in 2009 (Region 9 [Central New York] being a huge exception here), but Erie and Monroe Counties still put them up for all PPLT situations. Main rationales given were cost and reduced load on span wires. NYSDOT switched to exclusively doghouses around 2010 or so (and recently, there has been a shift to FYAs in much of the state), but there are still quite a few bimodals around.

Some towns in Suffolk County NY are still installing new bimodal arrows. Suffolk county itself was installing them up until about 4 or 5 years ago, either as a 4 stack or an arrow next to the green ball, with the other balls directly above the green ball.

Are bimodal arrows allowed in the MUTCD outside of 3 stack FYA applications?

Yes. Several states use them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2017, 01:23:01 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2017, 12:05:28 AM
Are bimodal arrows allowed in the MUTCD outside of 3 stack FYA applications?

Yes...

Quote from: MUTCD 4D.09
If a dual-arrow signal section (capable of alternating between the display of a GREEN ARROW and a YELLOW ARROW signal indication) is used in a vertically-arranged signal face, the dual-arrow signal section shall occupy the same position relative to the other sections as the signal section that displays the GREEN ARROW signal indication in a vertically-arranged signal face would occupy.

(Thanks to jeffandnicole)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on July 16, 2017, 03:10:34 AM
Speaking of bimodal signals... Seattle Blvd S at 4th Ave S (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964005,-122.3287656,3a,36.5y,310.2h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scH_CqClDed3FAWWIOg7zsA!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). The left and right signals are normal (left arrows and diagonal right arrows, respectively), but the center signal has a red circle, a left bimodal green/yellow arrow, and a diagonal right bimodal green/yellow arrow. Even more strangely, the right turn comes on before the left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964319,-122.3287691,3a,75y,312.77h,90.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9KzG-X4i-o8IyU3Ykdd7Gw!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) (I think -- street view shows it staying on after the left instead, but I went by there recently and I remember a leading right turn), which makes the shared center lane somewhat problematic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 17, 2017, 12:37:32 AM
Thanks jakeroot and jeffandnicole. I havent read the MUTCD in a while.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 17, 2017, 12:46:06 AM
Quote from: jay8g on July 16, 2017, 03:10:34 AM
Speaking of bimodal signals... Seattle Blvd S at 4th Ave S (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964005,-122.3287656,3a,36.5y,310.2h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scH_CqClDed3FAWWIOg7zsA!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). The left and right signals are normal (left arrows and diagonal right arrows, respectively), but the center signal has a red circle, a left bimodal green/yellow arrow, and a diagonal right bimodal green/yellow arrow. Even more strangely, the right turn comes on before the left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964319,-122.3287691,3a,75y,312.77h,90.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9KzG-X4i-o8IyU3Ykdd7Gw!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) (I think -- street view shows it staying on after the left instead, but I went by there recently and I remember a leading right turn), which makes the shared center lane somewhat problematic.

That is one weird setup. Why not just use balls instead of left arrows, and make the middle signal a doghouse or other similar signal?

Something like this, except not a doghouse on the right (Ignore the shared left lane)

https://goo.gl/maps/GjXqG9XU1uS2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on July 17, 2017, 04:32:37 PM
Bi-modal arrows on PPLT signals are very common up here in Maine. Most vertical 4-section signals in the state (minus may be one or two FYA's) will have them, including the right turn signals (https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7217/7376254100_7b54cae626_o.jpg).

Pennsylvania is the opposite; there are virtually no bi-modal arrows anywhere in the state. In PA, especially around District 6 (Philadelphia area) there will be 4-section PPLT signals in a R-Y-G-GA arrangement with no yellow phase for the turns. The green arrow will go on for its phase, then just go dark. These are slowly being phased out, however.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ilpt4u on July 17, 2017, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2
I haven't heard any issues with that interchange, or the adjacent/"matching" one going the other direction on 13, about a mile away

I've turned into the Marion/Williamson County Airport/now Veterans Airport of Southern IL just a few times, and its not a bad light/interchange design at all. The Left Signal is plenty visible if you are turning Left

Even more fun is the 8-seater Cessna Turbo Prop Flight from Marion to St Louis! :P
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 17, 2017, 10:07:49 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 17, 2017, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2
I haven't heard any issues with that interchange, or the adjacent/"matching" one going the other direction on 13, about a mile away

I've turned into the Marion/Williamson County Airport/now Veterans Airport of Southern IL just a few times, and its not a bad light/interchange design at all. The Left Signal is plenty visible if you are turning Left

Even more fun is the 8-seater Cessna Turbo Prop Flight from Marion to St Louis! :P

Seagull intersections are unheard of in this part of the country. There are a couple in/near Columbus, OH and at least one in Maryland, but that's all I know of remotely close to the northeast.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 17, 2017, 12:46:06 AM
Quote from: jay8g on July 16, 2017, 03:10:34 AM
Speaking of bimodal signals... Seattle Blvd S at 4th Ave S (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964005,-122.3287656,3a,36.5y,310.2h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scH_CqClDed3FAWWIOg7zsA!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). The left and right signals are normal (left arrows and diagonal right arrows, respectively), but the center signal has a red circle, a left bimodal green/yellow arrow, and a diagonal right bimodal green/yellow arrow. Even more strangely, the right turn comes on before the left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5964319,-122.3287691,3a,75y,312.77h,90.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9KzG-X4i-o8IyU3Ykdd7Gw!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) (I think -- street view shows it staying on after the left instead, but I went by there recently and I remember a leading right turn), which makes the shared center lane somewhat problematic.

That is one weird setup. Why not just use balls instead of left arrows, and make the middle signal a doghouse or other similar signal?

Something like this, except not a doghouse on the right (Ignore the shared left lane)

https://goo.gl/maps/GjXqG9XU1uS2

Seattle doesn't really use doghouses. In fact, I don't know of any. They are used by surrounding agencies, but not by SDOT (AFAIK).

Seattle's old PPLT signal (all but one have been replaced by FYAs):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey27vyMxea4
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ilpt4u on July 17, 2017, 11:18:24 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 17, 2017, 10:07:49 PM
Seagull intersections are unheard of in this part of the country. There are a couple in/near Columbus, OH and at least one in Maryland, but that's all I know of remotely close to the northeast.
For whatever reason, the Southern IL IDOT District seems to like to try different things...

Just in Marion, you have that pair of seagull intersections on RT 13...Continue East to the I-57/IL 13 interchange, and its a SPUI -- Marion and Southern IL in general isn't the most Urban area...and then the next I-57 interchange to the north, The Hill Ave, is a DDI -- either the First or Second in the state (not sure if it opened before or after the I-88/IL 59 one up in Naperville). And a section of IL 13 on the east side of Marion is slated to potentially get Michigan Lefts instead of regular left turns...I don't think I've EVER seen Michigan Lefts in IL, ever.

Oh and then keep going West on IL 13, and you have the Overpass Interchange to Nowhere at 13 and Wolf Creek Road, that was just built...I'm sure IDOT had a reason...maybe...

They have not decided to try the Flashing Yellow yet, tho. And I don't think thats a bad thing
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 11:48:02 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2

Reminds me of the [mostly] non-backplated eye-level signals common in BC....

- Hwy 91 @ 72 Ave, Surrey (https://goo.gl/9HPDLh)
- Hwy 11 @ Valley Road, Abbotsford (https://goo.gl/srMU1z)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on July 19, 2017, 02:05:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 11:48:02 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2

Reminds me of the [mostly] non-backplated eye-level signals common in BC....

- Hwy 91 @ 72 Ave, Surrey (https://goo.gl/9HPDLh)
- Hwy 11 @ Valley Road, Abbotsford (https://goo.gl/srMU1z)
Looks a lot like our Swedish setup too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 19, 2017, 02:15:10 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 17, 2017, 10:07:49 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 17, 2017, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2
I haven't heard any issues with that interchange, or the adjacent/"matching" one going the other direction on 13, about a mile away

I've turned into the Marion/Williamson County Airport/now Veterans Airport of Southern IL just a few times, and its not a bad light/interchange design at all. The Left Signal is plenty visible if you are turning Left

Even more fun is the 8-seater Cessna Turbo Prop Flight from Marion to St Louis! :P

Seagull intersections are unheard of in this part of the country. There are a couple in/near Columbus, OH and at least one in Maryland, but that's all I know of remotely close to the northeast.

There's 2 in NJ I'm familiar with.

One with a light... https://goo.gl/maps/LzfgCjbW5aH2 (County Rt. 547 at the Joint Base MDL (Lakehurst Naval Base))

And one without... https://goo.gl/maps/fr8ePpnRL8H2 (Rt. 52 Causeway between Somers Point and OCNJ) (no separating barrier either).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 19, 2017, 03:29:11 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 17, 2017, 10:07:49 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 17, 2017, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2
I haven't heard any issues with that interchange, or the adjacent/"matching" one going the other direction on 13, about a mile away

I've turned into the Marion/Williamson County Airport/now Veterans Airport of Southern IL just a few times, and its not a bad light/interchange design at all. The Left Signal is plenty visible if you are turning Left

Even more fun is the 8-seater Cessna Turbo Prop Flight from Marion to St Louis! :P

Seagull intersections are unheard of in this part of the country. There are a couple in/near Columbus, OH and at least one in Maryland, but that's all I know of remotely close to the northeast.

There are plenty of these in Utah, only I believe they are called High T intersections here. Which is ironic, because the UT state bird is the California gull.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 19, 2017, 09:04:55 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2

I think 'Continuous Green T' is a much better name for this type of intersection.

There's been some of these around Peoria for years, though it looks like some have had the signals removed - I certainly seem to remember more than I am finding tonight.

* IL 29 at Cedar Hill Drive (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8492584,-89.5372866,3a,72.4y,27.4h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snfIE-rMqPVRHsmaruwmD9w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

* A possible former one on IL 29 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8293449,-89.5588668,3a,75y,357.44h,70.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBLe2VI16pHAg9x_W2o13zw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

* Possible former one on US 24. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5611386,-89.7519895,3a,18.5y,67.91h,81.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siMwfnAME7m2mA4HAb9MXJA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)  Appears to have handholes and former signal foundations.

* One on US 150 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.706825,-89.5345087,3a,60y,198.77h,86.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2sykma2k31qNp0WHZtL42Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on July 23, 2017, 03:39:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Seattle doesn't really use doghouses. In fact, I don't know of any. They are used by surrounding agencies, but not by SDOT (AFAIK).

I know of one set, bizarrely used at a split-phase intersection (6th and Lander (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5797541,-122.3259817,3a,75y,17.13h,81.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKswVVxjI571W3Bu0RgvJ4A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)).

Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 11:09:18 PM
Seattle's old PPLT signal (all but one have been replaced by FYAs):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey27vyMxea4

I know of a few of these that are still around (Boylston and Roanoke, and 25th NE and 44th, off the top of my head). Was this setup ever MUTCD-compliant or standard anywhere else?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 23, 2017, 10:09:40 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 19, 2017, 09:04:55 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 17, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
I found my first Illinois seagull intersection...and I feel conflicted.  I'm not sure if I like how inconspicuous the left turn signals are.  Is it a good or a bad thing that these left turn arrows are less noticeable? 

https://goo.gl/maps/wRqRJi5DuoJ2

I think 'Continuous Green T' is a much better name for this type of intersection.

There's been some of these around Peoria for years, though it looks like some have had the signals removed - I certainly seem to remember more than I am finding tonight.

* IL 29 at Cedar Hill Drive (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8492584,-89.5372866,3a,72.4y,27.4h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snfIE-rMqPVRHsmaruwmD9w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

* A possible former one on IL 29 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8293449,-89.5588668,3a,75y,357.44h,70.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBLe2VI16pHAg9x_W2o13zw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

* Possible former one on US 24. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5611386,-89.7519895,3a,18.5y,67.91h,81.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siMwfnAME7m2mA4HAb9MXJA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)  Appears to have handholes and former signal foundations.

* One on US 150 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.706825,-89.5345087,3a,60y,198.77h,86.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2sykma2k31qNp0WHZtL42Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

A few interesting ones in California:

PCH at Chautauqua in PAcific PAlisades:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.028324,-118.5196244,3a,75y,96.1h,76.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sltDz6SXF_TbZj-j0itg8Tw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en


La Cienega at Stocker in Ladera Heights (near Inglewood):

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9982028,-118.3698316,3a,75y,133.94h,82.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRFN0HAbSMRDNdAWqMnMvcg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 11:05:48 AM
This just looks bad ... and it's happening quite often when single signal heads have needed replacement in Virginia.  I've not seen this practice in other states using the yellow retro-reflective backplates, where different backplate styles are mixed in the same direction.

(https://preview.ibb.co/mcxRqQ/signal.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on July 27, 2017, 02:52:12 PM
I was unaware that retroreflective backplates were even a thing. Pretty sure I've never seen one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 27, 2017, 06:06:45 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 27, 2017, 02:52:12 PM
I was unaware that retroreflective backplates were even a thing. Pretty sure I've never seen one.
Its a relatively new thing. In Florida, it seems like every new signal installed in the past (probably) 2 years has the retroreflective backplates... Interestingly, it seemingly appeared out of nowhere, they started doing it on every light, I never saw any test period or "slower" phase in like I've seen on other signal changes like the FYA. Backplates were generally rare in a lot of parts of the state before the retroreflective ones became standard.

The other weird part is, at least around here, as they replace individual signal heads, they seemingly always install them with the retroreflective backplate, and then most of the time, they come back a few days later and take it off to make all the signals in the same direction match backplates, or occasionally they will add it to the other existing signal heads in that direction. I haven't seen any left in a state similiar to that photo for more then a couple weeks (or at least when the construction signs come down if it is part of a larger project)

The one thing I really like about the retroreflective backplates is when the power is out, especially at night, its now really easy to see where the signals and intersections are, as compared to before, you somewhat had to remember where the intersections you are supposed to stop at are and look for others headlights to know to stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 08:58:03 PM
I definitely like the retro-reflective backplate, particularly at night, but I'm pretty sure in the MUTCD it's improper to mix traditional backplates with yellow retro-reflective ones at the same intersection, especially for signals facing the same direction.

Virginia's VDOT started testing these backplates 3-4 years ago, but, starting in 2015, replaced backplates on large swaths of 'corridors of statewide significance.' In Northern Virginia, now, most or all backplates (along with some signal heads) have been replaced with the new ones on major routes like US-29 south of Centreville, VA-286 (Fairfax County Parkway), VA-289 (Franconia-Springfield Parkway), VA-294 (Prince William Pkwy), and VA-234 (Dumfries Rd / Prince William Pkwy).

When signal heads are replaced or brand new signal installations are erected, sometimes they have the new retroreflective backplates, sometimes they have traditional ones.

I wonder if Virginia is going to transition from using yellow signal housings, doors, and visors to black ones with the retroreflective backplates like Ohio does?  I think the black signal heads contrast well with the yellow retroreflective backplates.  I've seen, At one intersection on SR-648/Edsall Rd in Fairfax County, just west of I-395, black signal heads with retroreflective backplates were installed in a replacement project. Not sure if that was a fluke by a contractor or indicative of further changes in signal standards for VDOT.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 27, 2017, 09:54:59 PM
States that have adopted retroreflective backplates for new signal installations in this part of the country include, but are certainly not limited to, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Vermont and Virginia. I can't speak for the others, but NY started using retroreflective in 2013-2014 and hasn't looked back. In Massachusetts, several of the new FYAs have retroreflective backplates, even if the other signal heads at the intersection do not. As mentioned previously, Ohio changed from yellow to dark green signal heads when they started using retroreflective backplates.

As far as why they're popping up everywhere: MUTCD guidance is to use backplates if the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or higher. Several states have taken this as their standard.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on July 27, 2017, 11:29:17 PM
Quote from: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 08:58:03 PM
I wonder if Virginia is going to transition from using yellow signal housings, doors, and visors to black ones with the retroreflective backplates like Ohio does?  I think the black signal heads contrast well with the yellow retroreflective backplates.  I've seen, At one intersection on SR-648/Edsall Rd in Fairfax County, just west of I-395, black signal heads with retroreflective backplates were installed in a replacement project. Not sure if that was a fluke by a contractor or indicative of further changes in signal standards for VDOT.

I know the intersection you speak of; it's at Carolina Pl and the adjacent firehouse.  About a month back, there was an accident that knocked down one of the utility poles holding the old signals up.  Though they were put back up and suffered no real damage that I saw, that accident may have led to replacement. I have a gut feeling this was a county decision (in terms of design), as the new signals are similar to this set on VA-244/Columbia Pike at the Annandale firehouse (https://goo.gl/maps/yKmLRZE2cNS2), and I have yet to see such a setup at a routine intersection in Fairfax County.

(I do wish I had gotten a video of this, but for about a week after the replacement, the new signals were flashing green.  I chalk this up to someone forgetting to reprogram the controller.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on July 28, 2017, 12:32:36 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 27, 2017, 09:54:59 PM
States that have adopted retroreflective backplates for new signal installations in this part of the country include, but are certainly not limited to, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Vermont and Virginia. I can't speak for the others, but NY started using retroreflective in 2013-2014 and hasn't looked back. In Massachusetts, several of the new FYAs have retroreflective backplates, even if the other signal heads at the intersection do not. As mentioned previously, Ohio changed from yellow to dark green signal heads when they started using retroreflective backplates.

As far as why they're popping up everywhere: MUTCD guidance is to use backplates if the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or higher. Several states have taken this as their standard.

In the West, Utah seems to be phasing them in in bulk, while Colorado is going very slow in converting.  In my district, I have yet to see a backplate that is NOT all-black (nor do we have any FYAs).  Southwest Colorado, OTOH is almost all reflective bordered backplates (and FYA's).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 28, 2017, 05:09:56 AM
Quote from: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 08:58:03 PM
I definitely like the retro-reflective backplate, particularly at night, but I'm pretty sure in the MUTCD it's improper to mix traditional backplates with yellow retro-reflective ones at the same intersection, especially for signals facing the same direction.

Nope. The use of a yellow reflective strip is merely an option. There are no standards attached to the option that specify all signal heads on an approach (or at an intersection) must have the reflective strip.


Quote from: cl94 on July 27, 2017, 09:54:59 PM
As far as why they're popping up everywhere: MUTCD guidance is to use backplates if the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or higher. Several states have taken this as their standard.

That guidance is for the backplate itself, and is independent of whether reflective yellow border is applied to the backplate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 28, 2017, 11:40:56 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 28, 2017, 05:09:56 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 27, 2017, 09:54:59 PM
As far as why they're popping up everywhere: MUTCD guidance is to use backplates if the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or higher. Several states have taken this as their standard.

That guidance is for the backplate itself, and is independent of whether reflective yellow border is applied to the backplate.

Yes, and I never stated otherwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on July 28, 2017, 01:27:05 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 27, 2017, 11:29:17 PM
Quote from: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 08:58:03 PM
I wonder if Virginia is going to transition from using yellow signal housings, doors, and visors to black ones with the retroreflective backplates like Ohio does?  I think the black signal heads contrast well with the yellow retroreflective backplates.  I've seen, At one intersection on SR-648/Edsall Rd in Fairfax County, just west of I-395, black signal heads with retroreflective backplates were installed in a replacement project. Not sure if that was a fluke by a contractor or indicative of further changes in signal standards for VDOT.

I know the intersection you speak of; it's at Carolina Pl and the adjacent firehouse.  About a month back, there was an accident that knocked down one of the utility poles holding the old signals up.  Though they were put back up and suffered no real damage that I saw, that accident may have led to replacement. I have a gut feeling this was a county decision (in terms of design), as the new signals are similar to this set on VA-244/Columbia Pike at the Annandale firehouse (https://goo.gl/maps/yKmLRZE2cNS2), and I have yet to see such a setup at a routine intersection in Fairfax County.

(I do wish I had gotten a video of this, but for about a week after the replacement, the new signals were flashing green.  I chalk this up to someone forgetting to reprogram the controller.)

Yes, that's the intersection.  Virginia / VDOT, at one time, used red-painted signals for firehouses, some still exist around the Richmond suburbs and on US-1 just south of the Beltway in Fairfax County.  These were not painted red.  I seriously doubt that Fairfax County installed them as I don't believe the county has ever installed signals on a VDOT-maintained road. Interestingly, they also are the first Eagle Durasig signals that I've seen used in a permanent installation on a VDOT-maintained road in the Northern Virginia region in over 2 decades.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 30, 2017, 12:49:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 28, 2017, 11:40:56 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 28, 2017, 05:09:56 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 27, 2017, 09:54:59 PM
As far as why they're popping up everywhere: MUTCD guidance is to use backplates if the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or higher. Several states have taken this as their standard.

That guidance is for the backplate itself, and is independent of whether reflective yellow border is applied to the backplate.

Yes, and I never stated otherwise.

Merely a clarification, as everything else mentioned in that post was referring to backplates with reflective borders.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
I found some all-black signals (not including the actual lights :sombrero:) in Exeter, ON today along Highway 4. The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMtfVTtE.jpg&hash=5297559f192aa7c4bcf38137c318b40541722b39)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSMDJm2n.jpg&hash=286cace6b769db5cf36b1a5b2025a58f90c19f3f)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 08, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
I found some all-black signals (not including the actual lights :sombrero:) in Exeter, ON today along Highway 4. The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

http://i.imgur.com/MtfVTtE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SMDJm2n.jpg

All-black signals do seem to be exceptionally rare in Canada. The only places that I know of that use them exclusively today are Banff and Edmonton. Quebec and Winnipeg have both started using yellow strips around the outer edges (the latter for left turn signals, which are otherwise all black). Quebec does seem to be mostly all-black though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 08, 2017, 10:45:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 08, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
I found some all-black signals (not including the actual lights :sombrero:) in Exeter, ON today along Highway 4. The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

http://i.imgur.com/MtfVTtE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SMDJm2n.jpg

All-black signals do seem to be exceptionally rare in Canada. The only places that I know of that use them exclusively today are Banff and Edmonton. Quebec and Winnipeg have both started using yellow strips around the outer edges (the latter for left turn signals, which are otherwise all black). Quebec does seem to be mostly all-black though.

The all-yellow lights so commonly seen in Canada probably have better visibility in extreme Canadian blizzards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 11:24:44 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on August 08, 2017, 10:45:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 08, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
I found some all-black signals (not including the actual lights :sombrero:) in Exeter, ON today along Highway 4. The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

http://i.imgur.com/MtfVTtE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SMDJm2n.jpg

All-black signals do seem to be exceptionally rare in Canada. The only places that I know of that use them exclusively today are Banff and Edmonton. Quebec and Winnipeg have both started using yellow strips around the outer edges (the latter for left turn signals, which are otherwise all black). Quebec does seem to be mostly all-black though.

The all-yellow lights so commonly seen in Canada probably have better visibility in extreme Canadian blizzards.

I like the new standard in Waterloo Region (Ontario) of using black signal heads on yellow backplates, since I think it has the advantages of both colours.

Here's an example taken on King St E in Kitchener
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGEUxQKl.jpg&hash=59a09d1dbc41210a653fc706501fb7729901c9f8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignGeek101 on August 08, 2017, 11:45:44 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

There's a few in the Kingston downtown area:

https://goo.gl/maps/t3gyzXKtJsQ2

https://goo.gl/maps/7QBM9UXvwdA2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 09, 2017, 12:15:51 AM
Quote from: roadguy2 on August 08, 2017, 10:45:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 08, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 02:47:13 PM
I found some all-black signals (not including the actual lights :sombrero:) in Exeter, ON today along Highway 4. The only other place I know that has these in Ontario is Richmond Hill (though I haven't seen those ones yet).

http://i.imgur.com/MtfVTtE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SMDJm2n.jpg

All-black signals do seem to be exceptionally rare in Canada. The only places that I know of that use them exclusively today are Banff and Edmonton. Quebec and Winnipeg have both started using yellow strips around the outer edges (the latter for left turn signals, which are otherwise all black). Quebec does seem to be mostly all-black though.

The all-yellow lights so commonly seen in Canada probably have better visibility in extreme Canadian blizzards.

Perhaps in theory. But both of the places that I mentioned that still use all-black signals w/o yellow trim are in extremely snowy areas (Banff and Edmonton). There's also places that use yellow signals (at least yellow backplates) that have almost no snow at all: BC's Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island.

With that in mind, I don't think all-black signals are hard to see in snow. After all, snow is white.

Note that up until the late 90s, following a trial near Victoria, Canada's yellow back plates had no reflective trim as they do now. This means at night, they were impossible to see.

Quote from: 7/8 on August 08, 2017, 11:24:44 PM
I like the new standard in Waterloo Region (Ontario) of using black signal heads on yellow backplates, since I think it has the advantages of both colours.

Occasional all-yellow signals show up in BC (a lot in Coquitlam). But for the most part, this is the only style I ever see in Vancouver/the rest of BC.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2 (https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2)

Apologies for bringing this post back up, but I found a near identical signal (https://goo.gl/maps/5M8sSrPzNiM2) in Easton, MD while clinching MD-565.  Not MUTCD compliant though, as the thru arrow is at the bottom of the stack.  Aside: most of the signalized intersections on MD-565 through town only have one signal head per side.



I keep forgetting about these, but some of the signal (https://goo.gl/maps/9kbKxLXfGX32)s in downtown Culpeper have a bit of an European flair to them.  Can't say I've seen this style of design anywhere else in Virginia.



Quote from: dfnva on July 28, 2017, 01:27:05 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 27, 2017, 11:29:17 PM
Quote from: dfnva on July 27, 2017, 08:58:03 PM
I wonder if Virginia is going to transition from using yellow signal housings, doors, and visors to black ones with the retroreflective backplates like Ohio does?  I think the black signal heads contrast well with the yellow retroreflective backplates.  I've seen, At one intersection on SR-648/Edsall Rd in Fairfax County, just west of I-395, black signal heads with retroreflective backplates were installed in a replacement project. Not sure if that was a fluke by a contractor or indicative of further changes in signal standards for VDOT.

I know the intersection you speak of; it's at Carolina Pl and the adjacent firehouse.  About a month back, there was an accident that knocked down one of the utility poles holding the old signals up.  Though they were put back up and suffered no real damage that I saw, that accident may have led to replacement. I have a gut feeling this was a county decision (in terms of design), as the new signals are similar to this set on VA-244/Columbia Pike at the Annandale firehouse (https://goo.gl/maps/yKmLRZE2cNS2), and I have yet to see such a setup at a routine intersection in Fairfax County.

(I do wish I had gotten a video of this, but for about a week after the replacement, the new signals were flashing green.  I chalk this up to someone forgetting to reprogram the controller.)

Yes, that's the intersection.  Virginia / VDOT, at one time, used red-painted signals for firehouses, some still exist around the Richmond suburbs and on US-1 just south of the Beltway in Fairfax County.  These were not painted red.  I seriously doubt that Fairfax County installed them as I don't believe the county has ever installed signals on a VDOT-maintained road. Interestingly, they also are the first Eagle Durasig signals that I've seen used in a permanent installation on a VDOT-maintained road in the Northern Virginia region in over 2 decades.

My apologies for taking so long to respond.  Perhaps I phrased this wrong, but I was talking about who bore the financial responsibility for signal installation in specific instances.  In this case, these were put in solely for firehouse, not general traffic, so I'm led to think that the county would be the one to bear the costs.  As such, the county would also be able to specify what they wanted installed.  In a similar context, I would point out the intersection of VA-123 and the CIA complex, home to some of the last Auto LFE's in Fairax County.  VDOT would have replaced these by now (other signals along 123 have), but I'm again led to believe that it's not VDOT's responsibility to pay for it, but the federal government's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 09, 2017, 06:41:11 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
I keep forgetting about these, but some of the signal (https://goo.gl/maps/9kbKxLXfGX32)s in downtown Culpeper have a bit of an European flair to them.  Can't say I've seen this style of design anywhere else in Virginia.

Wow! Those are, by a mile, the most European-looking signals I've seen anywhere in the country. In particular, they seem very Dutch due to their overhead placement. I can't say I love the maximum-rounded (?) corners, but it's still pretty cool.

Bristol, PA has some signals with white borders, but that's the only other place I've seen anything similar.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 10, 2017, 02:00:50 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2017, 06:41:11 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
I keep forgetting about these, but some of the signal (https://goo.gl/maps/9kbKxLXfGX32)s in downtown Culpeper have a bit of an European flair to them.  Can't say I've seen this style of design anywhere else in Virginia.

Wow! Those are, by a mile, the most European-looking signals I've seen anywhere in the country. In particular, they seem very Dutch due to their overhead placement. I can't say I love the maximum-rounded (?) corners, but it's still pretty cool.

Bristol, PA has some signals with white borders, but that's the only other place I've seen anything similar.
New Hope, PA also has some signals with white borders at the one signalized intersection in town:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.364414,-74.9512573,3a,35.5y,257.33h,95.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sitxz9u-w27Je_V3pV9GrBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I must say, I really like the look of white borders.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 10, 2017, 12:49:54 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 01, 2017, 04:51:26 PM
Here's an odd one from Elgin, IL.  What do you do if you're on a one-way street that shifts over to a two-way street at an intersection where most traffic will leave off to the left?  This is what IDOT does, apparently.

https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2 (https://goo.gl/maps/r4q6HaKsniL2)

Apologies for bringing this post back up, but I found a near identical signal (https://goo.gl/maps/5M8sSrPzNiM2) in Easton, MD while clinching MD-565.  Not MUTCD compliant though, as the thru arrow is at the bottom of the stack.  Aside: most of the signalized intersections on MD-565 through town only have one signal head per side.

Wow... that's even crazier than the Illinois example. ONE side mounted signal at that... I wonder how many fender benders occur because of that? They should have signals on both sides of the street
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on August 10, 2017, 02:27:06 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
I keep forgetting about these, but some of the signal (https://goo.gl/maps/9kbKxLXfGX32)s in downtown Culpeper have a bit of an European flair to them.  Can't say I've seen this style of design anywhere else in Virginia.

Wow, very nice find!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 10, 2017, 09:00:30 PM
Quote from: riiga on August 10, 2017, 02:27:06 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on August 09, 2017, 04:35:51 PM
I keep forgetting about these, but some of the signal (https://goo.gl/maps/9kbKxLXfGX32)s in downtown Culpeper have a bit of an European flair to them.  Can't say I've seen this style of design anywhere else in Virginia.

Wow, very nice find!

From the outside looking it, I'd imagine that the US must be baffling in terms of our signal standards. There's no placement standards (overhead or on the side, near or far, doesn't matter), signal heads can be just about any color (though I think yellow and black are the recommended colors), backplates need to be black, but the strip around edge can be any reflective color...things are a total mess compared to most other countries (except Canada, which seems to be at least as messy).

Can you think of any signalised intersections in Sweden where the signal placement, design, etc is totally different from what you're used to normally seeing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 10, 2017, 09:27:20 PM
Jakeroot, there are placement standards in the MUTCD. Section 4D.13, figure 4D-4 shows a diagram with the driver's so-called "cone of vision". At least one and preferably both reqd. signal heads must be within that cone. The Manual leaves it up to engineering judgment whether the signals are overhead or post/pole mounted or both. But it recommends overhead with one head over each traffic lane, and allows supplemental signal heads as needed per engineering judgment.

The Manual used to recommend yellow as the preferred head color, but I think they did away with any color rec. in the 2009 Manual. However backplates are required to be black.

As you point out, there is a lot of diversity in configuration in different regions of the country. But all signals must meet those basic MUTCD standards. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 10, 2017, 10:53:31 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 10, 2017, 09:27:20 PM
As you point out, there is a lot of diversity in configuration in different regions of the country. But all signals must meet those basic MUTCD standards. 

And that's my point. I understand that there are basic standards, but there's a lot of variation, far more than most countries would permit. Looking at other countries, like Australia, Japan, South Africa, New Zealand...all of their signals look the same, country-wide. Not the case here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on August 11, 2017, 12:10:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 10, 2017, 09:00:30 PM
Can you think of any signalised intersections in Sweden where the signal placement, design, etc is totally different from what you're used to normally seeing?

Off the top of my head, no. This kind of setup (https://www.google.se/maps/@59.8450389,17.5508233,3a,53.1y,60.16h,89.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbkICq-wMUfaB7futLGvOtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is somewhat uncommon though, but that's probably the only type of deviating setup I know of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 11, 2017, 08:31:19 PM
That's a pretty cool installation. And they even have Shell gas and 7-Eleven stores in Sweden. Wonder if the coffee is the same.  LOL

Jakeroot, most of the countries you named are smaller than the USA so it's easier to maintain standardization. US being as large as it is had different practices evolve in different regions. Like how the Southwestern states mostly follow the California configuration. And how NYC, NYS and Long Island counties mostly use diagonal spans, etc. New Jersey is standardized statewide, but they're a small state so it's easier to do there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 12, 2017, 05:21:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 10, 2017, 09:00:30 PM
From the outside looking it, I'd imagine that the US must be baffling in terms of our signal standards. There's no placement standards (overhead or on the side, near or far, doesn't matter), signal heads can be just about any color (though I think yellow and black are the recommended colors), backplates need to be black, but the strip around edge can be any reflective color...things are a total mess compared to most other countries (except Canada, which seems to be at least as messy).

MUTCD doesn't have any recommendation on signal head housing colors. It only requires the inside of the visors, louvers (if present), and the front side of backplates to have a dull black finish, in order to minimize light reflection and increase contrast of the signal indication. Furthermore, the reflective strip is only allowed to be yellow.

Longitudinal placement standards require the primary signal face to be a minimum of 40 feet beyond the stop line, and not more than 180 feet beyond the stop line without a supplemental near side signal head. Lateral placement of primary signal faces has to be within the 40° cone of vision originating 10 feet back from the stop line at the center of the approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 12, 2017, 06:39:23 PM
I wasn't really trying to be overly precise with my points. I was just trying to point out how minimal our standards are compared to other industrialised nations (not necessarily similarly-sized ones).

Quote from: roadfro on August 12, 2017, 05:21:55 PM
the reflective strip is only allowed to be yellow.

Didn't realise this until just now. I thought it was required to be reflective. I've seen white used on several occasions, so I didn't rule out the possibility of white being allowed.

That said, white should be the color. Yellow is used because British Columbia uses yellow backplates, so naturally, they used a reflective yellow strip when they first tried out the idea (because it blended in with the border during the day, but stood out at night). We could just as easily use white. Makes more sense too, because signals are regulatory devices, not warning devices.

Quote from: SignBridge on August 11, 2017, 08:31:19 PM
Jakeroot, most of the countries you named are smaller than the USA so it's easier to maintain standardization. US being as large as it is had different practices evolve in different regions. Like how the Southwestern states mostly follow the California configuration. And how NYC, NYS and Long Island counties mostly use diagonal spans, etc. New Jersey is standardized statewide, but they're a small state so it's easier to do there.

That's kind of true. Australia is quite a large country (world's 6th largest), yet it has totally standardised signal designs, placement, etc. There might be occasional one-off oddities, but for the most part, a 4-way signal looks the same in each state.

That said, it really shouldn't matter how large the country is, nor how things evolved over time. I'm not saying the MUTCD is this holy grail of a manual, and only it knows best. But the sheer number of recommendations ("should") vs requirements ("shall") is pretty remarkable. If something proves beneficial, why would it not become a requirement?

I also understand the idea of state freedoms. There are certain states that use their own manuals (*cough* California), some that use modifications of it...why is this allowed? Why doesn't each state use the same manual? Honestly, these concerns go far deeper than just the manual (laws dictate different meanings for red arrows state-to-state, for example).

[/rant]
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Aerobird on August 13, 2017, 01:43:54 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 12, 2017, 06:39:23 PM
I also understand the idea of state freedoms. There are certain states that use their own manuals (*cough* California), some that use modifications of it...why is this allowed? Why doesn't each state use the same manual? Honestly, these concerns go far deeper than just the manual (laws dictate different meanings for red arrows state-to-state, for example).

[/rant]

Because, without diving into political issues, the 'ideal state' (no pun intended) as seen by the US is "a group of free and independent states, that banded together under a federal goverenment", as opposed to "a federal government, that is divided into states". Therefore, where possible, Thou Shalts that come from On High are frowned at mightily.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 16, 2017, 08:39:06 PM
As far as the black head/yellow backplate arrangement, that seems to be standard in Hamilton, ON as well
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on September 17, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
Out in the sprawl of Vancouver, WA is what initially looks like a standard signalized T-intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787444,-122.645937,3a,28.8y,201.99h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Oh17TZRObDJtpoE2YweBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). However, looking around, there are signals for the fourth approach, ped signals to cross it, and, until recently (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787369,-122.6461101,3a,75y,227.52h,85.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srI4bHCVBdWha299uYH0zSQ!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), there were pushbuttons for that crossing and a doghouse signal for a protected left turn. Unlike a normal road that never got built situation, however, there is no gap in the sidewalk or driveway curb cut or anything other than the signal to show that a road was ever intended to go here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 17, 2017, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: jay8g on September 17, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
Out in the sprawl of Vancouver, WA is what initially looks like a standard signalized T-intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787444,-122.645937,3a,28.8y,201.99h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Oh17TZRObDJtpoE2YweBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). However, looking around, there are signals for the fourth approach, ped signals to cross it, and, until recently (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787369,-122.6461101,3a,75y,227.52h,85.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srI4bHCVBdWha299uYH0zSQ!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), there were pushbuttons for that crossing and a doghouse signal for a protected left turn. Unlike a normal road that never got built situation, however, there is no gap in the sidewalk or driveway curb cut or anything other than the signal to show that a road was ever intended to go here.

Hahaha what the F? That's hilarious. I've heard of a mast arm being installed ahead of time (sometimes even the signals) but I've never seen the signals turned on and operational.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on September 17, 2017, 04:37:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 17, 2017, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: jay8g on September 17, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
Out in the sprawl of Vancouver, WA is what initially looks like a standard signalized T-intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787444,-122.645937,3a,28.8y,201.99h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Oh17TZRObDJtpoE2YweBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). However, looking around, there are signals for the fourth approach, ped signals to cross it, and, until recently (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787369,-122.6461101,3a,75y,227.52h,85.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srI4bHCVBdWha299uYH0zSQ!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), there were pushbuttons for that crossing and a doghouse signal for a protected left turn. Unlike a normal road that never got built situation, however, there is no gap in the sidewalk or driveway curb cut or anything other than the signal to show that a road was ever intended to go here.

Hahaha what the F? That's hilarious. I've heard of a mast arm being installed ahead of time (sometimes even the signals) but I've never seen the signals turned on and operational.
That is common around here (Orlando). Well, with usually with the stub built for the road (but sometimes not far enough back for sensors to be installed). Hell, on SR 50 they built multiple 4 way intersections with split phase for the side roads and dual left turn lanes for a shopping center that was never built. I think they initially had the signals covered with bags with them running, but they blew off and left them running for a few months before they covered them again. This repeated and they finally took down the signal heads...

I know when I was going to UCF, the main entrance to campus had old apartments across the street that were torn down, but the signal was left up with its own phase, activated every 3 minutes for a good 30 seconds facing a fence with no one ever there, and it was like this for over 5 years I believe before they finally built new apartments there. That area was always congested really bad as well, and they were wasting valuable time every cycle for nothing for YEARS.

In Gainesville this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6303125,-82.3888428,3a,65.5y,240.63h,82.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s79JyGZ9Dz-LqSpzAHfLOuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) never had the opposing mast arm installed, but its programmed as if it did. I don't even understand how this one happens. As you can see in the street view, its got the PPLT activated even though there is no straight movement. If someone goes in the right lane, they'll still get a red until the left turn movement finished, then the protected left ends, and it goes a green ball permitting a permissive left along with the right without stopping. Gainesville also has proactively replaced all the 5 head PPLTs with FYAs, but I guess they don't have it in there system as a permissive left, so it got skipped (the other PPLT on this intersection got replaced as part of that project).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on September 18, 2017, 05:49:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 17, 2017, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: jay8g on September 17, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
Out in the sprawl of Vancouver, WA is what initially looks like a standard signalized T-intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787444,-122.645937,3a,28.8y,201.99h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Oh17TZRObDJtpoE2YweBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). However, looking around, there are signals for the fourth approach, ped signals to cross it, and, until recently (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787369,-122.6461101,3a,75y,227.52h,85.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srI4bHCVBdWha299uYH0zSQ!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), there were pushbuttons for that crossing and a doghouse signal for a protected left turn. Unlike a normal road that never got built situation, however, there is no gap in the sidewalk or driveway curb cut or anything other than the signal to show that a road was ever intended to go here.

Hahaha what the F? That's hilarious. I've heard of a mast arm being installed ahead of time (sometimes even the signals) but I've never seen the signals turned on and operational.

Since there's a bike lane there, perhaps the signals are for the benefit of cyclists doing a hook turn?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 18, 2017, 01:52:10 PM
Quote from: Jet380 on September 18, 2017, 05:49:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 17, 2017, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: jay8g on September 17, 2017, 02:23:23 PM
Out in the sprawl of Vancouver, WA is what initially looks like a standard signalized T-intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787444,-122.645937,3a,28.8y,201.99h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Oh17TZRObDJtpoE2YweBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en). However, looking around, there are signals for the fourth approach, ped signals to cross it, and, until recently (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6787369,-122.6461101,3a,75y,227.52h,85.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srI4bHCVBdWha299uYH0zSQ!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), there were pushbuttons for that crossing and a doghouse signal for a protected left turn. Unlike a normal road that never got built situation, however, there is no gap in the sidewalk or driveway curb cut or anything other than the signal to show that a road was ever intended to go here.

Hahaha what the F? That's hilarious. I've heard of a mast arm being installed ahead of time (sometimes even the signals) but I've never seen the signals turned on and operational.

Since there's a bike lane there, perhaps the signals are for the benefit of cyclists doing a hook turn?

In retrospect, perhaps yes. But I highly doubt that was the purpose. I'd be willing to bet that less than 5 cyclists perform that maneuver a week (Vancouver is the opposite of Portland in most respects -- see this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMwCkZiEQ7A)).

FWIW, the signal appears to have been installed in the late 90s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 20, 2017, 02:10:29 PM
Interesting that they still maintain the bulbs in those signals, as they're incandescent while the rest of the intersection is LED. Looking at the visible reflectors in the abandoned pedestrian signals on that side (as they're missing the lenses), looks like they would've been hand/man peds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 28, 2017, 03:54:41 AM
Couple of interesting signals I spotted while zooming around Tucson on Street View:

Lots of signals for not having pro/per phasing: https://goo.gl/AdQZxR

(https://i.imgur.com/OCCyRgH.png)

City/state removed the median-mounted pro/per signal, leaving the far-left signal head as the only pro/per head for the left turn: https://goo.gl/ru5feA4

(https://i.imgur.com/SMXsbAz.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 28, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
The second photo with just the far-left left-turn signal doesn't seem like normal practice. I'm guessing the median signal-head was either knocked down in an accident and will be replaced or an error of omission was made in the installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 28, 2017, 11:26:17 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 28, 2017, 09:54:04 PM
The second photo with just the far-left left-turn signal doesn't seem like normal practice. I'm guessing the median signal-head was either knocked down in an accident and will be replaced or an error of omission was made in the installation.

They removed the signal in the median (I mentioned as much in my post). I'm sure a new signal will replace the one that was removed at some point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on October 01, 2017, 03:44:16 PM
Strictly speaking, this isn't a signal, but... I've never seen a mast arm that looks like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1942219,-119.1803337,3a,49.8y,185.04h,97.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHG9RHrVse-lukEGIsaZTjA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) before!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on October 01, 2017, 06:07:27 PM
Quote from: jay8g on October 01, 2017, 03:44:16 PM
Strictly speaking, this isn't a signal, but... I've never seen a mast arm that looks like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1942219,-119.1803337,3a,49.8y,185.04h,97.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHG9RHrVse-lukEGIsaZTjA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) before!

There are a bunch of those around California, especially closer to the Bay Area. Here's one in Marina...

(https://i.imgur.com/yYyAkNll.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 01, 2017, 08:15:11 PM
That is really funky, weird looking.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2017, 08:45:01 PM
I think there's a couple examples in Spokane, WA but I can't remember where (not out of question given its proximity to the original sign from Kennewick, WA). Definitely an odd mast arm. No idea what they were smoking when they decided that looked even remotely acceptable.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on October 01, 2017, 10:18:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 12, 2017, 06:39:23 PM
I wasn't really trying to be overly precise with my points. I was just trying to point out how minimal our standards are compared to other industrialised nations (not necessarily similarly-sized ones).

Quote from: roadfro on August 12, 2017, 05:21:55 PM
the reflective strip is only allowed to be yellow.

Didn't realise this until just now. I thought it was required to be reflective. I've seen white used on several occasions, so I didn't rule out the possibility of white being allowed.

That said, white should be the color. Yellow is used because British Columbia uses yellow backplates, so naturally, they used a reflective yellow strip when they first tried out the idea (because it blended in with the border during the day, but stood out at night). We could just as easily use white. Makes more sense too, because signals are regulatory devices, not warning devices.
When I was driving around Orlando I noticed they started using the fluorescent yellow retroreflective borders on traffic lights that are for schools instead of the standard yellow...

They also switched the bike trail sign from yellow to fluorescent yellow again... after switching it from fluorescent yellow to yellow probably about 2 years ago. They're so inconsistent between the two... its like the YIELD TO PEDS / STOP FOR PEDS signs, they can't decide which one they want for either of them (those are even worse, as they can't decide the color OR whether we need to yield or stop, whatever the difference is, sometimes there is a mix of all the combos at the same intersection)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 21, 2017, 04:16:05 AM
This is a follow-up to an earlier discussion on the shortest traffic signals. I think I've found a new contender for Washington State:

116 St NE @ Smokey Point Blvd (https://goo.gl/gRzocN) in Marysville, WA has a railway crossing on one side of the intersection. For one reason or another, Snohomish County decided that a mast-arm would not be used for the WB approach to the intersection. So, interestingly for Washington State, there is not only a near-side signal, but also three far side signals: one on the far left, one on the far right, and, most interestingly, one in the median (see overall setup here (https://goo.gl/KcPA8r)). The median-mounted signal is the odd one here. It is mounted much lower (https://goo.gl/Pdcr6T) than any of the post-mounted corner signals. The signal is split phased, hence the arrow on the bottom:

(https://i.imgur.com/6CGk88k.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 23, 2017, 01:25:51 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 21, 2017, 04:16:05 AM
This is a follow-up to an earlier discussion on the shortest traffic signals. I think I've found a new contender for Washington State:

116 St NE @ Smokey Point Blvd (https://goo.gl/gRzocN) in Marysville, WA has a railway crossing on one side of the intersection. For one reason or another, Snohomish County decided that a mast-arm would not be used for the WB approach to the intersection. So, interestingly for Washington State, there is not only a near-side signal, but also three far side signals: one on the far left, one on the far right, and, most interestingly, one in the median (see overall setup here (https://goo.gl/KcPA8r)). The median-mounted signal is the odd one here. It is mounted much lower (https://goo.gl/Pdcr6T) than any of the post-mounted corner signals. The signal is split phased, hence the arrow on the bottom:

(https://i.imgur.com/6CGk88k.png)
Looks like it was done to avoid blocking the railroad crossing signal behind it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Throckmorton on November 24, 2017, 05:29:56 PM
   
The thread title is pretty generic so I'm just going to throw this in the mix.   
   
https://goo.gl/maps/Qdzn6zRZGZr
   
85th and The Paseo, Kansas City, MO. This view is looking east. The flow of traffic at this spot is not complicated. When east/west is green, north/south is red and vice versa. That's it.   
   
There are nine signal lights. Three are suspended. Two of those are above the intersection for southbound and westbound traffic. You can see the third for eastbound in the near distance. The others are mounted on utility poles.   

The three yellows in this view sit about 30- 40 feet back from the intersection.   
   
Someone asked in another thread if there were any four ways left. This intersection could use one. Or something.   
   
   
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 24, 2017, 07:30:08 PM
Yeah, that looks like a really cheap, garbage quality installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on November 24, 2017, 08:36:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 21, 2017, 04:16:05 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/6CGk88k.png)
I don't see how they thought this was the best option, in terms of installation. :hmmm: :banghead:

How did they assure themselves that everyone and every type of vehicle could see this four-section?
What about vandals?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 25, 2017, 01:01:58 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on November 23, 2017, 01:25:51 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 21, 2017, 04:16:05 AM
https://i.imgur.com/6CGk88k.png

Looks like it was done to avoid blocking the railroad crossing signal behind it.

Most likely. Although, you could setup the signals to avoid getting in the way of the railway lights. California does this a lot.

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on November 24, 2017, 08:36:08 PM
I don't see how they thought this was the best option, in terms of installation.

How did they assure themselves that everyone and every type of vehicle could see this four-section?
What about vandals?

Visibility seems pretty good. I just went through the intersection today. There are three other signals for the approach: one to the left of this light, one to the right, and one on the near-side of the intersection. If you can't manage to see any of these, you aren't trying.

Vandals aren't a big problem in Snohomish County. Besides, what are they gonna steal? The "keep right" sign? :-D They could beat the shit out of the signal, but it's far from the only post-mounted signal in the area. It's just the lowest.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 07, 2017, 12:32:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.
Maybe that was the original plan, to add pedestrian walkways later?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 07, 2017, 10:12:51 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.
So, is it ture that crosswalk buttons don't work-- now that some crossing signals are integrated into the signal timing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 07, 2017, 01:33:26 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 07, 2017, 10:12:51 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.
So, is it ture that crosswalk buttons don't work-- now that some crossing signals are integrated into the signal timing.

Depends on where you're talking about. In New York City, most crosswalk buttons haven't worked for decades. In other places, they definitely work.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 07, 2017, 01:40:19 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

I'm also curious to know if bicycles are allowed to use the highway shoulder opposite the flow of traffic.  If so, then the stoplights could also be for bicycles.  And even if not, what about a cyclist heading up the ramp who changes his mind and heads back down?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 08, 2017, 02:44:14 AM
Quote from: cl94 on December 07, 2017, 01:33:26 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 07, 2017, 10:12:51 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing—with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.
So, is it ture that crosswalk buttons don't work-- now that some crossing signals are integrated into the signal timing.

Depends on where you're talking about. In New York City, most crosswalk buttons haven't worked for decades. In other places, they definitely work.
NYC is installing some new ped buttons that don't do anything other than give an audible signal for blind people, apparently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

Ahh, didn't notice the pushbuttons.

Something odd though: the diagram attached to the pushbuttons indicate to pedestrians to cross on the white man and wait on a red hand! (doh!)... https://goo.gl/YwhfGD

And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 06:01:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing—with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

Ahh, didn't notice the pushbuttons.

Something odd though: the diagram attached to the pushbuttons indicate to pedestrians to cross on the white man and wait on a red hand! (doh!)... https://goo.gl/YwhfGD

That appears to be normal signage.  What's wrong with it?

QuoteAnd as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

I would hope that's a normal function...to cross when you're light's green.  Although most people just cross whenever they want anyway.  The biggest problem is erroneous reports with people claiming that you can step into a crosswalk anytime you want and you get automatic right-of-way.  The media doesn't help with this, as they seemingly try to blame motorists for every pedestrian accident regardless of the facts of the incident.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 06:17:29 AM
one last post before bed time...

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 06:01:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

Ahh, didn't notice the pushbuttons.

Something odd though: the diagram attached to the pushbuttons indicate to pedestrians to cross on the white man and wait on a red hand! (doh!)... https://goo.gl/YwhfGD

That appears to be normal signage.  What's wrong with it?

There are no pedestrian heads at the intersection. Telling pedestrians to cross on the white man, and wait on the flashing red and solid red hand isn't relevant here, because those indications don't exist.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 06:01:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

I would hope that's a normal function...to cross when your light's green.  Although most people just cross whenever they want anyway.  The biggest problem is erroneous reports with people claiming that you can step into a crosswalk anytime you want and you get automatic right-of-way.  The media doesn't help with this, as they seemingly try to blame motorists for every pedestrian accident regardless of the facts of the incident.

At least where I'm from, a RYG signal is colloquially understood to be a traffic control device for vehicles, not pedestrians (even if that's not strictly the case). Perhaps they teach the meaning of traffic signals to pedestrians in driver's ed, but it couldn't possibly be less relevant to that audience. It's not exactly common knowledge that green means go for all traffic (not anymore -- I know that used to be the case). Then again, I can't think of any intersections anywhere near me that don't have pedestrian heads where pedestrians are allowed to cross. I'm sure somewhere in Washington, there's an intersection with a sign stating "pedestrians cross with green signal", but I don't have a clue where that is, nor why they wouldn't just use pedestrian heads. Note that a sign would almost certainly be included, because (as I alluded to earlier) it's not common knowledge to cross on a green orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 01:05:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 06:17:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 06:01:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

I would hope that's a normal function...to cross when your light's green.  Although most people just cross whenever they want anyway.  The biggest problem is erroneous reports with people claiming that you can step into a crosswalk anytime you want and you get automatic right-of-way.  The media doesn't help with this, as they seemingly try to blame motorists for every pedestrian accident regardless of the facts of the incident.

At least where I'm from, a RYG signal is colloquially understood to be a traffic control device for vehicles, not pedestrians (even if that's not strictly the case). Perhaps they teach the meaning of traffic signals to pedestrians in driver's ed, but it couldn't possibly be less relevant to that audience. It's not exactly common knowledge that green means go for all traffic (not anymore -- I know that used to be the case). Then again, I can't think of any intersections anywhere near me that don't have pedestrian heads where pedestrians are allowed to cross. I'm sure somewhere in Washington, there's an intersection with a sign stating "pedestrians cross with green signal", but I don't have a clue where that is, nor why they wouldn't just use pedestrian heads. Note that a sign would almost certainly be included, because (as I alluded to earlier) it's not common knowledge to cross on a green orb.

I teach my sons a little bit about how to be a pedestrian every time our family goes for a walk, and that includes how to cross with stoplights and/or ped signals.  I just figured that was my job as a parent.  I mean, how are they going to know later what to do if there's no ped signal if I don't teach them now?

Not to go down the rabbit hole of pedestrian right of way, but...  nothing in US law gives anybody explicit right of way.  Good luck finding a part of the vehicle code where a statute tells someone to just go right on ahead without worrying about yielding to anyone else.  Traffic laws invariably restrict right of way, they never grant it.  So, while it's true that stepping into a crosswalk doesn't automatically give you the right of way, it is also just as true that drivers are required to yield to you whenever you do step into a crosswalk.  And even if you're not in a crosswalk, they're still required to not hit you.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 01:05:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 06:17:29 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 06:01:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

I would hope that's a normal function...to cross when your light's green.  Although most people just cross whenever they want anyway.  The biggest problem is erroneous reports with people claiming that you can step into a crosswalk anytime you want and you get automatic right-of-way.  The media doesn't help with this, as they seemingly try to blame motorists for every pedestrian accident regardless of the facts of the incident.

At least where I'm from, a RYG signal is colloquially understood to be a traffic control device for vehicles, not pedestrians (even if that's not strictly the case). Perhaps they teach the meaning of traffic signals to pedestrians in driver's ed, but it couldn't possibly be less relevant to that audience. It's not exactly common knowledge that green means go for all traffic (not anymore -- I know that used to be the case). Then again, I can't think of any intersections anywhere near me that don't have pedestrian heads where pedestrians are allowed to cross. I'm sure somewhere in Washington, there's an intersection with a sign stating "pedestrians cross with green signal", but I don't have a clue where that is, nor why they wouldn't just use pedestrian heads. Note that a sign would almost certainly be included, because (as I alluded to earlier) it's not common knowledge to cross on a green orb.

I teach my sons a little bit about how to be a pedestrian every time our family goes for a walk, and that includes how to cross with stoplights and/or ped signals.  I just figured that was my job as a parent.  I mean, how are they going to know later what to do if there's no ped signal if I don't teach them now?

Exactly:  The time to teach pedestrians about signals isn't in driver's ed...after all, that's a class for driving.  Knowing what to do at walk/don't walk signs, and red/yellow/green lights, is when you're a kid walking around.

And unfortunately, whenever a parent just ignores the signal and takes their kid across the street against a don't walk/red signal, the kid learns that they don't need to care about signals as a pedestrian...more so when mom/dad yells at a car to watch them, even though the motorist has the right of way.

Quoteit is also just as true that drivers are required to yield to you whenever you do step into a crosswalk...

Not so.  If I have a green light and the ped walks into the perpendicular crosswalk against the don't walk/red signal, they still don't have the right of way.  I should take reasonable measures to do what I can do to avoid hitting them, or lessen the impact, but that's true no matter what may cross my path.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 02:43:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 01:05:22 PM
yield

take reasonable measures to do what I can do to avoid hitting

OK, I guess there's a difference between the two.  It's small but it exists.



Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
If I have a green light and the ped walks into the perpendicular crosswalk against the don't walk/red signal, they still don't have the right of way.

As I mentioned, traffic laws never state that someone "has" the right of way.  They only ever admonish people to relinquish right of way.  You are correct in saying that a pedestrian would be breaking a traffic law by entering a crosswalk against a red signal.  But, once it's happened, you are still obligated to yield to him–unless the crosswalk is an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statutes, Title 39 §39:4-36. a.
The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except at crosswalks when the movement of traffic is being regulated by police officers or traffic control signals, or where otherwise regulated by municipal, county, or State regulation, and except where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided:

The statute covering marked crosswalks, in contradistinction, does not carve out an exception for signal-controlled intersections.  I doesn't say you only have to yield when the pedestrian has obeyed all of his rules, just that you are required to stop.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statues, Title 39 §39:4-36. a. (1)
The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within a marked crosswalk, when the pedestrian is upon, or within one lane of, the half of the roadway, upon which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning. As used in this paragraph, "half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes conveying traffic in one direction of travel, and includes the entire width of a one-way roadway.



I'm not sure why New Jersey has that weird little loophole, though.
For what it's worth, here's how it goes in the UVC:

1. Pedestrians must yield to vehicles if crossing the street outside of a marked or unmarked crosswalk [Article V, §11-503(a)].
2. Pedestrians must yield to vehicles if a there is a pedestrian bridge or tunnel they choose not to use it [Article V, §11-503(b)].
3. Pedestrians must not cross between signals if both nearby intersections are signal-controlled [Article V, §11-503(c)].
4. Pedestrians must obey pedestrian signals if applicable [Article V, §11-501(a)].
5. Pedestrians must not suddenly step in front of a vehicle to cross [Article V, §11-502(b)].

1. Drivers must take at all times due care to avoid hitting pedestrians [Article V, §11-504].
2. Drivers must yield** to pedestrians in or about to be in any marked or unmarked crosswalk on their half of the road [Article V, §11-502(a,c)].
  ** (except if there is a pedestrian bridge or tunnel, and only at unsignalized locations)
3. Drivers must stop for pedestrians if the car in the next lane over has already stopped to let them across [Article V, §11-502(d)].

According the UVC, then, you are correct in saying drivers are not obligated by law to yield the right of way to pedestrians who enter a crosswalk against a red signal.  They are only admonished to "exercise due care to avoid colliding" with them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 08, 2017, 05:11:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

Ahh, didn't notice the pushbuttons.

Something odd though: the diagram attached to the pushbuttons indicate to pedestrians to cross on the white man and wait on a red hand! (doh!)... https://goo.gl/YwhfGD

And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

In downtown San Francisco a few years ago when I was there, it was quite common for there to not be any ped heads, you just went when the light turned green (and there were several signals pointed the wrong way on one-way streets, presumably for this purpose). And I would bet most pedestrians do know instinctively to go on a green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 06:00:15 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on December 08, 2017, 05:11:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 03:44:02 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 07, 2017, 01:53:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2017, 06:50:43 PM
In Denver, at the off-ramps from Peña Blvd to East 56th Ave, there are signals facing the wrong-way. In addition to three signal facing the off-ramp, there are two signals (two 8-8-8 post-mounted heads) facing up on the on-ramps, seemingly at no one.

https://goo.gl/ygHwG1 --&-- https://goo.gl/zHBHz4

I'm not sure if they were meant to be pedestrian heads, but there is zero pedestrian accommodation in the area, so I'm not sure why Denver would bother at all.

There are pedestrian crossing buttons for crossing the street here (newer looking buttons at that). So these signal heads facing the wrong way allow for peds to use the green phase for crossing–with the minimal pedestrian facilities/traffic at the intersection, this way makes more sense than installing ped heads for one little-used movement.

Ahh, didn't notice the pushbuttons.

Something odd though: the diagram attached to the pushbuttons indicate to pedestrians to cross on the white man and wait on a red hand! (doh!)... https://goo.gl/YwhfGD

And as it relates to that, how many pedestrians instinctively know to cross with a green signal? Such a setup is exceedingly rare these days. If anywhere needed a custom diagram, it would have been these crossings.

In downtown San Francisco a few years ago when I was there, it was quite common for there to not be any ped heads, you just went when the light turned green (and there were several signals pointed the wrong way on one-way streets, presumably for this purpose). And I would bet most pedestrians do know instinctively to go on a green.

Perhaps in areas where this is the norm, pedestrians would know to cross with the green signal. But, as far as I know, this is an exceedingly uncommon setup (even in areas where it might have been the norm, such as downtown San Francisco -- pretty sure ped heads are the norm now), and less people than ever before would know what to do when greeted with the situation. I suspect in Colorado, this setup is just as unusual as it is where I am, but I'm not 100% sure.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 06:07:15 PM
I have to imagine that, when people don't have a ped signal, most are capable of deciding green still means go and red still means stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2017, 06:28:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 06:07:15 PM
I have to imagine that, when people don't have a ped signal, most are capable of deciding green still means go and red still means stop.

I think, at best, pedestrians would know that it was safe to cross on green, not that they should.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on December 08, 2017, 07:27:51 PM
People in downtown Nashville, TN seemed to be hesitant to cross on greens. All the pedestrian heads didn't seem to be working because they never showed the walking symbol, and I don't remember seeing any push buttons. My family was always the first ones to cross on the greens.

At one intersection, a guy yelled out "f---ing jaywalkers!". It's not our fault the stupid signals aren't working, and we're not going to stand around forever waiting. We always made it across before the yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on December 08, 2017, 09:09:34 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on December 08, 2017, 07:27:51 PM
People in downtown Nashville, TN seemed to be hesitant to cross on greens. All the pedestrian heads didn't seem to be working because they never showed the walking symbol, and I don't remember seeing any push buttons. My family was always the first ones to cross on the greens.

At one intersection, a guy yelled out "f---ing jaywalkers!". It's not our fault the stupid signals aren't working, and we're not going to stand around forever waiting. We always made it across before the yellow.

The fact that jaywalking is a crime baffles me.  So much for pedestrians having the right of way.  Fuck that whiner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 11:06:26 PM
What exactly is jaywalking?  It is perfectly legal to walk across the middle of a block, as long as there aren't signalized intersections on both sides of you, and as long as you yield to the cars going by.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 11:23:26 PM
Quote
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
If I have a green light and the ped walks into the perpendicular crosswalk against the don't walk/red signal, they still don't have the right of way.

As I mentioned, traffic laws never state that someone "has" the right of way.  They only ever admonish people to relinquish right of way.  You are correct in saying that a pedestrian would be breaking a traffic law by entering a crosswalk against a red signal.  But, once it's happened, you are still obligated to yield to him–unless the crosswalk is an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statutes, Title 39 §39:4-36. a.
The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except at crosswalks when the movement of traffic is being regulated by police officers or traffic control signals, or where otherwise regulated by municipal, county, or State regulation, and except where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided:

The statute covering marked crosswalks, in contradistinction, does not carve out an exception for signal-controlled intersections.  I doesn't say you only have to yield when the pedestrian has obeyed all of his rules, just that you are required to stop.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statues, Title 39 §39:4-36. a. (1)
The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within a marked crosswalk, when the pedestrian is upon, or within one lane of, the half of the roadway, upon which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning. As used in this paragraph, "half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes conveying traffic in one direction of travel, and includes the entire width of a one-way roadway.

You didn't site the proper law as it pertains to marked crosswalks at traffic signals.  Here's 39:4-32:

Quote39:4-32. On highways where traffic is controlled by a traffic control signal or by traffic or police officers:

   a.   Pedestrians shall not cross a roadway against the "stop" or red signal at a crosswalk , whether marked or unmarked, unless otherwise specifically directed to go by a traffic or police officer, or official traffic control device.

   c.   A pedestrian crossing or starting across the intersection on a "go" or green signal, but who is still within the crosswalk when the signal changes, shall have the right of way until the pedestrian has reached the opposite curb or place of safety.

So in A, it specifically states a pedestrian should not enter the marked walkway when facing a stop signal.  In C, it absolutely states someone has the right of way, in contradiction to you believing that the law never states such.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 10, 2017, 04:42:26 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 11:06:26 PM
What exactly is jaywalking?  It is perfectly legal to walk across the middle of a block, as long as there aren't signalized intersections on both sides of you, and as long as you yield to the cars going by.
Jaywalking is when you walk into the street knowing there is a crosswalk next to you.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 10, 2017, 08:19:59 PM
Jaywalking as I understand it means crossing the street against a Don't Walk sign or a red signal in which case a pedestrian presumably does not or should not have the right-of-way even in a marked crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 10, 2017, 09:30:33 PM
Here's the Utah law on this:

Quote from: 41-6a-1003.  Pedestrians yielding right-of-way -- Limits on pedestrians.
(1)   A pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles on the roadway.
(2)   A pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where there is a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles on the roadway.
(3)   Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation, a pedestrian may not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
(4)   
(a)   A pedestrian may not cross a roadway intersection diagonally unless authorized by a traffic-control device.
(b)   If a pedestrian is authorized to cross diagonally under Subsection (4)(a), the pedestrian shall cross only as directed by the appropriate traffic-control device.
(5)   A violation of this section is an infraction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 11, 2017, 01:11:23 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 10, 2017, 04:42:26 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 08, 2017, 11:06:26 PM
What exactly is jaywalking?  It is perfectly legal to walk across the middle of a block, as long as there aren't signalized intersections on both sides of you, and as long as you yield to the cars going by.
Jaywalking is when you walk into the street knowing there is a crosswalk next to you.

In the jurisdictions I've looked up pedestrian laws for, doing this is legal so long as said nearby crosswalk isn't signalized.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 11, 2017, 01:16:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 11:23:26 PM
Quote
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 08, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
If I have a green light and the ped walks into the perpendicular crosswalk against the don't walk/red signal, they still don't have the right of way.

As I mentioned, traffic laws never state that someone "has" the right of way.  They only ever admonish people to relinquish right of way.  You are correct in saying that a pedestrian would be breaking a traffic law by entering a crosswalk against a red signal.  But, once it's happened, you are still obligated to yield to him–unless the crosswalk is an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statutes, Title 39 §39:4-36. a.
The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except at crosswalks when the movement of traffic is being regulated by police officers or traffic control signals, or where otherwise regulated by municipal, county, or State regulation, and except where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided:

The statute covering marked crosswalks, in contradistinction, does not carve out an exception for signal-controlled intersections.  I doesn't say you only have to yield when the pedestrian has obeyed all of his rules, just that you are required to stop.

Quote from: 2016 New Jersey Revised Statues, Title 39 §39:4-36. a. (1)
The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within a marked crosswalk, when the pedestrian is upon, or within one lane of, the half of the roadway, upon which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning. As used in this paragraph, "half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes conveying traffic in one direction of travel, and includes the entire width of a one-way roadway.

You didn't site the proper law as it pertains to marked crosswalks at traffic signals.  Here's 39:4-32:

Quote39:4-32. On highways where traffic is controlled by a traffic control signal or by traffic or police officers:

   a.   Pedestrians shall not cross a roadway against the "stop" or red signal at a crosswalk , whether marked or unmarked, unless otherwise specifically directed to go by a traffic or police officer, or official traffic control device.

   c.   A pedestrian crossing or starting across the intersection on a "go" or green signal, but who is still within the crosswalk when the signal changes, shall have the right of way until the pedestrian has reached the opposite curb or place of safety.

So in A, it specifically states a pedestrian should not enter the marked walkway when facing a stop signal.  In C, it absolutely states someone has the right of way, in contradiction to you believing that the law never states such.

Fair enough.  So a pedestrian who walks out into a marked crosswalk against a red signal is not specifically stated to have the right of way, but all drivers are nevertheless still required by law to stop and let him or her pass.

(ps – How did I miss the "shall have the right of way" part?)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2017, 07:39:35 PM
I was down in Tucson, Arizona over the weekend. For as uninteresting as the city may be for those who aren't traffic nerds (at least according to my family who live in Phoenix), I've always found the city fascinating. They seem to be on the cutting edge of just about every new traffic control device, intersection configuration, etc. I've never seen so many "foreign" setups in my life.

I came upon this intersection in NE Tucson (Tanque Verde Road @ Sabino Canyon Road (https://goo.gl/uS7jcF)), where I noticed that the EB to NB left turn, a double left turn with permissive phasing (as is the way for almost all double lefts in Tucson), featured both a leading green arrow, and a lagging green arrow. I assume this is necessary due to a large amount of traffic performing the maneuver. Nonetheless, I've never seen this phasing used before:

https://youtu.be/1WWBn_6o4oY
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2017, 07:51:02 PM
That lead/lag phasing does exist elsewhere. Back in 2010 I noted a similar set-up in the San Francisco suburb of Millbrae, Calif. near S.F. Int'l Airport. It was on S.R. 82, known locally as El Camino Real. It appeared to be "actuated" only. That is the lead or lag phase would only activate if a vehicle tripped the induction loop in the left-turn lane. If there were no vehicles in the lane, that phase would be skipped as the signal cycled. It was the first and last time I ever saw a signal function that way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2017, 08:56:24 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 15, 2017, 07:51:02 PM
That lead/lag phasing does exist elsewhere. Back in 2010 I noted a similar set-up in the San Francisco suburb of Millbrae, Calif. near S.F. Int'l Airport. It was on S.R. 82, known locally as El Camino Real. It appeared to be "actuated" only. That is the lead or lag phase would only activate if a vehicle tripped the induction loop in the left-turn lane. If there were no vehicles in the lane, that phase would be skipped as the signal cycled. It was the first and last time I ever saw a signal function that way.

I stuck around and watched the Tucson signal to see how it performed, but time after time, this was the phasing. Traffic was too heavy for me to get an idea of how it worked when traffic levels were lower. But, from what I observed at quieter intersections, pro/per left turns seemed to include the green arrow even when there wasn't any traffic, so I assume the Tanque Verde/Sabino Canyon intersection works the same (including a green arrow at the beginning and end of the phase regardless of traffic levels, with the only difference being the length of the green arrow).

I think this phasing was chosen because the EB to NB maneuver needs quite a long protected phase. But because Tucson uses lagging signals, the oncoming WB to SB left turn (evidently used far less) would have a green arrow for the entire length of the EB to NB maneuver (to prevent yellow trap w/o using FYAs). So, they split said maneuver in half, leading the phase with a protected left for EB to NB, allowing EB through traffic to proceed for the first protected maneuver, and then following up with a lagging left, where the WB to SB maneuver had a green arrow. Basically gives the EB through traffic a much longer phase, although the WB through traffic seems to have a much shorter phase (about 12 seconds shorter than EB, from what I could tell).

Tucson seems to be experimenting with FYAs now; I noticed a relatively new one (https://goo.gl/EYqLfF) being used at the Golf Links/Swan intersection north of Davis-Monthan AFB, evidently the first for a double left (they have FYAs used along Speedway Blvd, but they're all single-lane left turns). The FYA would definitely improve upon these awkward situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 04:56:26 AM
I've found an example of Dallas Phasing in Washington State. Keene Road @ Englewood/Westcliffe, Richland:

https://goo.gl/kDM8jE

The left turn doghouses (aligned in the Colorado style -- also unusual) have louvres placed over the signal faces. Judging by street view imagery, the signals seem to run independently of the through traffic signals. Since I haven't been to the Tri-Cities for several years, I cannot confirm my suspicions. But the capture below, plus the signal louvres seem to suggest Dallas phasing.

Kind of makes me wonder...how many signals with Dallas Phasing still exist? I think even Texas has gotten rid of most of theirs. I never realised an example of it existed up here.

(https://i.imgur.com/xoONXX0.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:19:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 04:56:26 AM
I've found an example of Dallas Phasing in Washington State. Keene Road @ Englewood/Westcliffe, Richland:

https://goo.gl/kDM8jE

The left turn doghouses (aligned in the Colorado style -- also unusual) have louvres placed over the signal faces. Judging by street view imagery, the signals seem to run independently of the through traffic signals. Since I haven't been to the Tri-Cities for several years, I cannot confirm my suspicions. But the capture below, plus the signal louvres seem to suggest Dallas phasing.

Kind of makes me wonder...how many signals with Dallas Phasing still exist? I think even Texas has gotten rid of most of theirs. I never realised an example of it existed up here.

(https://i.imgur.com/xoONXX0.png)

Isn't the doghouse with the red indication (while the other heads are green) an MUTCD violation?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 05:28:00 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:19:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 04:56:26 AM
I've found an example of Dallas Phasing in Washington State. Keene Road @ Englewood/Westcliffe, Richland:

https://goo.gl/kDM8jE

The left turn doghouses (aligned in the Colorado style -- also unusual) have louvres placed over the signal faces. Judging by street view imagery, the signals seem to run independently of the through traffic signals. Since I haven't been to the Tri-Cities for several years, I cannot confirm my suspicions. But the capture below, plus the signal louvres seem to suggest Dallas phasing.

Kind of makes me wonder...how many signals with Dallas Phasing still exist? I think even Texas has gotten rid of most of theirs. I never realised an example of it existed up here.

https://i.imgur.com/xoONXX0.png

Isn't the doghouse with the red indication (while the other heads are green) an MUTCD violation?

Normally, I think it would be, yes. But it's a hallmark trait of Dallas phasing: the doghouse above the left turn lane runs completely independent of the through signals, so you can get these strange red/green combos. The louvres try to keep drivers from looking at the wrong signals.

The catch is, I can't quite figure out why, in the photo I posted, the left turn doghouse had the red orb lit up at all. If it was a leading left, even with Dallas phasing, the green orb should have been lit. The signal must have went red briefly, following the protected phase. This is evidenced by the very next Street View frame, showing a green orb: https://goo.gl/QcuAA5
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:31:29 AM
So if the doghouse is intended to be viewed only by traffic using the left turn lane, why even have a doghouse at all, as opposed to, say, a simple three section head?

P.S. This is the first time I've ever heard of "Dallas phasing," so excuse my ignorance on the subject. ;-)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 05:45:13 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:31:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 05:28:00 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:19:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 04:56:26 AM
I've found an example of Dallas Phasing in Washington State. Keene Road @ Englewood/Westcliffe, Richland:

https://goo.gl/kDM8jE

The left turn doghouses (aligned in the Colorado style -- also unusual) have louvres placed over the signal faces. Judging by street view imagery, the signals seem to run independently of the through traffic signals. Since I haven't been to the Tri-Cities for several years, I cannot confirm my suspicions. But the capture below, plus the signal louvres seem to suggest Dallas phasing.

Kind of makes me wonder...how many signals with Dallas Phasing still exist? I think even Texas has gotten rid of most of theirs. I never realised an example of it existed up here.

(https://i.imgur.com/xoONXX0.png)

Isn't the doghouse with the red indication (while the other heads are green) an MUTCD violation?

Normally, I think it would be, yes. But it's a hallmark trait of Dallas phasing: the doghouse above the left turn lane runs completely independent of the through signals, so you can get these strange red/green combos. The louvres try to keep drivers from looking at the wrong signals.

The catch is, I can't quite figure out why, in the photo I posted, the left turn doghouse had the red orb lit up at all. If it was a leading left, even with Dallas phasing, the green orb should have been lit. The signal must have went red briefly, following the protected phase. This is evidenced by the very next Street View frame, showing a green orb: https://goo.gl/QcuAA5

P.S. This is the first time I've ever heard of "Dallas phasing," so excuse my ignorance on the subject. ;-)

Not to worry. It's a very unusual setup...

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:31:29 AM
So if the doghouse is intended to be viewed only by traffic using the left turn lane, why even have a doghouse at all, as opposed to, say, a simple three section head?

The idea with Dallas phasing was to allow protected/permissive left turns with lead/lag phasing, by using louvres to prevent traffic in parallel lanes from seeing each other's signals (making it so through traffic could see one signal, but left turners see another). Because both signals used orbs, louvres were necessary to prevent confusion, and most importantly, prevent yellow trap (you'd need to ensure that left turning traffic, whose left turn was leading, didn't turn into traffic when the oncoming left turn's lagging protected movement flipped the through signal's light to red).

Now, with the advent of the FYA, and its all-arrow displays, Dallas phasing is no longer necessary. There's literally nothing to hide anymore.

Our very own roadfro made a video some time ago, detailing the operation of these signals:

https://youtu.be/KPKjcPI5Sko
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 16, 2017, 09:10:00 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 05:31:29 AM
So if the doghouse is intended to be viewed only by traffic using the left turn lane, why even have a doghouse at all, as opposed to, say, a simple three section head?

P.S. This is the first time I've ever heard of "Dallas phasing," so excuse my ignorance on the subject. ;-)

Dallas phasing is basically using a protected/permissive signal as a left turn signal. So in that photo above, the doghouse is intended to be used only by left turn traffic. The reason a 5-section head has to be used instead of a 3-section is that you want both protected and permissive indications. If the green light and arrow both come on, you get a protected left. If just the green light comes on, you get a permissive left.

They aren't installed anymore because FYA does the same thing in a much clearer, easier-to-understand way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 16, 2017, 09:25:52 PM
Guys, there is some confusion here with terminology. The left-turn signal shown in the photo above while it's similar to a doghouse, and works the same, is commonly called a side-by-side

Contrary to what someone said above, they are still permitted by the current MUTCD and are still being installed. They are called "shared signals" because they control both the left-turn and thru movements, and are required to always show the same circular-light color as the adjacent thru signals. The Manual suggests they be mounted between the left-thru lane and the left-turn lane to emphasize their "shared" function.

These signals are not Dallas Phasing. What Dallas Phasing actually does is it shows a green-ball over the left-turn lane while the heads over the thru-lanes are red. It allowed permissive left turns while thru traffic is stopped. And this is what the MUTCD no longer allows and now requires a flashing-yellow in its place.  Do a Google search for Dallas Phasing and you'll find some illustrations that explain it better.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2017, 10:01:44 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 16, 2017, 09:25:52 PM
Guys, there is some confusion here with terminology. The left-turn signal shown in the photo above while it's similar to a doghouse, and works the same, is commonly called a side-by-side

Contrary to what someone said above, they are still permitted by the current MUTCD and are still being installed. They are called "shared signals" because they control both the left-turn and thru movements, and are required to always show the same circular-light color as the adjacent thru signals. The Manual suggests they be mounted between the left-thru lane and the left-turn lane to emphasize their "shared" function.

These signals are not Dallas Phasing. What Dallas Phasing actually does is it shows a green-ball over the left-turn lane while the heads over the thru-lanes are red. It allowed permissive left turns while thru traffic is stopped. And this is what the MUTCD no longer allows and now requires a flashing-yellow in its place.  Do a Google search for Dallas Phasing and you'll find some illustrations that explain it better.

But the signal in jakeroot's picture is displaying a different indication and is centered over the left turn lane?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 16, 2017, 10:07:10 PM
The rules in the 2009 Manual apply to new and rebuilt signals only. The signal in the photo is apparently an older one, similar to thousands still in use nationwide. The Manual allows them to continue in-service until they are rebuilt or replaced.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 10:15:28 PM
What I was trying to say above was that Dallas Phasing was no longer allowed (or was obsolete), not that shared signal faces (be them doghouses or side-by-side signals) were no longer allowed. They still have plenty of uses, chiefly when there is no dedicated left turn lane.

The signal in the photo above, as far as I can tell, is in fact Dallas Phasing, that for no apparent reason, utilises a side-by-side 5-section display (extremely rare in Washington, hence the reason that I brought it up at all). The red orb and the green orb would not be lit at the same time if it weren't Dallas Phasing. That's the only setup that would allow such a thing. Minus a shared signal face that had its faces replaced by arrows (seen in Colorado quite a lot).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 17, 2017, 01:20:58 AM
The way I understand it, because the left turn signal is showing a ball indication that is different from the through lanes, it is Dallas phasing. The equivalent FYA display to what is shown in the picture would be a red left arrow and two green balls for through traffic.

Having two different ball indications facing the same direction at the same time is what is banned in new signals by the current MUTCD. Doghouses installed today must have the ball indicators match the through lane indicators, and be placed between the left turn lane and the leftmost through lane.

In addition, if you move around that GSV, you'll see that the balls in the left turn signal head are louvered and so are not visible to the through lanes. Another clear indicator of Dallas phasing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 17, 2017, 06:19:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 05:45:13 AM
Our very own roadfro made a video some time ago, detailing the operation of these signals:

Thanks for the shoutout :)

I made that almost 8 years ago. To date, it's the only video I've ever posted on YouTube. (The complexity of the PowerPoint animations took me quite a while.)


Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 10:15:28 PM
The signal in the photo above, as far as I can tell, is in fact Dallas Phasing, that for no apparent reason, utilises a side-by-side 5-section display (extremely rare in Washington, hence the reason that I brought it up at all). The red orb and the green orb would not be lit at the same time if it weren't Dallas Phasing. That's the only setup that would allow such a thing. Minus a shared signal face that had its faces replaced by arrows (seen in Colorado quite a lot).

It might not be Dallas Phasing... True that Dallas Phasing allows the turn lane and thru lanes to have different circular indications at the same time. However, seeing thru lanes green and a turn lane red doesn't quite jive with Dallas Phasing, since it should be allowing the left turn lane to have a circular green at the same time as the adjacent or opposing thru.


Another explanation for what is seen in the photo is time-of-day protected vs. protected/permitted phasing. This is something that was done for a while at select intersections in the Las Vegas area. In these cases, a doghouse with Dallas Phasing-style louvers was used over all circular indications of the 5-section head. During busy peak periods, where permitted left turns were unlikely to have a sufficient gap in the opposing traffic, the signal operated in protected-only mode and the circular red was displayed during adjacent and opposing thru greens. However, off-peak, the circular green was able to be displayed when appropriate. (Interestingly, at some of these setups, a red arrow was used at the top instead of using a louvered circular red. I didn't care for that variant at all, as a circular green/yellow looks odd being terminated by a red arrow.)

As Nevada embraced the FYA display quickly after the 2009 MUTCD was implemented, NDOT made funding available to local agencies so they could start replacing 5-section PPLT displays with 4-section FYAs. As I recall, most of the intersections in the Las Vegas area running Dallas Phasing and/or this time-of-day protected with 5-section heads were among the first to have the signal heads changed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 17, 2017, 07:59:45 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 17, 2017, 06:19:03 PM
It might not be Dallas Phasing... True that Dallas Phasing allows the turn lane and thru lanes to have different circular indications at the same time. However, seeing thru lanes green and a turn lane red doesn't quite jive with Dallas Phasing, since it should be allowing the left turn lane to have a circular green at the same time as the adjacent or opposing thru.

Another explanation for what is seen in the photo is time-of-day protected vs. protected/permitted phasing. This is something that was done for a while at select intersections in the Las Vegas area. In these cases, a doghouse with Dallas Phasing-style louvers was used over all circular indications of the 5-section head. During busy peak periods, where permitted left turns were unlikely to have a sufficient gap in the opposing traffic, the signal operated in protected-only mode and the circular red was displayed during adjacent and opposing thru greens. However, off-peak, the circular green was able to be displayed when appropriate. (Interestingly, at some of these setups, a red arrow was used at the top instead of using a louvered circular red. I didn't care for that variant at all, as a circular green/yellow looks odd being terminated by a red arrow.)

I was curious about that when I first stumbled upon the signal. It should be green, not red, if the left turn was leading. But I did post two Street View links, in addition to the image above, which you can see here:

Frame 1: https://goo.gl/kDM8jE
Frame 2: http://goo.gl/QcuAA5

In frame 1, the signal is red. But literally seconds later (judging by the oncoming cars having moved off), the signal changes to green. My assumption, after having then considered this, was that the signal phasing was green arrow > yellow arrow > red ball > green ball > yellow ball > red ball. Basically, the same behavior as most FYAs, just without the all arrow displays. Basically, I'm still pretty sure it's Dallas Phasing, just a slight modification of the traditional setup.

I mentioned this oddity upthread:

Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2017, 05:28:00 AM
The catch is, I can't quite figure out why, in the photo I posted, the left turn doghouse had the red orb lit up at all. If it was a leading left, even with Dallas phasing, the green orb should have been lit. The signal must have went red briefly, following the protected phase. This is evidenced by the very next Street View frame, showing a green orb: https://goo.gl/QcuAA5
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 19, 2017, 10:44:44 AM
^ I must have overlooked your street view frame observation the first time. That explanation certainly works...and it could be that all the circular indications were tied to the opposing thru signals (which isn't 100% typical with Dallas Phasing)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 22, 2017, 07:35:23 PM
I have never seen an overhead traffic signal in British Columbia without a backplate...lo and behold, the intersection of Fort, Oak Bay, and Pandora in suburban Victoria: https://goo.gl/iSo3Gw

Hardly interesting to most of you, but very unusual for BC. There are more in Victoria, glancing around on Street View. Never realised such a setup existed in BC; I haven't been out on Vancouver Island for 10+ years. Only noticed this signal due to a CBC News story (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/retaining-wall-collapse-victoria-oak-bay-evacuation-1.4456467).

(https://i.imgur.com/eSq1wHX.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 03, 2018, 05:38:37 PM
This one pedestrian head in Puyallup, WA kept catching my eye, but I only noticed why yesteday. For some reason, whenever a "4" is displayed, there's an extra line on the bottom of the number (like a lowercase "y"), and whenever a "0" is displayed, there's an extra line across the middle (making it look like an "8").

https://goo.gl/De4d7L

https://youtu.be/-qyQdVz6les
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

(https://i.imgur.com/7D4JbA9.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 05, 2018, 10:29:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

Depends on when the signal was installed. By 2003 MUTCD standards, I'm pretty sure this is acceptable, since you have a one-lane through movement and one primary signal located in the cone of vision. The 2009 MUTCD introduced a standard that dictates that two primary signals are required for the through movement in the cone of vision, even if the through movement is not the major movement on the approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on January 05, 2018, 03:04:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

No idea on if it's allowed, but New Jersey has been known to put only one signal on both the far and near sides of an intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/K7c2Jgia2bv
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 05, 2018, 03:33:21 PM
Quote from: Ian on January 05, 2018, 03:04:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

No idea on if it's allowed, but New Jersey has been known to put only one signal on both the far and near sides of an intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/K7c2Jgia2bv

That's generally an older layout.   Today, they are pretty good adhering to the one signal per lane concept, as shown on these newer signals on NJ 38.  https://goo.gl/maps/u61Z84jmNR82  They also continue to post one near-side traffic signal. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 08:13:11 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 05, 2018, 10:29:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

Depends on when the signal was installed. By 2003 MUTCD standards, I'm pretty sure this is acceptable, since you have a one-lane through movement and one primary signal located in the cone of vision. The 2009 MUTCD introduced a standard that dictates that two primary signals are required for the through movement in the cone of vision, even if the through movement is not the major movement on the approach.

The signal was installed in 2010. So, it sounds like they might not have gotten the memo in time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 05, 2018, 09:29:28 PM
Roadfro, you'd best check your 2009 Manual again. On page-463, Sec. 4D-13.01 repeats what previous Manuals said: "At least one and preferably both of the minimum of two primary signals required for the through movement" shall be located within the cone-of-vision visible from the stop-line.

So that 2010 installation in Renton, Wa. is still permitted by the MUTCD. But again, as in the past Manuals, the FHWA strongly encourages both required heads to be in the "cone". But that installation strictly speaking, is in-compliance. And I might add, it looks well-designed to me, given the geometry of that particular intersection, though a second green-ball on the far-side would be good too. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 06, 2018, 01:20:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 08:13:11 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 05, 2018, 10:29:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2018, 01:25:35 AM
Does anyone know if this is allowed?

In Renton, WA, at the off-ramp to Talbot Road from southbound 405, one of the two thru-signals is posted near-side. From the stop line, only the far-side signal is visible (the near-side signal is mounted too far back). I'm pretty sure two far-side signals (both in the stop-line cone of vision) are required before any secondary signals can be considered. Out of image, there is also a near-side left turn signal. I appreciate WSDOT going the extra mile by using near-side signals, but I'd also appreciate an extra far-side signal if possible.

https://goo.gl/JSEgHG

Depends on when the signal was installed. By 2003 MUTCD standards, I'm pretty sure this is acceptable, since you have a one-lane through movement and one primary signal located in the cone of vision. The 2009 MUTCD introduced a standard that dictates that two primary signals are required for the through movement in the cone of vision, even if the through movement is not the major movement on the approach.

The signal was installed in 2010. So, it sounds like they might not have gotten the memo in time.

States are given two years after a new MUTCD is introduced to either adopt it verbatim, adopt verbatim with a state supplement, or create their own state MUTCD that is in substantial compliance with the national one. For the 2009 MUTCD, which was approved 1/15/2010, states had until 1/15/2012 to adopt. So it is entirely possible that this signal was installed in the interim and Washington (which appears to be a "adopt with state supplement" state, according to the MUTCD website) had not yet incorporated the new standard at the time of design or construction.

Quote from: SignBridge on January 05, 2018, 09:29:28 PM
Roadfro, you'd best check your 2009 Manual again. On page-463, Sec. 4D-13.01 repeats what previous Manuals said: "At least one and preferably both of the minimum of two primary signals required for the through movement" shall be located within the cone-of-vision visible from the stop-line.

So that 2010 installation in Renton, Wa. is still permitted by the MUTCD. But again, as in the past Manuals, the FHWA strongly encourages both required heads to be in the "cone". But that installation strictly speaking, is in-compliance. And I might add, it looks well-designed to me, given the geometry of that particular intersection, though a second green-ball on the far-side would be good too. 

Ok, I was mistaken about both primary signal faces being in the cone of vision at the stop line. But compliance still depends on which version of MUTCD this was designed under. With 2009 MUTCD, two primary signal faces are still required for this movement. Since the second signal head is not 40-180 feet beyond the stop line, as required by Sec 4D.14 p01 and illustrated in Fig 4D-4, it cannot be considered a primary signal face. Therefore, the intersection still doesn't meet 2009 MUTCD standards for signal head placement.

I don't disagree with a supplemental signal head here though, given the curve on the off ramp (I'd have probably put in a near-side supplemental for the left turn also). But a second primary face would have been good to have even under 2003 standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2018, 02:47:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 06, 2018, 01:20:56 PM
I don't disagree with a supplemental signal head here though, given the curve on the off ramp (I'd have probably put in a near-side supplemental for the left turn also). But a second primary face would have been good to have even under 2003 standards.

You might be alluding to this because I already pointed it out, but WSDOT, in what I can only describe as totally out of character, did actually use a supplementary near-side left turn signal (check out the street view in the original post). If it were warranted anywhere, it would be this curve. Though, this region of the DOT is known for going off-script. The oncoming right turn has a supplementary right turn signal, and the left turn onto northbound I-405 on the other side of the freeway has a supplementary left turn signal. They almost had a perfect setup here. I intend to email WSDOT to ask about installing another far-side signal, just so I can complete the perfection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 06, 2018, 10:57:56 PM
Roadfro, I believe you may still be mistaken about the Manual's requirements. The section you cited (4D.14.01.A) also contains that same wording "at least one and preferably both" when specifying the range of 40 to 180 ft. from the stop line for the two primary signals.

I believe the writers of the Manual might have specifically worded it that way to allow for some flexibility for oddly angled intersections like the one in the Renton photo. It's all good.

Admittedly, the MUTCD is very complicated and we have to read it very carefully. I've made mistakes too and had to reread a section several times before I understood it. Especially the sections that outlawed "Dallas Phasing". They should give us college credits for this! LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 07, 2018, 12:12:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2018, 10:57:56 PM
Admittedly, the MUTCD is very complicated and we have to read it very carefully. I've made mistakes too and had to reread a section several times before I understood it. Especially the sections that outlawed "Dallas Phasing". They should give us college credits for this! LOL

A college class on the ins-and-outs of the MUTCD would be amazing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 12:53:26 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 07, 2018, 12:12:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2018, 10:57:56 PM
Admittedly, the MUTCD is very complicated and we have to read it very carefully. I've made mistakes too and had to reread a section several times before I understood it. Especially the sections that outlawed "Dallas Phasing". They should give us college credits for this! LOL

A college class on the ins-and-outs of the MUTCD would be amazing.

I'm sure civil engineering courses bring up the MUTCD from time to time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 01:02:13 AM
I'm assuming that this relatively recent NYSDOT installation isnt MUTCD compliant on this approach

NY110 at Milbar Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/BpxHfvDVEsL2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 01:36:10 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 01:02:13 AM
I'm assuming that this relatively recent NYSDOT installation isnt MUTCD compliant on this approach

NY110 at Milbar Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/BpxHfvDVEsL2

Yikes. No, that's definitely not compliant. Looks like they modified the setup recently (https://goo.gl/9LUS19) by removing the split-phasing, but forgot to account for the now-missing additional through head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 02:05:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 01:36:10 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 01:02:13 AM
I'm assuming that this relatively recent NYSDOT installation isnt MUTCD compliant on this approach

NY110 at Milbar Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/BpxHfvDVEsL2

Yikes. No, that's definitely not compliant. Looks like they modified the setup recently (https://goo.gl/9LUS19) by removing the split-phasing, but forgot to account for the now-missing additional through head.

It is still split phased. I've driven through that intersection with the old and new setups active.

Other side view

Farmingdale, New York

https://goo.gl/maps/8CqVfMb8esD2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 02:09:57 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 02:05:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 01:36:10 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 01:02:13 AM
I'm assuming that this relatively recent NYSDOT installation isnt MUTCD compliant on this approach

NY110 at Milbar Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/BpxHfvDVEsL2

Yikes. No, that's definitely not compliant. Looks like they modified the setup recently (https://goo.gl/9LUS19) by removing the split-phasing, but forgot to account for the now-missing additional through head.

It is still split phased. I've driven through that intersection with the old and new setups active.

Other side view

Farmingdale, New York

https://goo.gl/maps/8CqVfMb8esD2

That's just bizarre. No idea why they would have changed the signal head, if the operation didn't change. I can tell they recently retrofitted the signal heads with backplates, but only for the north/south approaches. Maybe they have some changes in mind for the east/west approaches?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 07, 2018, 01:37:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 06, 2018, 02:47:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 06, 2018, 01:20:56 PM
I don't disagree with a supplemental signal head here though, given the curve on the off ramp (I'd have probably put in a near-side supplemental for the left turn also). But a second primary face would have been good to have even under 2003 standards.

You might be alluding to this because I already pointed it out, but WSDOT, in what I can only describe as totally out of character, did actually use a supplementary near-side left turn signal (check out the street view in the original post). If it were warranted anywhere, it would be this curve. Though, this region of the DOT is known for going off-script. The oncoming right turn has a supplementary right turn signal, and the left turn onto northbound I-5 on the other side of the freeway has a supplementary left turn signal. They almost had a perfect setup here. I intend to email WSDOT to ask about installing another far-side signal, just so I can complete the perfection.

I definitely missed that near-side left turn signal. Well kudos to WSDOT then :)

Quote from: SignBridge on January 06, 2018, 10:57:56 PM
Roadfro, I believe you may still be mistaken about the Manual's requirements. The section you cited (4D.14.01.A) also contains that same wording "at least one and preferably both" when specifying the range of 40 to 180 ft. from the stop line for the two primary signals.

I believe the writers of the Manual might have specifically worded it that way to allow for some flexibility for oddly angled intersections like the one in the Renton photo. It's all good.

So I looked up the definition of 'primary signal face' from Chapter 1: "Primary Signal Face–one of the required or recommended minimum number of signal faces for a given approach or separate turning movement, but not including near-side signal faces required as a result of the far-side signal faces exceeding the maximum distance from the stop line."

That definition doesn't really provide any clarification on this issue (the near side signal does not appear to be required due to the maximum distance stipulation). When you look at Figure 4D-4 ("Lateral and Longitudinal Location of Primary Signal Faces"), that seems to indicate a primary signal face must fall within the cone of vision. But the "at least one and preferably both" wording on location of through signals is really confusing the issue. If two primary signal faces are required, and "at least one and preferably both" must fall within the cone of vision, where would you possibly locate a second primary signal face if not within the cone of vision?  (Note that at this intersection, there is already a pole installed for a ped head that could easily have been used to add the second primary through signal face within the cone of vision.)

I guess it's just baffling to me that a "primary" signal face could be located on the near side of the intersection not visible from the stop line. Maybe I'm just too used to Nevada layouts, wherein you'll almost always find a mast-mounted signal head and at least one overhead signal head for every through movement that is visible from the stop line...
[/quote]
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 04:11:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 02:09:57 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 02:05:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 01:36:10 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 07, 2018, 01:02:13 AM
I'm assuming that this relatively recent NYSDOT installation isnt MUTCD compliant on this approach

NY110 at Milbar Blvd

https://goo.gl/maps/BpxHfvDVEsL2

Yikes. No, that's definitely not compliant. Looks like they modified the setup recently (https://goo.gl/9LUS19) by removing the split-phasing, but forgot to account for the now-missing additional through head.

It is still split phased. I've driven through that intersection with the old and new setups active.

Other side view

Farmingdale, New York

https://goo.gl/maps/8CqVfMb8esD2

That's just bizarre. No idea why they would have changed the signal head, if the operation didn't change. I can tell they recently retrofitted the signal heads with backplates, but only for the north/south approaches. Maybe they have some changes in mind for the east/west approaches?

The backplates were included with that new install. The older signals were quite old.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 07, 2018, 09:46:16 PM
I'm not following this issue with the signal in Farmingdale, NY. I don't know what existed before but it looks MUTCD compliant to me in the photo. What is the problem?

And Roadfro, I think you're right. (chuckle!) You've been spoiled by the excellent signal configurations in Nevada (and California). Those of us who come from the Northeast are used to more variety in signal mounting. There are many options used in this part of the country that are MUTCD compliant, but different than what you're used to. Though I actually prefer the Western states practices.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 09:56:44 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 07, 2018, 09:46:16 PM
I'm not following this issue with the signal in Farmingdale, NY. I don't know what existed before but it looks MUTCD compliant to me in the photo. What is the problem?

The link in the OP (the first link) shows an approach with only one through signal. I've looked everywhere in GSV and can't find the additional through head, if one was in fact used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 08, 2018, 01:43:37 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2018, 09:56:44 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 07, 2018, 09:46:16 PM
I'm not following this issue with the signal in Farmingdale, NY. I don't know what existed before but it looks MUTCD compliant to me in the photo. What is the problem?

The link in the OP (the first link) shows an approach with only one through signal. I've looked everywhere in GSV and can't find the additional through head, if one was in fact used.
I've seen a few set-ups like that before here in Huntsville:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6909391,-86.5749269,3a,15y,356.35h,95.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssh223AI0_4PtLLp0bj-gvA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6910627,-86.5742449,3a,15y,4.29h,97.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svzQx-UFSXr9O76RBqroULA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6910262,-86.5749395,3a,20.2y,171.24h,107.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTIcZobURp0IFLtmb0KzL4Q!2e0!5s20130701T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5954347,-86.5622004,3a,15y,260.59h,97.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sccjc18OzfAe_FkDqfjlw2g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.595312,-86.5621501,3a,15y,87.2h,99.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_XvQdgTA8d_vNu9zPvkWqg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6304479,-86.5669386,3a,15y,98.03h,94.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO1dDZ4tS6UsT3HZGbW7laQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

However, they're typically more like these:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6912489,-86.5742554,3a,15y,169.1h,96.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srFGc-gAaLkacrspmvnO1xw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6304099,-86.5670339,3a,15y,289.11h,98.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Se0u1i8EsDePEt3PzCIDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6759613,-86.5679823,3a,15.3y,291.15h,110t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ6S9QmJSxPcBey8vgddwLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6905951,-86.5803905,3a,15y,335.9h,96.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUTHrBBAPFOPHg5FBMjj82w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7490497,-86.5782459,3a,15y,2.81h,96.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEbK3AJgpbGWBk3dEG9o1Hg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7714837,-86.6510727,3a,15y,285.31h,99.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX6QA9gQUHtUz6Cu5__dx-A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

However, in the case of this example (http://"https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6905951,-86.5803905,3a,15y,335.9h,96.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUTHrBBAPFOPHg5FBMjj82w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656"), it appears that a third northbound signal on the right (would've been a thru signal) was originally planned (and maybe even hung) based on the existence of an un-used drip-loop (http://"https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6907461,-86.580462,3a,15y,359.97h,108.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb7ZMe_pEfdo7uUhBgeMyzw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656") where a signal could go. Its (possible) existence seems to be confirmed by the fact that the traffic islands are far enough back for a third northbound lane there. However, the (possible) signal & lane have been gone as long as I can remember, so they were likely removed to improve the flow of traffic due to how many people heading west on Airport Road are turning right to head north on the Parkway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015–just how common are straight ahead arrows?

(https://i.imgur.com/rqNHOKB.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on January 08, 2018, 09:20:22 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015–just how common are straight ahead arrows?

In Ontario, they're often used at parclo A4's to emphasize that you can't turn onto the off-ramp.
Here's an example on Hespeler Rd at the 401: https://goo.gl/maps/rBhaMzvH3To (https://goo.gl/maps/rBhaMzvH3To)

In Montreal, especially in downtown, the signal phase often starts with a green straight arrow for several seconds before switching to a green ball. The straight arrow and NTOR restriction prevent cars from being able to turn into the pedestrian crosswalk, giving pedestrians a safe headstart.

What I find interesting is that your photo shows green straight arrows and a left FYA. In Ontario, a straight green arrow means no turns are allowed at the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 08, 2018, 12:20:56 PM
How about an intersection of all arrow indications?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6095589,-86.977119,3a,89.9y,192.81h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sboRnGrCDfeIisU_1ndqhdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6094538,-86.9770278,3a,16.8y,53.76h,104.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1somWIC1U7vePBRnV4QN8iRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 12:26:56 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 08, 2018, 12:20:56 PM
How about an intersection of all arrow indications?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6095589,-86.977119,3a,89.9y,192.81h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sboRnGrCDfeIisU_1ndqhdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6094538,-86.9770278,3a,16.8y,53.76h,104.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1somWIC1U7vePBRnV4QN8iRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's just impressive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: dfnva on January 08, 2018, 02:39:32 PM
Straight ahead arrows used to be fairly common in Virginia.

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015–just how common are straight ahead arrows?

(https://i.imgur.com/rqNHOKB.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 08, 2018, 05:02:16 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 08, 2018, 12:20:56 PM
How about an intersection of all arrow indications?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6095589,-86.977119,3a,89.9y,192.81h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sboRnGrCDfeIisU_1ndqhdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6094538,-86.9770278,3a,16.8y,53.76h,104.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1somWIC1U7vePBRnV4QN8iRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Red or yellow straight ahead arrows are a MUTCD no-no.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on January 08, 2018, 05:42:20 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015—just how common are straight ahead arrows?

They’re relatively common in Utah, used to emphasize that a particular movement is not allowed.
Here’s an example, (https://goo.gl/maps/98EPtsQi4Yw) at I-80 and US 89 (State St). The cross street is the freeeay off ramp, so it’s one-way right (east).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 09, 2018, 12:35:19 AM
Up arrows are common in NYC. Usually they are in an 8-8-12 layout.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 09, 2018, 09:48:47 AM
Up arrows in Norfolk on Military Hwy at Virginia Beach Blvd (image from GSV)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180109/98c181221ce252fabd89d2ea28c7182b.jpg)

SM-S820L

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 09, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015–just how common are straight ahead arrows?

(https://i.imgur.com/rqNHOKB.jpg)

What I find interesting is that the "LEFT TURN YIELD ON FLASHING YELLOW ARROW" is on one of those lit signs (not sure what they're actually called) as opposed to just a regular sign
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2018, 04:23:31 PM
Quote from: plain on January 09, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 08, 2018, 05:33:00 AM
So, I'm curious, because I just rediscovered this picture I took back in June 2015–just how common are straight ahead arrows?

https://i.imgur.com/rqNHOKB.jpg

What I find interesting is that the "LEFT TURN YIELD ON FLASHING YELLOW ARROW" is on one of those lit signs (not sure what they're actually called) as opposed to just a regular sign

I'm wondering if the signal is time-of-day based. During peak times, it might go to a red arrow, and the sign would change to say "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".

I, for one, think time-of-day phasing is pretty dumb. But, it seems to be more common by the year.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 02:34:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2018, 04:23:31 PM
I'm wondering if the signal is time-of-day based. During peak times, it might go to a red arrow, and the sign would change to say "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".

I, for one, think time-of-day phasing is pretty dumb. But, it seems to be more common by the year.

It is either time or demand based, because the left lane is sometimes turned into a straight/left option lane, as evidenced by this electronic lane sign on the overpass: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9487734,-92.986119,3a,75y,155.7h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swjyqTZD4kJfY1hCuxWLZIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

For all the times I've been by there, though, I've never seen it used like that.

Edit: if you switch to the 2011 GSV images (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9479308,-92.985783,3a,34.7y,153.94h,92.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s00EO7Jp0Ee9Kx4RJuL9UTw!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), you can see it in that mode, but back then the intersection had different, older equipment.

Edit #2: further playing around with GSV found this, the other message that sign displays (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9477284,-92.9857194,3a,75y,134.57h,96.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s84b5xsMmjiRBuWJEwqjV7Q!2e0!5s20130901T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 10, 2018, 03:04:56 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 02:34:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2018, 04:23:31 PM
I'm wondering if the signal is time-of-day based. During peak times, it might go to a red arrow, and the sign would change to say "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".

I, for one, think time-of-day phasing is pretty dumb. But, it seems to be more common by the year.

It is either time or demand based, because the left lane is sometimes turned into a straight/left option lane, as evidenced by this electronic lane sign on the overpass: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9487734,-92.986119,3a,75y,155.7h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swjyqTZD4kJfY1hCuxWLZIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

For all the times I've been by there, though, I've never seen it used like that.

Edit: if you switch to the 2011 GSV images (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9479308,-92.985783,3a,34.7y,153.94h,92.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s00EO7Jp0Ee9Kx4RJuL9UTw!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), you can see it in that mode, but back then the intersection had different, older equipment.

Edit #2: further playing around with GSV found this, the other message that sign displays (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9477284,-92.9857194,3a,75y,134.57h,96.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s84b5xsMmjiRBuWJEwqjV7Q!2e0!5s20130901T000000!7i13312!8i6656).

I also played around with it, and got this GSV image: https://goo.gl/FgBR1r ... goes protected-only when the double-left setup is used. My understanding was that MN was double permissive left-friendly, but maybe not as much as I previously thought.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 03:25:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 10, 2018, 03:04:56 AM
I also played around with it, and got this GSV image: https://goo.gl/FgBR1r ... goes protected-only when the double-left setup is used. My understanding was that MN was double permissive left-friendly, but maybe not as much as I previously thought.

I've seen the equipment for it in a few places, but never in permissive operation. I think the other problem is that, in this particular spot, since it's only a temporary double left, perhaps MnDOT felt that to allow protected/permissive operation there would be too confusing? Wouldn't allowing it also require an unusual signal head with five sections, like in the 2011 GSV link I posted? (Except with the requisite substitutions for a FYA, of course.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2018, 06:23:51 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 02:34:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2018, 04:23:31 PM
I'm wondering if the signal is time-of-day based. During peak times, it might go to a red arrow, and the sign would change to say "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".

I, for one, think time-of-day phasing is pretty dumb. But, it seems to be more common by the year.

It is either time or demand based, because the left lane is sometimes turned into a straight/left option lane, as evidenced by this electronic lane sign on the overpass: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9487734,-92.986119,3a,75y,155.7h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swjyqTZD4kJfY1hCuxWLZIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Although it appears it's either a straight OR a left turn lane.  It doesn't appear it's an actual option lane where you can choose to turn left or go straight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 06:43:30 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2018, 06:23:51 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 02:34:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2018, 04:23:31 PM
I'm wondering if the signal is time-of-day based. During peak times, it might go to a red arrow, and the sign would change to say "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY".

I, for one, think time-of-day phasing is pretty dumb. But, it seems to be more common by the year.
It is either time or demand based, because the left lane is sometimes turned into a straight/left option lane, as evidenced by this electronic lane sign on the overpass: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9487734,-92.986119,3a,75y,155.7h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swjyqTZD4kJfY1hCuxWLZIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Although it appears it's either a straight OR a left turn lane.  It doesn't appear it's an actual option lane where you can choose to turn left or go straight.

Yes, you are correct. I noticed that after fiddling around with GSV for like twenty minutes and just never updated my post (again!)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 10, 2018, 08:54:49 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 10, 2018, 03:25:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 10, 2018, 03:04:56 AM
I also played around with it, and got this GSV image: https://goo.gl/FgBR1r ... goes protected-only when the double-left setup is used. My understanding was that MN was double permissive left-friendly, but maybe not as much as I previously thought.

I've seen the equipment for it in a few places, but never in permissive operation. I think the other problem is that, in this particular spot, since it's only a temporary double left, perhaps MnDOT felt that to allow protected/permissive operation there would be too confusing? Wouldn't allowing it also require an unusual signal head with five sections, like in the 2011 GSV link I posted? (Except with the requisite substitutions for a FYA, of course.)

Based on the newfound knowledge above, I think an FYA would still be acceptable. Given that it's a temporary movement, I can see why MNDOT might not be tempted to do anything unusual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 16, 2018, 10:42:40 AM
Here's a weird traffic signal I found on Google Streetview in Juneau, Alaska.

https://goo.gl/maps/nwhk5ZEnZYE2

The mast arm curves downward at the end, where it hovers over a section of median.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: aztoucan on January 16, 2018, 01:49:30 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on January 16, 2018, 10:42:40 AM
Here's a weird traffic signal I found on Google Streetview in Juneau, Alaska.

https://goo.gl/maps/nwhk5ZEnZYE2

The mast arm curves downward at the end, where it hovers over a section of median.

That style was very popular in the Sacramento area. Not so much in use any more though


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 16, 2018, 04:04:34 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on January 16, 2018, 10:42:40 AM
Here's a weird traffic signal I found on Google Streetview in Juneau, Alaska.

https://goo.gl/maps/nwhk5ZEnZYE2

The mast arm curves downward at the end, where it hovers over a section of median.

I think I've seen these posted here before. But regardless, they are indeed quite weird. I've never seen them in WA before.

Side-note: props to Alaska for using side-mounted signals in all the right places.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 22, 2018, 04:08:01 PM
This pic was posted in the 1-2-3 Road Sign Challenge thread. What kind of beacon signal is this?

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6845338262_171ec38853_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 22, 2018, 07:19:51 PM
I've heard them called bouncing-ball beacons.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hurricane Rex on January 23, 2018, 01:00:47 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 22, 2018, 04:08:01 PM
This pic was posted in the 1-2-3 Road Sign Challenge thread. What kind of beacon signal is this?

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6845338262_171ec38853_c.jpg)

Looks like just an evolved flashing stop light to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 23, 2018, 04:42:29 PM
Thanks guys. I've never seen that style before and it seems odd that it's displaying red and yellow at the same time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 23, 2018, 05:03:49 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 23, 2018, 04:42:29 PM
Thanks guys. I've never seen that style before and it seems odd that it's displaying red and yellow at the same time.

Is the beacon over the center lane flashing red? Certainly looks like it, but there's no painted turn lane there, and usually beacons don't have different indications for one direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on January 23, 2018, 09:50:35 PM
I just saw this on Imgur (https://imgur.com/gallery/vy4Ch):
(https://i.imgur.com/zZxIceq.jpg)

The post says that they are in Ukraine

One of the comments (https://imgur.com/gallery/vy4Ch/comment/1241549929) made the point that it would be too easy to see from the wrong direction, and that it would be unclear what light goes with what lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 24, 2018, 04:02:19 PM
Does anyone else feel like the FHWA took over the world? I mean what is stopping any other country from making traffic lights Purple, Brown, White? There is clear descendants in other countries that can be seen. What does a Yield sign look like elsewhere? An upside down triangle. America's political push in the 40's for globalization has had an interesting effect on the world as a whole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 24, 2018, 04:47:49 PM
^^ There is the Vienna Conventions of international signs and signals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 24, 2018, 06:01:10 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 24, 2018, 04:47:49 PM
^^ There is the Vienna Conventions of international signs and signals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals

...and I would say the Vienna convention, as a whole, has had a much larger effect on the world than anything from the FHWA. We invented the octagonal stop sign, sure. But, we're at best on-par with what's coming out of Europe. Equal entities, basically.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on January 24, 2018, 08:40:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 23, 2018, 05:03:49 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 23, 2018, 04:42:29 PM
Thanks guys. I've never seen that style before and it seems odd that it's displaying red and yellow at the same time.

Is the beacon over the center lane flashing red? Certainly looks like it, but there's no painted turn lane there, and usually beacons don't have different indications for one direction.

For a while, TxDOT seemed to use "yellow" LED assemblies that were very orange compared to the lenses on the incandescent fixtures that they replaced. Given that the left side looks evenly illuminated everywhere and the right side is brightest in the center, I suspect that we're seeing one of each.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on January 25, 2018, 01:58:48 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 24, 2018, 04:02:19 PM
Does anyone else feel like the FHWA took over the world? I mean what is stopping any other country from making traffic lights Purple, Brown, White? There is clear descendants in other countries that can be seen. What does a Yield sign look like elsewhere? An upside down triangle. America's political push in the 40's for globalization has had an interesting effect on the world as a whole.

Not really, the American influence in road signage and signals is mostly limited to the Americas and certain Asian/Oceanian countries. Most of the world is rather influenced by Europe and the standardisation efforts by the UN which produced the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals), and even though a lot of countries haven't signed or ratified the convention, they more or less follow it.

As pointed out by jakeroot, the US' biggest contribution is probably the octogonal stop sign which has replaced the round stop sign (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg/240px-Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg.png) used until the 70s in most of Europe (and even longer in some cases). Yellow road markings for opposing traffic may also be worth mentioning as a contribution.

For you last statement, there is no American exceptionalism at play here, in fact the US has stayed out of the Vienna Convention and gone its own way, but I do remember seeing a picture on here showing (supposedly) trial usage of Vienna Convention style signage in the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman on January 25, 2018, 04:16:51 PM
Quote from: riiga on January 25, 2018, 01:58:48 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 24, 2018, 04:02:19 PM
Does anyone else feel like the FHWA took over the world? I mean what is stopping any other country from making traffic lights Purple, Brown, White? There is clear descendants in other countries that can be seen. What does a Yield sign look like elsewhere? An upside down triangle. America's political push in the 40's for globalization has had an interesting effect on the world as a whole.

Not really, the American influence in road signage and signals is mostly limited to the Americas and certain Asian/Oceanian countries. Most of the world is rather influenced by Europe and the standardisation efforts by the UN which produced the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals), and even though a lot of countries haven't signed or ratified the convention, they more or less follow it.

As pointed out by jakeroot, the US' biggest contribution is probably the octogonal stop sign which has replaced the round stop sign (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg/240px-Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg.png) used until the 70s in most of Europe (and even longer in some cases). Yellow road markings for opposing traffic may also be worth mentioning as a contribution.

For you last statement, there is no American exceptionalism at play here, in fact the US has stayed out of the Vienna Convention and gone its own way, but I do remember seeing a picture on here showing (supposedly) trial usage of Vienna Convention style signage in the US.
In the late 1960s/early 1970s, as a trial, guide signs based on the Vienna Convention standards were installed on streets around the Boston Common and the Public Garden - I remember seeing them as a kid.  IIRC, a few of them lasted into the mid-1980s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 25, 2018, 04:30:10 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 25, 2018, 04:16:51 PM
Quote from: riiga on January 25, 2018, 01:58:48 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 24, 2018, 04:02:19 PM
Does anyone else feel like the FHWA took over the world? I mean what is stopping any other country from making traffic lights Purple, Brown, White? There is clear descendants in other countries that can be seen. What does a Yield sign look like elsewhere? An upside down triangle. America's political push in the 40's for globalization has had an interesting effect on the world as a whole.

Not really, the American influence in road signage and signals is mostly limited to the Americas and certain Asian/Oceanian countries. Most of the world is rather influenced by Europe and the standardisation efforts by the UN which produced the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals), and even though a lot of countries haven't signed or ratified the convention, they more or less follow it.

As pointed out by jakeroot, the US' biggest contribution is probably the octogonal stop sign which has replaced the round stop sign (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg/240px-Vienna_Convention_road_sign_B2b_%28v1%29.svg.png) used until the 70s in most of Europe (and even longer in some cases). Yellow road markings for opposing traffic may also be worth mentioning as a contribution.

For you last statement, there is no American exceptionalism at play here, in fact the US has stayed out of the Vienna Convention and gone its own way, but I do remember seeing a picture on here showing (supposedly) trial usage of Vienna Convention style signage in the US.

In the late 1960s/early 1970s, as a trial, guide signs based on the Vienna Convention standards were installed on streets around the Boston Common and the Public Garden - I remember seeing them as a kid.  IIRC, a few of them lasted into the mid-1980s.

I don't think they were lifted from Vienna standards per se. They were really Worboys-style signage:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Boston-worboys-sign.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 27, 2018, 04:31:01 AM
This setup has since been removed, but at this intersection (https://goo.gl/2h3SUw) in Auburn, Washington, the left turn arrow was provided by a doghouse, whereas the right turn arrow was provided by a tower... :crazy:

(https://i.imgur.com/oHmhlU6.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:33:21 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.

Uh, you sure about that? Care to post some GVS links?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:39:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:33:21 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.

Uh, you sure about that? Care to post some GVS links?

This is the exact spot I took that picture from. (https://goo.gl/pbgKbd)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:41:47 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:39:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:33:21 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.

Uh, you sure about that? Care to post some GVS links?

This is the exact spot I took that picture from. (https://goo.gl/pbgKbd)

Thanks...Although just to make sure my comment wasn't misunderstood, I was referring to Arkansas' comment that these are common in other states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 27, 2018, 05:44:42 PM
Reminds me of those lights they use to start races, just placed horizontally.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:45:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:33:21 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.

Uh, you sure about that? Care to post some GVS links?
No, I said I had seen photos similar in nature to those stoplights. I have wondered about them too. I haven't had any luck searching for similar ones. :banghead:

I've always thought that the extra lenses were turning capable.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:46:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:41:47 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:39:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2018, 05:33:21 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
Ah, West Capitol Ave! These signals are common elsewhere in other areas of different states, from the photos I have seen.

Uh, you sure about that? Care to post some GVS links?

This is the exact spot I took that picture from. (https://goo.gl/pbgKbd)

Thanks...Although just to make sure my comment wasn't misunderstood, I was referring to Arkansas' comment that these are common in other states.

Oh... I thought you were talking to me  :-D

Quote from: jakeroot on January 27, 2018, 05:44:42 PM
Reminds me of those lights they use to start races, just placed horizontally.

Now that someone says it, it really does look like it...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:54:20 PM
To add to this, here are some horizontally hung wire spans just down the street on Capitol Ave (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7453358,-92.279456,3a,49y,185.86h,88.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSGE2YAB9pho6qxCPE-PtSA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:55:47 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 27, 2018, 05:54:20 PM
To add to this, here are some horizonitally hung wire spans just down the street on Capitol Ave.

Yup! I have that too. (Just not on Flickr)

(https://vgy.me/TL1kEE.png)

And this photo quality is terrible because it was raining.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 01:31:37 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!

I can't help but notice that, in these two images, the horizontal layout of the 5-section signal is different. In the NY example, the green orb is on the far right of the signal, with the two arrow displays to the left of it. But in the Arkansas example, the green orb is in the middle, effectively just a standard 5-section tower turned to one side (90 degrees anti-clockwise I assume).

IIRC, the Arkansas example is the one not following MUTCD guidelines. A guideline that I disagree with, I might add. Not sure why the green orb has to be on the far right edge, even with a pro/per signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 30, 2018, 02:20:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 01:31:37 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!

I can't help but notice that, in these two images, the horizontal layout of the 5-section signal is different. In the NY example, the green orb is on the far right of the signal, with the two arrow displays to the left of it. But in the Arkansas example, the green orb is in the middle, effectively just a standard 5-section tower turned to one side (90 degrees anti-clockwise I assume).

IIRC, the Arkansas example is the one not following MUTCD guidelines. A guideline that I disagree with, I might add. Not sure why the green orb has to be on the far right edge, even with a pro/per signal.
I think it's because the FHWA wants left arrows to be left or below any green ball indications, and the arrows to be grouped together. Horizontal right turn signals have to have the green ball in the middle with the arrows on the right:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/fig4d_18_longdesc.htm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 02:55:31 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 30, 2018, 02:20:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 01:31:37 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!

I can't help but notice that, in these two images, the horizontal layout of the 5-section signal is different. In the NY example, the green orb is on the far right of the signal, with the two arrow displays to the left of it. But in the Arkansas example, the green orb is in the middle, effectively just a standard 5-section tower turned to one side (90 degrees anti-clockwise I assume).

IIRC, the Arkansas example is the one not following MUTCD guidelines. A guideline that I disagree with, I might add. Not sure why the green orb has to be on the far right edge, even with a pro/per signal.

I think it's because the FHWA wants left arrows to be left or below any green ball indications, and the arrows to be grouped together. Horizontal right turn signals have to have the green ball in the middle with the arrows on the right:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/fig4d_18_longdesc.htm

Didn't realize that Arkansas signal was a pro/per right turn signal (thought it was for left turns). Nonetheless, an arrow pointing left or right should be enough to clue drivers in to which direction they are allowed to proceed. I don't see why horizontal left-turn pro/per signals need to have the left arrows positioned to the left of the green ball. The arrows still point left. The position of the green orb shouldn't be relevant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 30, 2018, 04:38:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 02:55:31 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on January 30, 2018, 02:20:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 01:31:37 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!

I can't help but notice that, in these two images, the horizontal layout of the 5-section signal is different. In the NY example, the green orb is on the far right of the signal, with the two arrow displays to the left of it. But in the Arkansas example, the green orb is in the middle, effectively just a standard 5-section tower turned to one side (90 degrees anti-clockwise I assume).

IIRC, the Arkansas example is the one not following MUTCD guidelines. A guideline that I disagree with, I might add. Not sure why the green orb has to be on the far right edge, even with a pro/per signal.

I think it's because the FHWA wants left arrows to be left or below any green ball indications, and the arrows to be grouped together. Horizontal right turn signals have to have the green ball in the middle with the arrows on the right:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/fig4d_18_longdesc.htm

Didn't realize that Arkansas signal was a pro/per right turn signal (thought it was for left turns).
Actually, I'm not sure that the one in Arkansas has the indications past the green even functional, based on how they appear to lack visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on January 30, 2018, 10:48:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 30, 2018, 01:31:37 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 30, 2018, 01:02:02 AM
NY uses horizontal signals on span wire but only if there are visibility related issues. Sometimes they will even be in a cluster with regular vertical signals as seen here at an intersection by an overpass

https://goo.gl/maps/pLv5E4XnAzC2
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!

I can't help but notice that, in these two images, the horizontal layout of the 5-section signal is different. In the NY example, the green orb is on the far right of the signal, with the two arrow displays to the left of it. But in the Arkansas example, the green orb is in the middle, effectively just a standard 5-section tower turned to one side (90 degrees anti-clockwise I assume).

IIRC, the Arkansas example is the one not following MUTCD guidelines. A guideline that I disagree with, I might add. Not sure why the green orb has to be on the far right edge, even with a pro/per signal.
Oddly, I don't think those lenses have activated lights in them for the ones on W. Capitol Ave. I have been through there multiple times, and they don't seem to activate. I haven't seen an inductor or pressure plate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on February 01, 2018, 07:31:46 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on January 27, 2018, 05:06:50 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TBKS1 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I saw this in downtown Little Rock today and I don't know what kind of signal this is. I thought it was pretty unique though!
The original layout of this signal had double reds, and arrow indications for straight and turning traffic. I saw them in the late-1980s.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180202/b76f1c9dee13ec6bd84b4d3eda8ee6b1.jpg)

SM-G892A

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 04, 2018, 12:22:48 AM
Saw this very ugly "mast arm" setup today. Too many lights hanging from arms.

https://goo.gl/maps/K96emK5bPgC2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 04, 2018, 12:53:33 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 04, 2018, 12:22:48 AM
Saw this very ugly "mast arm" setup today. Too many lights hanging from arms.

https://goo.gl/maps/K96emK5bPgC2

Very rarely do I ever prefer wire-span to a mast-arm setup, but in this case, I definitely do.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 04, 2018, 08:11:09 PM
Some mast-arm installations like that one are downright clumsy looking. I hate when the vertical piece of the mounting bracket sticks way up above the mast-arm. It looks so unprofessional.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 04, 2018, 08:13:03 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 04, 2018, 08:11:09 PM
Some mast-arm installations like that one are downright clumsy looking. I hate when the vertical piece of the mounting bracket sticks way up above the mast-arm. It looks so unprofessional.

It's definitely a "that'll do" look. Whoever designed that setup clearly doesn't have a lot of love for the profession.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 04, 2018, 08:40:19 PM
Yeah well it happens a lot on Long Island in recent installations. Both NYSDOT and Suffolk County do it that way. Nassau County DPW does much better looking installations using their own unique mounting hardware, but they are deficient in other ways. Some other states like California and Nevada do so much more classy mast-arm signals than anyone in the Northeast. That includes appearance and functionality.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on February 04, 2018, 11:51:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 04, 2018, 12:53:33 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 04, 2018, 12:22:48 AM
Saw this very ugly "mast arm" setup today. Too many lights hanging from arms.

https://goo.gl/maps/K96emK5bPgC2

Very rarely do I ever prefer wire-span to a mast-arm setup, but in this case, I definitely do.
My brain exploded when I opened that GSV link! :ded: :-D :banghead:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: lordsutch on February 05, 2018, 05:26:09 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 04, 2018, 12:22:48 AM
Saw this very ugly "mast arm" setup today. Too many lights hanging from arms.

https://goo.gl/maps/K96emK5bPgC2

At least they could have had one horizontal pole connected between the two vertical poles to spread the signal heads out a bit better, if nothing else. I'm not a fan of trying to get away with using just two poles with one horizontal span each (wire-span or mast-arm) but if you're going to do it, the rarely-seen full-diagonal pole option is the best option.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 07:00:24 PM
Quote from: lordsutch on February 05, 2018, 05:26:09 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 04, 2018, 12:22:48 AM
Saw this very ugly "mast arm" setup today. Too many lights hanging from arms.

https://goo.gl/maps/K96emK5bPgC2

At least they could have had one horizontal pole connected between the two vertical poles to spread the signal heads out a bit better, if nothing else. I'm not a fan of trying to get away with using just two poles with one horizontal span each (wire-span or mast-arm) but if you're going to do it, the rarely-seen full-diagonal pole option is the best option.

A monotube gantry could have worked, as long as it was tall enough to pass over the telephone wires.

A better idea, that would have looked far cleaner, without interfering with the telephone wires, would have been to use only post-mounted signals. Outside of downtown areas, this style of installation has mostly been done away with in most (all?) states. But in 2006, a new one popped up just south of Bothell, WA (https://goo.gl/VnUD4x). I can't quite figure out why only post-mounted signals were used here, but it gets the job done quite well:

(https://i.imgur.com/nYUiumV.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 07:11:24 PM
Walking around downtown Seattle today. Snapped exactly two images of things I found interesting:

Anyone know what's going on with the green signal face? Sticks out much further than the red and amber faces. (3rd and Pike):

(https://i.imgur.com/Oz84gEm.jpg)

Not a particularly good photo, due to the nearby sidewalk being closed (and my failure to adjust the aperture), but here's an 8-8-8 signal head placed directly next to a 12-12-12-12 signal head. Seems so tiny in comparison. The Rainier Tower is in the background (5th & Union):

(https://i.imgur.com/tBnb2hX.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on February 05, 2018, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 07:11:24 PM
Walking around downtown Seattle today. Snapped exactly two images of things I found interesting:

Anyone know what's going on with the green signal face? Sticks out much further than the red and amber faces. (3rd and Pike):

That looks like a 3M PV retrofit lens. While dedicated PV units only came in 12-inch, they made 8-inch lenses for retrofits.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 05, 2018, 09:12:47 PM
Jakeroot, that all pole-mount configuration in Bothell, Wa. is not that unusual. And it's common in California at similar intersections with narrow roads and only one lane in each direction. The driver's cone-of-vision from the stop-line is narrow enough that the MUTCD standards can be met with only post/pole mounts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 11:27:30 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 05, 2018, 08:18:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 07:11:24 PM
Walking around downtown Seattle today. Snapped exactly two images of things I found interesting:

Anyone know what's going on with the green signal face? Sticks out much further than the red and amber faces. (3rd and Pike):

That looks like a 3M PV retrofit lens. While dedicated PV units only came in 12-inch, they made 8-inch lenses for retrofits.

Very cool! Thanks for the info.



Quote from: SignBridge on February 05, 2018, 09:12:47 PM
Jakeroot, that all pole-mount configuration in Bothell, Wa. is not that unusual. And it's common in California at similar intersections with narrow roads and only one lane in each direction. The driver's cone-of-vision from the stop-line is narrow enough that the MUTCD standards can be met with only post/pole mounts.

I should be more specific. Intersections with all-pole-mounted signals are not at all uncommon. But they aren't really installed anymore. Even in California, at new intersections, two of the four approaches will have a mast arm (almost always all four). It's difficult to find an example, due to California's love-affair with all-way stops, but this signal in Penngrove (https://goo.gl/EtupMH), which has one lane for three of the four approaches, still has mast arms. Those three single-lane approaches only have one overhead signal, but there's still mast arms being used.

With my Bothell example, the signal is relatively new. New setups with all-post-mounted signals (outside of downtown areas) seems to be very uncommon. The only state that might have used this setup would have been Wisconsin, and even they've moved on to a more California-esque setup with mast arms for all approaches.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 06, 2018, 12:16:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 11:27:30 PM
this signal in Penngrove (//http://)
That link don't work.

And nice find with that 3M 8 inch PV adapter on it! Not too many of those in service.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 01:28:43 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 06, 2018, 12:16:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 05, 2018, 11:27:30 PM
this signal in Penngrove (https://goo.gl/EtupMH)
That link don't work.

And nice find with that 3M 8 inch PV adapter on it! Not too many of those in service.

Correct link: https://goo.gl/EtupMH (fixed in quote above). Thanks for the heads up.

I think that PV adapter is the only one in Seattle. Not aware of any others.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 06, 2018, 02:45:06 AM
Also, RE: Post-mount signals, they're very rare here in Alabama, as we've been using mostly overhead mounts since the beginning of traffic signals down here (usually span wires though sometimes mast arms, especially in cities and on newer installs in a few places, also mostly cities). In fact, I can personally only think of only 5 intersections with only post-mount signals state-wide, four of which are in downtown Opelika, AL:
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.6474879,-85.378239,3a,78.2y,227.43h,79.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ-LUhZlGVJyi-Fi2lLIo4Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.6466289,-85.3793105,3a,50.9y,229.28h,85.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slduoYd0cGhLQcoIvYaauRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.6455005,-85.3786016,3a,35.2y,54.37h,89.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWGwYebUZ6AFfA47oZixTyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.646593,-85.3771822,3a,56.1y,226.72h,86.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srgGBobIWt00RihmHbB9iWg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The only other one that I'm aware of is this one on Moulton Street in downtown Decatur, AL (and it's the only one in my immediate area):
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6039331,-86.9848175,3a,45.2y,265.28h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swAOsr4g2_HXCCkIr1UpPZA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
There used to be two others on 2nd Avenue, but they were downgraded to 4-way stops years ago. Though in my experience with the remaining one in Decatur and the ones in Opelika, I can see why Decatur would want to remove two of their set-ups, as the signals can be kinda easy to miss, though it probably doesn't help that they all use 8 inch signals and the one in Decatur has 4-way clusters hung on span wires to either side of it.

The only other place I'm aware of in the southeast as a whole with only post mount signals in use at an intersection is Dayton, TN, which has a few intersections like this in their downtown:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4926569,-85.0141588,3a,50.1y,21.28h,85.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNBcGFqCoYrGY9M2yhhVP2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4934716,-85.013522,3a,49.5y,41.04h,86.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRhIV2E_TIHOLaJNWoRZLxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4942905,-85.0128175,3a,75y,36.29h,81.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKMhTibo8lASzajwKN9YRQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4950308,-85.0121877,3a,56.2y,39.95h,81.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZk-onSdKYr0GAuhBqyk6pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!? These older installs have mast-arms along PA 611, and have side-posts mounted on the side streets. These installs include very old signal models, they have Crouse-Hinds Type M and Type R signals, Econolite Bullseyes, a Marbelite, Highway Signs & Signal Corporation heads, and the typical old Eagle signal. These photos are a treat for those of you who either live in PA, or love old signals

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180204/19e587d52a56f13221983801b3268041.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180204/44ccad9202c6c1d8714f826f7041f720.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180204/f0d328e0ec80927bbb2b11b0b120c864.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180204/25c2653f8d09ff7a8ec65c8542b81d6f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180204/1d5420007ee811feba3e88beba55845f.jpg)


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180205/33dc8584257607a4c77fd99aa499ab89.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180205/bdec85b0e50088354a9162b3361ec98f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180205/3d6c19b7677a2e0e68aa6e3a738d9764.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180205/e28092d0bdd23fc5525f34bf17b3b4be.jpg)

ASUS Chromebook C202SA

Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades. And about the Econolite bullseyes, I don't think there are any others left within the Philadelphia area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.


Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?

Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Well, there's a couple reasons. Only a small group of roadgeeks have a fascination with signals. Not even I really care about the signals themselves. I'm more into their placement and operation. Furthermore, you seem to be the only signal-geek in the Philly area.

Also, you might want to fix your quote. Somehow you deleted my response and replaced it with your own.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 05:06:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?

Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Well, there's a couple reasons. Only a small group of roadgeeks have a fascination with signals. Not even I really care about the signals themselves. I'm more into their placement and operation. Furthermore, you seem to be the only signal-geek in the Philly area.

Also, you might want to fix your quote. Somehow you deleted my response and replaced it with your own.

There are actually four traffic signal geeks that live in the Philly area: Me, macsignals, Ian Ligget, and NotMUTCDcompliant
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:20:46 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 05:06:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?

Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Well, there's a couple reasons. Only a small group of roadgeeks have a fascination with signals. Not even I really care about the signals themselves. I'm more into their placement and operation. Furthermore, you seem to be the only signal-geek in the Philly area.

There are actually four traffic signal geeks that live in the Philly area: Me, macsignals, Ian Ligget, and NotMUTCDcompliant

So there's one other? macsignals is not a user here, and NotMUTCDcompliant is the head of another website you were banned from. Ian seems to be only other AARoads user, besides yourself, who'd actually post something like what you've shared here. But he doesn't really post a whole lot to begin with, and judging by his age (same as mine), he's probably busy doing life's chores.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 06, 2018, 10:01:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:20:46 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 05:06:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?

Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Well, there's a couple reasons. Only a small group of roadgeeks have a fascination with signals. Not even I really care about the signals themselves. I'm more into their placement and operation. Furthermore, you seem to be the only signal-geek in the Philly area.

There are actually four traffic signal geeks that live in the Philly area: Me, macsignals, Ian Ligget, and NotMUTCDcompliant

So there's one other? macsignals is not a user here, and NotMUTCDcompliant is the head of another website you were banned from. Ian seems to be only other AARoads user, besides yourself, who'd actually post something like what you've shared here. But he doesn't really post a whole lot to begin with, and judging by his age (same as mine), he's probably busy doing life's chores.
notMUTCDcompliant does have an account here, IIRC, but like Ian, he doesn't post very often.

Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades. And about the Econolite bullseyes, I don't think there are any others left within the Philadelphia area.
It's entirely possible that people just weren't aware that those signals (still) existed, or at least didn't think they were worth documenting. I've found some really old signals in my area that no-one else knew about (such as a Crouse-hinds Type M 4-way with two red lights on all sides), and I once stumbled-upon a pair of single-face Crouse-hinds Type DT beacons by complete accident before as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 06, 2018, 10:01:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:20:46 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 05:06:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?
....
Why did I post this here, well...How were these left undocumented, I'm the only one who's ever mentioned these, how could so many old traffic signals go undocumented, especailly these, these are the only installs left that were left unaffected by Broad Street's 2008 Upgrades.

What do you mean by "undocumented"? As in, not replaced in keeping with the traditional signal replacement schedules?

Undocumented as in, nobody has ever shot photos or mentioned these setups before except for me

Well, there's a couple reasons. Only a small group of roadgeeks have a fascination with signals. Not even I really care about the signals themselves. I'm more into their placement and operation. Furthermore, you seem to be the only signal-geek in the Philly area.

There are actually four traffic signal geeks that live in the Philly area: Me, macsignals, Ian Ligget, and NotMUTCDcompliant

So there's one other? macsignals is not a user here, and NotMUTCDcompliant is the head of another website you were banned from. Ian seems to be only other AARoads user, besides yourself, who'd actually post something like what you've shared here. But he doesn't really post a whole lot to begin with, and judging by his age (same as mine), he's probably busy doing life's chores.

notMUTCDcompliant does have an account here, IIRC, but like Ian, he doesn't post very often.

His only post was in response to a thread that traffic light guy created about being banned from another forum, Highway Divides. He was/is the head of that website.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21859.msg2287713#msg2287713

So technically, he has an account. But not in the traditional sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: webny99 on February 06, 2018, 11:01:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 10:14:50 PM
So technically, he has an account. But not in the traditional sense.

That is indeed not only untraditional, but rather strange. I wonder if notmutcdcompliant created an account for that sole purpose. Strange indeed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 07, 2018, 05:42:54 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 06, 2018, 11:01:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 10:14:50 PM
So technically, he has an account. But not in the traditional sense.

That is indeed not only untraditional, but rather strange. I wonder if notmutcdcompliant created an account for that sole purpose. Strange indeed.

His account was created well before he posted for the first time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 07, 2018, 11:32:41 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 07, 2018, 05:42:54 AM
Quote from: webny99 on February 06, 2018, 11:01:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 06, 2018, 10:14:50 PM
So technically, he has an account. But not in the traditional sense.

That is indeed not only untraditional, but rather strange. I wonder if notmutcdcompliant created an account for that sole purpose. Strange indeed.

His account was created well before he posted for the first time.

More than likely for the sole purpose of tracking traffic light guy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2018, 01:49:32 PM
We can always discuss the number of people that can hang on a Philly traffic light before it crashes to the ground! LOL

Go Eagles!!!  :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 07, 2018, 01:49:32 PM
We can always discuss the number of people that can hang on a Philly traffic light before it crashes to the ground! LOL

Go Eagles!!!  :)

When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?

You answered your own question. No one else really cares...

Quote from: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team

I triple dog dare you to make one post not relating to traffic signals in Philly. Go on, try it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 08, 2018, 05:25:50 PM
Quote from: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team

I triple dog dare you to make one post not relating to traffic signals in Philly. Go on, try it.

He could post about traffic signals in Camden, NJ (or any other nearby suburb) and it would count.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:51:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 08, 2018, 05:25:50 PM
Quote from: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team

I triple dog dare you to make one post not relating to traffic signals in Philly. Go on, try it.

He could post about traffic signals in Camden, NJ (or any other nearby suburb) and it would count.

Okay... how about making a single post not relating to traffic signals at all?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: seicer on February 08, 2018, 07:11:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ONUTm2m.jpg)

An interesting find in Yonkers, New York. Most likely a c. 1950's Marbelite with one single unit taken apart for an infrared detector.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 08, 2018, 08:15:43 PM
Quote from: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?

You answered your own question. No one else really cares...

Quote from: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team

I triple dog dare you to make one post not relating to traffic signals in Philly. Go on, try it.
Next time I vacation in New Jersey, you guys are getting pictures. And one post not related to traffic signals, my name is traffic light guy for a reason. 

ASUS Chromebook C202SA

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 08, 2018, 08:33:32 PM
Quote from: Ian on February 08, 2018, 05:08:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 04:52:14 PM
Philly is the only area left in my area that still has post-mounted signals. But that's besides the fact. I know no one else really cares, but I found a few sets of old traffic signal equipment still standing along the Northernmost tip of Broad Street in Philadelphia. How are these signals undocumented!?!?

You answered your own question. No one else really cares...

Quote from: traffic light guy on February 07, 2018, 03:38:38 PM
When I think of Eagles, I think of the old Eagle flatback traffic signals within the city, not the Football team

I triple dog dare you to make one post not relating to traffic signals in Philly. Go on, try it.

Plus, I've seen your older Flickr posts, you also went head over heals for old traffic signals within the Philadelphia area, but to a way lesser extent than I do
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 08, 2018, 10:15:58 PM
Quote from: seicer on February 08, 2018, 07:11:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ONUTm2m.jpg)

An interesting find in Yonkers, New York. Most likely a c. 1950's Marbelite with one single unit taken apart for an infrared detector.
Yea, that's the gutted remains of a 12 inch Marbelite section there. How strange!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 09, 2018, 09:57:32 AM
Since you're a traffic signal fan who lives in Philly, take a ride around Center City and see how many visors are loose from people climbing and hanging on them during the Eagles celebrations over the past week!  LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 09, 2018, 03:40:47 PM
I actually got many shots of old traffic signals during the parade. You guys are lucky to have me, I keep track of all the oldies in the Philadelphia area, that way you guys can still look at the pictures when the good stuff is long gone. Spring Garden street had some good stuff! I loved the Crouse-Hinds Type M breadpan signals! 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 11, 2018, 03:55:46 PM
Here is a really rare old signal that I found in North Philly:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

You see the traffic light that's mounted overhead, I'm not sure if this is true, but a member told me that this is a rare Type K head, that was manufactured by marbelite decades ago.

Here's a link to the original topic: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21967.0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on February 12, 2018, 08:25:04 PM
Two questions on span wire mounted signals:

1) What is the longest span used?  From rough measurements in Google Maps, it appears US 30 at Missisippi Street in Merrillville, IN has one of ~177 feet (Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4713398,-87.3162767,3a,60y,253.03h,87.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srCSYtcKtL11iOywMNVWcOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)).  Are there any over 200 feet?

2) Are there any span wire mounting systems that have the signal heads directly attached to three or more wires?  Say one at the top of the signal head, one in the middle of the head, and one at the bottom?  The Merrillville example would not appear to meet this criteria as the third wire appears to be more for supporting the middle wire than the signal heads.

On a different subject, it appears Georgia is not against using FYA doghouses, based on this signal at Memorial Drive and Candler Road on the Atlanta city limit. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7470426,-84.2919638,3a,15y,292.97h,100.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OrW9gspgiO6CbMjqxubAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 15, 2018, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on February 12, 2018, 08:25:04 PM
On a different subject, it appears Georgia is not against using FYA doghouses, based on this signal at Memorial Drive and Candler Road on the Atlanta city limit. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7470426,-84.2919638,3a,15y,292.97h,100.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OrW9gspgiO6CbMjqxubAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)
I saw a number of FYA doghouses when I was last in Atlanta back in 2016.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 02:33:14 AM
Here's an up-close look at a post-mounted traffic signal in Coquitlam, BC. Note the standard practice in BC of mounting the secondary (side) signals in-line with the pedestrian heads:

(https://i.imgur.com/6XXscfQ.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 16, 2018, 02:44:37 AM
Looks like an American LED for the upper section as well?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 04:06:09 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 02:33:14 AM
Here's an up-close look at a post-mounted traffic signal in Coquitlam, BC. Note the standard practice in BC of mounting the secondary (side) signals in-line with the pedestrian heads:

(https://i.imgur.com/6XXscfQ.jpg)
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 16, 2018, 02:44:37 AM
Looks like an American LED for the upper section as well?

Could be! I don't know jack shit about the signals themselves. For me, it's all about the placement. This sort of setup (with the signals and ped-heads inline with each other) is rare (if not non-existent) in the US, so I thought I'd share a photo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 16, 2018, 03:27:51 PM
I've seen Hackensack, NJ do it before on some of their older installs:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4591/24492462227_d3a35d459d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/DjjgHv)Econolite 8-8-12 Traffic Light &amp; Pedestrian Signals (https://flic.kr/p/DjjgHv) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4690/27579906419_76707a551c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/J29eiV)Econolite 8-8-12 Traffic Light &amp; Pedestrian Signals (https://flic.kr/p/J29eiV) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8785797,-74.0474004,3a,42.3y,163.12h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s51A5RWU6JOQT5FmtiEaR8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Philadelphia, PA also liked to do this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.949195,-75.1505149,3a,15y,329.59h,93.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ692nINM4DK_qn-D9aNE2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 04:42:53 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 16, 2018, 03:27:51 PM
I've seen Hackensack, NJ do it before on some of their older installs:
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4591/24492462227_d3a35d459d_b.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4690/27579906419_76707a551c_b.jpg

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8785797,-74.0474004,3a,42.3y,163.12h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s51A5RWU6JOQT5FmtiEaR8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Philadelphia, PA also liked to do this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.949195,-75.1505149,3a,15y,329.59h,93.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ692nINM4DK_qn-D9aNE2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Well, I'll be damned! I did not know of any installations like this in the US. I don't know how often post-mounted signals are used in NJ these days (nor PA), but any idea if this is still common practice?



Here's an overview of the intersection of the signal I posted above. It was recently converted from a ped-controlled (flashing green) intersection to a four-way permissive signal. I could be perceiving it incorrectly, but the overhead signals seem smaller than the one's mounted on posts? They don't seem small enough to be 8-inch signals, but for some reason, no matter how long I look at the photo, I can't convince myself that they're 12 inch signals either...

(https://i.imgur.com/jSSZBiz.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 16, 2018, 05:36:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 04:42:53 PM
I could be perceiving it incorrectly, but the overhead signals seem smaller than the one's mounted on posts? They don't seem small enough to be 8-inch signals, but for some reason, no matter how long I look at the photo, I can't convince myself that they're 12 inch signals either...

(https://i.imgur.com/jSSZBiz.jpg)

I think they're the same size, and the overhead ones just look smaller for two reasons:
1-the overheads are farther away from the camera
2-the overheads have those huge yellow backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 16, 2018, 05:52:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2018, 04:42:53 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 16, 2018, 03:27:51 PM
I've seen Hackensack, NJ do it before on some of their older installs:
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4591/24492462227_d3a35d459d_b.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4690/27579906419_76707a551c_b.jpg

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8785797,-74.0474004,3a,42.3y,163.12h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s51A5RWU6JOQT5FmtiEaR8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Philadelphia, PA also liked to do this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.949195,-75.1505149,3a,15y,329.59h,93.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ692nINM4DK_qn-D9aNE2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Well, I'll be damned! I did not know of any installations like this in the US. I don't know how often post-mounted signals are used in NJ these days (nor PA), but any idea if this is still common practice?

It's still relatively common in NJ. Mostly due to how close the signal poles are to the intersection curbs, the posts are conveniently placed should additional signals be warranted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 21, 2018, 11:17:53 PM
This is kind of an odd setup for my area.

This left turn (https://goo.gl/RpAAMw) in Canyon Park (a neighborhood of Bothell, WA) operates with a flashing yellow arrow (installed 2016). There are two signal heads. One near-side overhead (sort of like Maryland, but more visible here), and one on a pole on the far left side (technically not a mast arm). Far left turn signals are becoming more common in my area, but in this scenario, it was necessary due to the near-side signal being nearly impossible to see anywhere past the stop line. That almost makes the far left pole-mounted signal the primary signal head, since it's the only one that can be seen throughout the maneuver (you could argue that traditionally-placed overhead signals are visible throughout the maneuver)

(https://i.imgur.com/P6nFss9.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on February 22, 2018, 12:07:41 AM
That seems like a lazy and inappropriate setup. Unless the turn lane is like a quarter mile long, I don't think signal heads straight above the end of the left-turn lane are appropriate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on February 22, 2018, 09:50:30 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 06, 2018, 03:17:17 PM
How are these signals undocumented!?!?

It also depends on someone's level of interest.  Would I document a whole intersection of Eagle flatbacks?  Probably not.  Why?  They just don't strike my fancy.  As for the others you mentioned:

Crouse-Hinds Type M: If I saw a 12" still hanging around, I might stop if I had time.  Those are neat.  I've driven under scores of 8"ers in Columbus and now I wish I might have spent a little more time checking them out.
Crouse-Hinds Type R: To me, they're a dime a dozen.  I know they're technically PEEK signals now, but they all look about the same.
Econolite Bullseyes: These, if I were to see some, might be worth a stop depending on the neighborhood.
Marbelite: I drove under scores of these in Akron and got photos of very few.  Would I stop for some now?  Perhaps.  Depends on how big of a hurry I'm in.
Highway Signs & Signal Corporation: Can't say I've seen those.

Now, if I see a 4-way still in service, I would definitely stop for a photo or 17.  Art decos?  Same thing.  Kentron signals (my favorite signal brand) almost get me to stop every time, but I can think of one I better hurry up and get.  Otherwise, I have to be in some sort of a mood for signal photos.  The comment made about finding a place to park and the right lighting rings true for me.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on February 22, 2018, 10:56:47 AM
Something I found on Wikipedia this morning:
Quote
In 2011, the Arkansas State Historic Preservation Office nominated the state's last remaining pedestal mounted signal, located in Smackover, to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4463/37065341974_fcb19d3d69_z_d.jpg)
Photo by me May 16, 2017


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on February 22, 2018, 11:40:09 AM
No idea if the three in New York are on the National Register. One of them has been reduced to flash mode. The one on NY 10 in Canajoharie is safe because the village maintains a couple blocks of NY 10 around it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 25, 2018, 12:45:00 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.googleapis.com%2Fmaps%2Fapi%2Fstreetview%3Fsize%3D600x300%26amp%3Blocation%3D42.8102%2C-71.1032%26amp%3Bheading%3D340%26amp%3Bpitch%3D0&hash=ceaacc17110abce78ad3162326dc4e7068db2b55)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.googleapis.com%2Fmaps%2Fapi%2Fstreetview%3Fsize%3D600x300%26amp%3Blocation%3D42.8103%2C-71.1033%26amp%3Bheading%3D340%26amp%3Bpitch%3D0&hash=e1155760de733acbecb37c0ea4f90269b52a4b4c)

(The first photo gives context; the second photo is the signal itself.)

This traffic light on the slip ramp shouldn't even exist; there is no conflicting movement. Its cycle: green (~20s, variable), yellow (4s), red (2s), green right arrow (~20s, variable), yellow right arrow (4s), red (2s), repeat. Note that the only red in this cycle is the all-red phase. This is the end of one of the only 2-lane segments of road with over 30k AADT in the United States, and it would probably be less congested if this signal was configured properly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 25, 2018, 12:56:33 PM
I'm confused. Wouldn't the slip lane movement conflict with the oncoming left turn? I'd a rather it had a yield sign. If it were Illinois, it would be signalised for the purpose of protecting a crossing pedestrian. Not sure if that's the case here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 25, 2018, 01:06:54 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2018, 12:45:00 PM
(https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/streetview?size=600x300&location=42.8102,-71.1032&heading=340&pitch=0)
(https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/streetview?size=600x300&location=42.8103,-71.1033&heading=340&pitch=0)

(The first photo gives context; the second photo is the signal itself.)

This traffic light on the slip ramp shouldn't even exist; there is no conflicting movement. Its cycle: green (~20s, variable), yellow (4s), red (2s), green right arrow (~20s, variable), yellow right arrow (4s), red (2s), repeat. Note that the only red in this cycle is the all-red phase. This is the end of one of the only 2-lane segments of road with over 30k AADT in the United States, and it would probably be less congested if this signal was configured properly.

It should exist because of the pedestrian signal. But it could remain on green arrow until the ped phase is activated.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 25, 2018, 06:34:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 25, 2018, 01:06:54 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2018, 12:45:00 PM
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/streetview?size=600x300&location=42.8102,-71.1032&heading=340&pitch=0
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/streetview?size=600x300&location=42.8103,-71.1033&heading=340&pitch=0

(The first photo gives context; the second photo is the signal itself.)

This traffic light on the slip ramp shouldn't even exist; there is no conflicting movement. Its cycle: green (~20s, variable), yellow (4s), red (2s), green right arrow (~20s, variable), yellow right arrow (4s), red (2s), repeat. Note that the only red in this cycle is the all-red phase. This is the end of one of the only 2-lane segments of road with over 30k AADT in the United States, and it would probably be less congested if this signal was configured properly.

It should exist because of the pedestrian signal. But it could remain on green arrow until the ped phase is activated.

I think I'm getting it a bit more now.

To the best of my knowledge, you can't have a green arrow conflicting with any other signal. ie, a right turn green arrow with an oncoming yield signal (FYA or solid green orb). Right-on-red generally doesn't count since the signal doesn't technically conflict. In this case, I'm guessing the green orb is displayed when the through traffic has a green, and the green arrow displayed when the traffic from the right has a green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 25, 2018, 06:45:57 PM
Has anyone ever seen doghouses older than these, when were the first doghouses installed, these are the oldest ones that I'm aware of. These are 12" flatbacks, in Lower Merion, PA. From what I know, these were installed at one point during the seventies

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4661/38671743300_ac6a11610c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/21VhMYQ)Eagle flatback doghouse traffic signal mounted on the side of the pole (https://flic.kr/p/21VhMYQ) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr


(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/39586494855_d78c113018_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/23j88Kn)Old Eagle flatbacks on stainless steel monotubes (https://flic.kr/p/23j88Kn) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4703/40439233852_33bcf3d09d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24BtDkS)Eagle flatbacks on stainless steel monotubes (https://flic.kr/p/24BtDkS) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 25, 2018, 07:20:04 PM
I see you were able to get out there. Did your parents take you or did you take the SEPTA out that way?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 25, 2018, 07:27:23 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 25, 2018, 07:20:04 PM
I see you were able to get out there. Did your parents take you or did you take the SEPTA out that way?

Eh, don't worry about it, I made arrangments, I learned my lesson
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 25, 2018, 09:06:17 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 25, 2018, 07:20:04 PM
I see you were able to get out there. Did your parents take you or did you take the SEPTA out that way?

Anyway, about the photos, have you ever seen any doghouses older than those, or am I a nut for thinking that those were the first doghouses ever.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 26, 2018, 03:09:10 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 25, 2018, 09:06:17 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 25, 2018, 07:20:04 PM
I see you were able to get out there. Did your parents take you or did you take the SEPTA out that way?

Anyway, about the photos, have you ever seen any doghouses older than those, or am I a nut for thinking that those were the first doghouses ever.
The 1970s seems to be about when they came about. Here's a Durasig doghouse that was here in Huntsville back in the mid to late 1970s:
http://digitalarchives.hmcpl.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p16458coll13/id/146/rec/3

However, I'm not sure if the Singer signal seen on the left is older or newer than the Durasigs, though if it's older, then that means that the remaining Singer doghouses here in Huntsville are probably from the early to mid 1970s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 26, 2018, 06:36:00 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 26, 2018, 03:09:10 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 25, 2018, 09:06:17 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 25, 2018, 07:20:04 PM
I see you were able to get out there. Did your parents take you or did you take the SEPTA out that way?

Anyway, about the photos, have you ever seen any doghouses older than those, or am I a nut for thinking that those were the first doghouses ever.
The 1970s seems to be about when they came about. Here's a Durasig doghouse that was here in Huntsville back in the mid to late 1970s:
http://digitalarchives.hmcpl.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p16458coll13/id/146/rec/3

However, I'm not sure if the Singer signal seen on the left is older or newer than the Durasigs, though if it's older, then that means that the remaining Singer doghouses here in Huntsville are probably from the early to mid 1970s.

Yup, you're not wrong, but my flatbacks win, they're a couple years older, they were installed in the early part of the 1970s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 26, 2018, 08:52:18 PM
Look at this weird signal on the far left of the mast-arm, it's shaped like a T-bone steak. Not too many of these in the Philly/Delaware Valley side of PA, but very common in the out-state area.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4607/39771856354_5f0b966d25_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/23Avagh)More old Eagle flatbacks mounted on a stainless steel angled mast-arm (https://flic.kr/p/23Avagh) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 27, 2018, 09:27:24 AM
Huntsville loves those Upside-down T signals. In fact, they've replaced almost every inline-4 signal in the city with them. They're much less common in other parts of Alabama, though I have seen a few in the southern part of the state. New Jersey also has quite a few, IIRC.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 27, 2018, 06:44:55 PM
Here's an 8-8-8 GE/Econolite left turn signal with a green arrow in West Vancouver, BC. These are quite common and are still installed. This one was pretty easy to access, otherwise I would have captured a newer one. They're basically only used in the median of the road.

(https://i.imgur.com/wYMuS3I.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 27, 2018, 06:59:19 PM
That reminds me: here's an interesting 8" left turn arrow installation in Salt Lake City. Previously for traffic at the stop line, the only visible turning signal was a ground mounted arrow on the far left corner. I don't know of any other examples like this, except at ramp meters.

GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/jSjGoSZc3np)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4662/26455414818_e6660c2f92_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GiLV8G)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 27, 2018, 07:25:14 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on February 27, 2018, 06:59:19 PM
That reminds me: here's an interesting 8" left turn arrow installation in Salt Lake City. Previously for traffic at the stop line, the only visible turning signal was a ground mounted arrow on the far left corner. I don't know of any other examples like this, except at ramp meters.

GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/jSjGoSZc3np)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4662/26455414818_e6660c2f92_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GiLV8G)
Rare t see 8 inch arrows here in the US, especially LED ones!

SM-G900V

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 27, 2018, 07:26:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 27, 2018, 06:44:55 PM
Here's an 8-8-8 GE/Econolite left turn signal with a green arrow in West Vancouver, BC. These are quite common and are still installed. This one was pretty easy to access, otherwise I would have captured a newer one. They're basically only used in the median of the road.

(https://i.imgur.com/wYMuS3I.jpg)
That's probabky either a CGE (Canadian GE, who made signals independent of GE here in the US) or early Fortran signal. Nice find!

SM-G900V

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on February 27, 2018, 07:27:28 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on February 27, 2018, 06:59:19 PM
That reminds me: here's an interesting 8" left turn arrow installation in Salt Lake City. Previously for traffic at the stop line, the only visible turning signal was a ground mounted arrow on the far left corner. I don't know of any other examples like this, except at ramp meters.

Ramp meters excepted, I just don't understand why any agency would ever mount a signal head that close to the ground. It looks like a poorly-implemented hack job as installed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 27, 2018, 09:45:13 PM
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/39586760205_23edd8d974_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/23j9uCn)Generation 2 Durasigs, McCain signals, and pedestrians (https://flic.kr/p/23j9uCn) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

Anyone else here have seen these weird louvered backplates, these were only used in PA during from the Late-1960s to the mid-80s. At one point, when these were first installed, the backplates were black, now they have faded to white.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Signal man619 on February 27, 2018, 10:16:31 PM
Yeah, lots of states used them, like Virginia. They fade to white because of the exposed primer coat under the black.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 01, 2018, 02:25:27 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 27, 2018, 09:45:13 PM
Anyone else here have seen these weird louvered backplates, these were only used in PA during from the Late-1960s to the mid-80s.

New backplates in my area have slats cut into the backplates, but not to such an extreme degree: https://goo.gl/V32FYb

I believe the holes reduce wind load on the signal, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 01, 2018, 03:18:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 01, 2018, 02:25:27 AM
New backplates in my area have slats cut into the backplates, but not to such an extreme degree: https://goo.gl/V32FYb

I believe the holes reduce wind load on the signal, but I could be wrong.

I dunno what else they'd be for, but I have a hard time believing those little slats make all that much difference mitigating wind stresses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 01, 2018, 10:30:56 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 01, 2018, 03:18:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 01, 2018, 02:25:27 AM
New backplates in my area have slats cut into the backplates, but not to such an extreme degree: https://goo.gl/V32FYb

I believe the holes reduce wind load on the signal, but I could be wrong.

I dunno what else they'd be for, but I have a hard time believing those little slats make all that much difference mitigating wind stresses.

Yep, that's what they're for. I've never seen any documentation that they make a quantified statistically-significant difference in the wind loading on a mast arm though. (Admittedly, I've never looked for such information and am now curious.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 01, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 01, 2018, 03:18:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 01, 2018, 02:25:27 AM
New backplates in my area have slats cut into the backplates, but not to such an extreme degree: https://goo.gl/V32FYb

I believe the holes reduce wind load on the signal, but I could be wrong.

I dunno what else they'd be for, but I have a hard time believing those little slats make all that much difference mitigating wind stresses.

That's what I would think too.  You don't see those things slatted anymore.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 03, 2018, 12:44:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 01, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
That's what I would think too.  You don't see those things slatted anymore.

Depends on location. In Nevada, you'll be hard pressed to find a signal head that doesn't have wind slats on the backplate. The only ones I can ever recall seeing were older ones pole-mounted on a signal mast–never overhead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on March 03, 2018, 03:56:21 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 03, 2018, 12:44:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 01, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
That's what I would think too.  You don't see those things slatted anymore.

Depends on location. In Nevada, you'll be hard pressed to find a signal head that doesn't have wind slats on the backplate. The only ones I can ever recall seeing were older ones pole-mounted on a signal mast–never overhead.

Same situation in Utah, where I have never seen a backplate without wind slats. Whether or not they actually do anything is another matter...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 03, 2018, 04:39:06 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on March 03, 2018, 03:56:21 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 03, 2018, 12:44:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 01, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
That's what I would think too.  You don't see those things slatted anymore.

Depends on location. In Nevada, you'll be hard pressed to find a signal head that doesn't have wind slats on the backplate. The only ones I can ever recall seeing were older ones pole-mounted on a signal mast–never overhead.

Same situation in Utah, where I have never seen a backplate without wind slats. Whether or not they actually do anything is another matter...

Up until the mid 2000s, most new backplates in Washington did not have wind slats. But new installations since then have all had it. Not sure which policy changed.

British Columbia, however, does not use wind slats on any installations that I'm aware of (even brand new ones, even in areas that are fairly flat and could conceivably be quite windy).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 04, 2018, 11:41:34 PM
I apologize if this has already been discussed thoroughly–but I just noticed this unusual setup when I posted the picture in another thread. I thought it was a plain old regular doghouse setup (even way back in 2015 when I was standing on the side of the road taking the goddamn picture :pan:), but I'm now noticing that it's a five-section FYA doghouse-style setup:

(https://i.imgur.com/baM8Ijx.jpg)

I can't imagine this is a common configuration. Anyone else ever come across these?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 04, 2018, 11:50:45 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 04, 2018, 11:41:34 PM

I can't imagine this is a common configuration. Anyone else ever come across these?
It was discussed before, but Minnesota developed that signal then got approval from the feds to install them.  Eau Claire WI has also installed them for the only doghouses in Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 06, 2018, 04:40:24 AM
Atlanta, GA has a bunch in service, and I've suggested it to Huntsville's Traffic Engineering Department so we'll see if any crop up around here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2018, 05:32:55 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/39969943395/in/dateposted-public/ I was wondering what is up with this signal on Paris Street in Kansas City, MO?  It uses all 3M signals.  There is no shallow angles or situations that others out of the cone of view would misinterpret, so it really is not needed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 18, 2018, 05:52:20 PM
^^ Looks like the signals are at an angle for the cross street,  so the engineer may have deemed the angle shallow enough to warrant it.  Can't tell how much of an angle the intersection is from the photo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 18, 2018, 09:31:35 PM
Not that much of an angle. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to just use full visors or maybe angle visors if they really thought there was a problem?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 19, 2018, 12:44:04 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2018, 05:32:55 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/39969943395/in/dateposted-public/ I was wondering what is up with this signal on Paris Street in Kansas City, MO?  It uses all 3M signals.  There is no shallow angles or situations that others out of the cone of view would misinterpret, so it really is not needed.
Those are all McCain PV signals. But they're pretty much a 3M that was reverse-engineered by McCain.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 19, 2018, 10:00:52 PM
This is kind of off-topic, but am I the only one who thinks that old traffic lights are ugly. Keep in mind, I love old traffic lights, it's just that the ugliness (chipped faded paint, dim lights, crooked discolored visors) add charm and make up of part of what makes old signals interesting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 19, 2018, 11:14:30 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 19, 2018, 10:00:52 PM
This is kind of off-topic, but am I the only one who thinks that old traffic lights are ugly. Keep in mind, I love old traffic lights, it's just that the ugliness (chipped faded paint, dim lights, crooked discolored visors) add charm and make up of part of what makes old signals interesting.

That's the reason I prefer newer signals. They're just a helluva lot more presentable. Really old signals (that are chipped and discolored) give me the feeling that the local agency has been neglecting the infrastructure (which bothers me).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 20, 2018, 11:17:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 19, 2018, 11:14:30 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 19, 2018, 10:00:52 PM
This is kind of off-topic, but am I the only one who thinks that old traffic lights are ugly. Keep in mind, I love old traffic lights, it's just that the ugliness (chipped faded paint, dim lights, crooked discolored visors) add charm and make up of part of what makes old signals interesting.

That's the reason I prefer newer signals. They're just a helluva lot more presentable. Really old signals (that are chipped and discolored) give me the feeling that the local agency has been neglecting the infrastructure (which bothers me).

If its damaged  light that is made of plastic,.then.yes, get rid of it.  BUT if it's an old metal light that is beaten up, then its a badge of honor and should be preserved.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 20, 2018, 07:48:55 PM
I was bored at home on the other day, so I did some searching around for some old traffic signals. I ran into an intersection with some really old Econolite "bull's eyes". They come in two versions, the round door (Which resembles the GE streamline) and the square door models. The versions I came across were square doors, Philly used to have a ton of these several decades ago, now the city only has about.....five left! Five that I'm aware of, since God knows where the rest of them are. Not sure if it's common in other states, but here's a little treat for you guys, so here are two that I found last weekend, the other two I captured a couple months ago during the super bowl parade (Which some of you have already seen).

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4782/26010230657_8720da713b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FCreoH)Econolite Bullseye (side-view) (https://flic.kr/p/FCreoH) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/810/40174562544_442f9fb23f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24d68Ms)Another Econolite Bullseye (Side View) (https://flic.kr/p/24d68Ms) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

Might be common where you guys live. But pretty uncommon in SE PA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 10:19:09 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

Are you referring to this (The signal mounted overhead)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I was told that this was a Type K, not a Type L
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Signal man619 on March 22, 2018, 11:40:02 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 10:19:09 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

Are you referring to this (The signal mounted overhead)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I was told that this was a Type K, not a Type L

Type K is a Crouse Hinds 12,12,12.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 22, 2018, 12:34:23 PM
I live in Florida and we have a mixed variety of installations.  In Miami, Gainesville, Pensacola, Panama City, Tallahassee, and Naples they have been using mast arms with horizontal signal heads mounted on them.   Much has to do with hurricanes as Andrew proved them to work out best under high winds.

In Tampa they have been lately using metal posts with span wires.  As always Florida used span wires strung from concrete stain poles with two cables.  The top cable for support while the bottom cable supplied the power to the heads.  In Hillsborough County lately they have been using one for both support and power to string their latest signals from.

In Lake County and many parts of Polk along US 27, they have been pretty standard with old FL concrete signal poles and using the box design instead of the diagonals like New York uses and what was previous in rural areas.  FL did always use box assemblies in urban areas over big intersections, but now that is the norm from Lake Wales to Leesburg along US 27.

In Orlando, we used California mast arms in the city limits (though many are being replaced by straight arms) and in Orange County they are straight mostly, but some are still span wires and in two locations Orange County have went from mast arm to span wire (usually the other way around).

Florida now must be the most diverse state as most usually keep their installations standard.  New York mostly uses green heads on diagonal span wire, and the Carolinas use box span wiring with yellow heads between wooden telephone poles.  NJ, though changing over to montube mast arms, mostly used truss style mast arms (and in the 1950's and before were double guy arms) with in urban areas using side mounts on 7 feet tall posts.

I am guessing its because FDOT does not do signals but has each county or city maintain and design their installations as most states have the state say what goes.  Even on state highways in Florida, FDOT makes the locals or county take care of the stoplights. So that is why we must be the most diverse state with signal designs, I am guessing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 22, 2018, 07:28:39 PM
There's more Dallas displays in Washington than I realized. These are also in the Tri-Cities (Richland, specifically). The only other one that I know of in Washington is only a few miles away. These are on WA-240, but I think they're locally maintained. I don't know of any Dallas displays installed by WSDOT. I can't be completely certain without seeing the phase occurring either in-person or in Street View (as below), but the seven intersections along WA-240 between Adams Street and Hains Ave (examples: here (https://goo.gl/1DL1ti), here (https://goo.gl/qfGKAG), here (https://goo.gl/v2CEHA), and here (https://goo.gl/6b1cMg)) all seem to use Dallas displays (sometimes utilising the modified R10-21 sign, unlike the intersection below) (the only giveaway is the louvres and the use of the 3M programmable visibility heads for all intersections except the one below, where Street View managed the capture the situation).

(https://i.imgur.com/ZQlnISA.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 23, 2018, 03:39:27 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 22, 2018, 11:40:02 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 10:19:09 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

Are you referring to this (The signal mounted overhead)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I was told that this was a Type K, not a Type L

Type K is a Crouse Hinds 12,12,12.

Never heard of a Crouse-Hinds Type K. My area only has Crouse-Hinds Type Ms and Rs
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 23, 2018, 11:49:53 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 23, 2018, 03:39:27 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 22, 2018, 11:40:02 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 10:19:09 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

Are you referring to this (The signal mounted overhead)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I was told that this was a Type K, not a Type L

Type K is a Crouse Hinds 12,12,12.

Never heard of a Crouse-Hinds Type K. My area only has Crouse-Hinds Type Ms and Rs
The Type K was the model designation of the 12 inch Art-Decos (and the 12 inch Type Ms, IIRC).

Also, speaking of 12 inch Type Ms, I think I may have found the only one in the state of Alabama today on US 31 in Birmingham:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5586818,-86.8206676,3a,15y,248.94h,81.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS-hpRgqcMOJ-S-u1_jWxDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5585855,-86.8206928,3a,15y,325.98h,83.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn5sqA7NFVRnsQuFkMu-faQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In all honesty though, Birmingham has just about one example of every 12 inch signal ever made in service there (the only ones I know of that they lack are the round-door Econolite Bullseyes, 12 inch CGE and Fortran signals, and 12 inch Crouse-hinds Art-Deco signals)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 24, 2018, 06:58:57 PM
I'm in Minnesota for the weekend, and I came across this relatively new signal installation that uses a mix of both FYAs and five section towers:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmuENe7D.jpg&hash=65f53385558f174b888fb60f1cccc1e08a8f6ad0)

This is the intersection of CR 78 and CR 133 in Sartell. I thought it odd to mix the two, especially for a new installation. Thoughts?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 24, 2018, 07:08:11 PM
^^I think it a FYA for dedicated left-turn lanes and the 5-section signal for a shared left and ahead lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 24, 2018, 07:11:49 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 24, 2018, 06:58:57 PM
I'm in Minnesota for the weekend, and I came across this relatively new signal installation that uses a mix of both FYAs and five section towers:

http://i.imgur.com/muENe7D.jpg

This is the intersection of CR 78 and CR 133 in Sartell. I thought it odd to mix the two, especially for a new installation. Thoughts?

Another excellent-looking installation by Minnesota. Why every state can't place signals this well (except for those that do), I'll never know.

As Big John mentions above, the tower is necessary due to the shared lane. But I wonder how the signal is phased. Shared lane approaches in my area are typically fully-permissive. The ones that do have a 5-section above a shared lane, basically never activate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: seicer on March 24, 2018, 10:34:14 PM
Lebanon, Kentucky:
* Example one (https://goo.gl/maps/wu9HoYPTxm82) - Order generic "historic" gantry and just hang signals however
* Example two (https://goo.gl/maps/bSgAKvFKG482) - a singular post would work better here than this mess

Typical Kentucky state installation:
* Example one (https://goo.gl/maps/MChbx891ro92) - Metal posts and sloppy wiring, which is sadly the norm
* Example two (https://goo.gl/maps/Lc5oCsqNPA92) - Metal posts and sloppy wiring, and reflective backplates, used all around Frankfort

Lexington (?) city installation:
* Example one (https://goo.gl/maps/hfCZJpq7VKx) - Mast arm with backlit signs
* Example two (https://goo.gl/maps/Zfq6UjbVtQw) - Mast arm with backlit signs
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 24, 2018, 11:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2018, 07:11:49 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 24, 2018, 06:58:57 PM
I'm in Minnesota for the weekend, and I came across this relatively new signal installation that uses a mix of both FYAs and five section towers:

http://i.imgur.com/muENe7D.jpg

This is the intersection of CR 78 and CR 133 in Sartell. I thought it odd to mix the two, especially for a new installation. Thoughts?
Another excellent-looking installation by Minnesota. Why every state can't place signals this well (except for those that do), I'll never know.

As Big John mentions above, the tower is necessary due to the shared lane. But I wonder how the signal is phased. Shared lane approaches in my area are typically fully-permissive. The ones that do have a 5-section above a shared lane, basically never activate.

I watched it for a few cycles as I took pictures of it, and the tower for CR 78 always had a leading protected phase, though that was probably due to traffic volume. It also might be set that way due to the fact that not many vehicles will continue straight through into the gas station parking lot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 25, 2018, 12:00:05 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 23, 2018, 11:49:53 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 23, 2018, 03:39:27 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 22, 2018, 11:40:02 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 10:19:09 PM
Quote from: Signal man619 on March 21, 2018, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 21, 2018, 06:46:36 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 21, 2018, 02:24:55 AM
Nice! Huntsville's removed most of the ones around the city years ago, and many of the remaining ones will be going within the next year or so when the intersection they're at gets redone. There's a fair number in Central Alabama though, especially in Birmingham.

It gets better, I found a few Crouse-Hinds Type Ms that are still in service, I believe those are currently the oldest signals in Philly, next to the art decos in the Naval Base.

And the Marbelite 12in type L.

Are you referring to this (The signal mounted overhead)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4699/40158153591_f8a4252f9a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt)Marbelite on top with a pair of McCains (https://flic.kr/p/24bD2Yt) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I was told that this was a Type K, not a Type L

Type K is a Crouse Hinds 12,12,12.

Never heard of a Crouse-Hinds Type K. My area only has Crouse-Hinds Type Ms and Rs
The Type K was the model designation of the 12 inch Art-Decos (and the 12 inch Type Ms, IIRC).

Also, speaking of 12 inch Type Ms, I think I may have found the only one in the state of Alabama today on US 31 in Birmingham:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5586818,-86.8206676,3a,15y,248.94h,81.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS-hpRgqcMOJ-S-u1_jWxDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5585855,-86.8206928,3a,15y,325.98h,83.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn5sqA7NFVRnsQuFkMu-faQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In all honesty though, Birmingham has just about one example of every 12 inch signal ever made in service there (the only ones I know of that they lack are the round-door Econolite Bullseyes, 12 inch CGE and Fortran signals, and 12 inch Crouse-hinds Art-Deco signals)

Damn, consider me lucky due to the fact that Philly still has a few old signals such as Crouse-Hinds Type Ms and bullseyes, and that rare Marbelite Type L
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on March 26, 2018, 04:34:24 AM
I'm pretty sure this isn't the best way to convey what they're trying to prohibit:

https://goo.gl/maps/n3uXLxrhhqy

Also I'm not sure if they're still there and I haven't been up there in years but I remember this weird setup at White Marsh:

https://goo.gl/maps/n2NT9cmBYir
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 06:23:23 AM
Quote from: kj3400 on March 26, 2018, 04:34:24 AM
I'm pretty sure this isn't the best way to convey what they're trying to prohibit:

https://goo.gl/maps/n3uXLxrhhqy

Are you talking about no left/right turn at the crossover?  They are tough to sign because there's not really once standard in how to sign it. Usually though you don't have a green ball and a straight arrow right below it.

Quote
Also I'm not sure if they're still there and I haven't been up there in years but I remember this weird setup at White Marsh:
https://goo.gl/maps/n2NT9cmBYir

What's the weird setup here?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 26, 2018, 08:32:20 AM
Quote from: kj3400 on March 26, 2018, 04:34:24 AM
I'm pretty sure this isn't the best way to convey what they're trying to prohibit:

https://goo.gl/maps/n3uXLxrhhqy

Also I'm not sure if they're still there and I haven't been up there in years but I remember this weird setup at White Marsh:

https://goo.gl/maps/n2NT9cmBYir

NYC signs the main/service road setups like this. People seem to get it 

Queens Blvd and Broadway

https://goo.gl/maps/bvX2nxH4Ti82
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 01:13:09 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 06:23:23 AM
Quote from: kj3400 on March 26, 2018, 04:34:24 AM
Also I'm not sure if they're still there and I haven't been up there in years but I remember this weird setup at White Marsh:
https://goo.gl/maps/n2NT9cmBYir

What's the weird setup here?

All three approaches have only one through signal head. Blatant violation of policy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 01:21:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 01:13:09 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 06:23:23 AM
Quote from: kj3400 on March 26, 2018, 04:34:24 AM
Also I'm not sure if they're still there and I haven't been up there in years but I remember this weird setup at White Marsh:
https://goo.gl/maps/n2NT9cmBYir

What's the weird setup here?

All three approaches have only one through signal head. Blatant violation of policy.

Ah, I see it now. 

Malls seem to have this issues with traffic lights. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: seicer on March 26, 2018, 02:58:05 PM
What policy? Does that policy cover private property? If so, does the MUTCD? Because shopping centers terribly misrepresent signs and pavement markings all the time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2018, 03:12:06 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 26, 2018, 02:58:05 PM
What policy? Does that policy cover private property? If so, does the MUTCD? Because shopping centers terribly misrepresent signs and pavement markings all the time.

Yep.  Per: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_general.htm#genq4

QuoteTitle 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 655.603 states that "for the purpose of MUTCD applicability, the phrase 'open to public travel' includes toll roads and roads within shopping centers, parking lots, airports, sports arenas, and other similar business and recreation facilities that are privately owned but where the public is allowed to travel without access restrictions.

And Yes, it's amazing how bad such signage and markings can be.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: seicer on March 26, 2018, 03:21:37 PM
Gotcha. With that, what incentive is there if there are no penalties? I suspect that a lot of these issues is just pure ignorance - mom-and-pop painters, local sign fabricators, and local electricians who really don't know federal policy and not willful. But it would be nice to see enforcement out of safety concerns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on March 26, 2018, 03:36:54 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on March 01, 2018, 03:18:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 01, 2018, 02:25:27 AM
New backplates in my area have slats cut into the backplates, but not to such an extreme degree: https://goo.gl/V32FYb

I believe the holes reduce wind load on the signal, but I could be wrong.

I dunno what else they'd be for, but I have a hard time believing those little slats make all that much difference mitigating wind stresses.
What I've read around is that they are a two-way street, meaning that they reduce wind load and provide a distinction for the environment around the signal; like that of yellow lined backplates at night.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 04:29:55 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 26, 2018, 03:21:37 PM
Gotcha. With that, what incentive is there if there are no penalties? I suspect that a lot of these issues is just pure ignorance - mom-and-pop painters, local sign fabricators, and local electricians who really don't know federal policy and not willful. But it would be nice to see enforcement out of safety concerns.

That may be true with really small shopping centers (what some might call a plaza or strip mall), but larger malls that have their own traffic lights are not usually managed mom-and-pop-style. One of the larger malls near me, Westfield Southcenter, has a huge parking lot with several tall garages. Something of this scale would have to be managed by a dedicated management team, either (in this case) by Westfield Corporation itself, or in the case of other malls, through whomever the owner decides. In some cases, the parking lot itself is owned by the shopping center, but managed by an outside group. This group would be the ones who maintain the striping and signage. In the case of a local parking company near me (one I am intimately familiar with), they keep a copy of the MUTCD on-hand to ensure compliance, since they have to self-regulate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 04:39:48 PM
Double-posting due to unrelated topic

Here's something for our Eagle Flatback-geek 'traffic light guy'...

I rarely go through this intersection, so I only just spotted these today. Here are some Eagle Flatbacks in Federal Way, WA, the only Eagle Flatbacks I know of in Western Washington. Two of the four approaches have wire-spun signals, with all but one of the signals for these two approaches using 12-inch Eagle Flatbacks (the one odd-duck is a McCain (https://goo.gl/MMVdUj), replacing a Flatback when the city needed a right turn filter). The left turn signals use all-arrow displays, which have been common in Washington for many years (decades even). If the signals date to when the intersection was last widened, these date to the 70s.

https://goo.gl/o1T4Bt -- I captured my own photo, but it was no good due to rain.

(https://i.imgur.com/bsR7Vsc.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 26, 2018, 07:33:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 04:39:48 PM
Double-posting due to unrelated topic

Here's something for our Eagle Flatback-geek 'traffic light guy'...

I rarely go through this intersection, so I only just spotted these today. Here are some Eagle Flatbacks in Federal Way, WA, the only Eagle Flatbacks I know of in Western Washington. Two of the four approaches have wire-spun signals, with all but one of the signals for these two approaches using 12-inch Eagle Flatbacks (the one odd-duck is a McCain (https://goo.gl/MMVdUj), replacing a Flatback when the city needed a right turn filter). The left turn signals use all-arrow displays, which have been common in Washington for many years (decades even). If the signals date to when the intersection was last widened, these date to the 70s.

https://goo.gl/o1T4Bt -- I captured my own photo, but it was no good due to rain.

(https://i.imgur.com/bsR7Vsc.png)

The reason why I like eagle flatbacks so much, is because most of the old signals in my area happen to be flatbacks. To be honest I enjoy other older signal brands such as much, Econolite bullseye, Crouse-Hinds, Marbelite...and so on.

Anyways, about the signals, the new backplates and LED retrofits make the signals look so sleek and modern, making them hard to distinguish from the McCains from a distance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: seicer on March 26, 2018, 10:37:06 PM
Deposit, New York from Sunday:

(https://i.imgur.com/82r5A2l.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/mrBPGV9.jpg)

Not shown: Handpainted Traffic Signal Ahead Sign (https://goo.gl/maps/kbwFxwoFHYu)

This section of NY 17 was bypassed around circa 1965, and this became a secondary county route. I'm sure those signals have not been out of flash mode for decades now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on March 27, 2018, 12:02:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 04:39:48 PM
Double-posting due to unrelated topic

Here's something for our Eagle Flatback-geek 'traffic light guy'...
I get that he is into traffic lights, but to me (being ignorant in that field) I only see a traffic signal housing. Now, I do prefer one style over another, but I wouldn't know the style's name. Maybe I could expand in that direction, as I have done with my recent sign photos.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 01, 2018, 02:31:53 PM
Quote from: seicer on March 26, 2018, 03:21:37 PM
Gotcha. With that, what incentive is there if there are no penalties? I suspect that a lot of these issues is just pure ignorance - mom-and-pop painters, local sign fabricators, and local electricians who really don't know federal policy and not willful. But it would be nice to see enforcement out of safety concerns.

If a non-compliant traffic control device causes an accident, I would imagine the property owner could be held liable for causing the accident through negligence.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 01, 2018, 09:08:51 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on March 27, 2018, 12:02:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 26, 2018, 04:39:48 PM
Double-posting due to unrelated topic

Here's something for our Eagle Flatback-geek 'traffic light guy'...
I get that he is into traffic lights, but to me (being ignorant in that field) I only see a traffic signal housing. Now, I do prefer one style over another, but I wouldn't know the style's name. Maybe I could expand in that direction, as I have done with my recent sign photos.

Yeah, up until this thread, signal housings were just signal housings. I did not see any difference between any other manufacturer. Now that I am familiar with some of the designs, and I have my favorites, I actually find hunting for them to be pretty fun. I'm really more into traffic control than anything else, but this makes that more engaging.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 01, 2018, 10:12:26 PM
So, serious question time, because I just thought of this:

Why are signal bodies still thick, considering the adoption of LED lamps? I get that the switch is not universal, and that some jurisdictions are actually going back to incandescent lamps, but for those that are installing new LED lamps, why?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 02, 2018, 12:58:25 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 01, 2018, 10:12:26 PM
So, serious question time, because I just thought of this:

Why are signal bodies still thick, considering the adoption of LED lamps? I get that the switch is not universal, and that some jurisdictions are actually going back to incandescent lamps, but for those that are installing new LED lamps, why?
Utility cost effectiveness. I mean, why would a municipality want to burn through money they don't have in bills, when they can save that money and direct it elsewhere?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 01:42:14 AM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 02, 2018, 12:58:25 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 01, 2018, 10:12:26 PM
So, serious question time, because I just thought of this:

Why are signal bodies still thick, considering the adoption of LED lamps? I get that the switch is not universal, and that some jurisdictions are actually going back to incandescent lamps, but for those that are installing new LED lamps, why?
Utility cost effectiveness. I mean, why would a municipality want to burn through money they don't have in bills, when they can save that money and direct it elsewhere?

But that assumes that all municipalities are short on cash and/or aren't interested in updating their infrastructure to new technology.

As to the question, AFAIK, LED signal faces are all retrofits, even those that are new (so a new LED McCain is simply stuffed inside a former incandescent body). There are countries that have experimented with flat-faced LED signal displays, but I don't think they've been approved for US in the US just yet, especially since they don't have any visors (which I believe are required).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 02, 2018, 03:06:13 AM
I wonder exactly how interchangeable the "guts" to a traffic light setup are. Obviously, signal housings are pretty much interchangeable and you don't have to pair a McCain controller to a McCain signal. Otherwise, the setups that Norman has with Peeks and McCains on the same mastarm wouldn't work. So what else? Are the lenses the same? Visors? I think backplates are compatible, because I've seen ODOT pop their favorite vented, reflective backplates onto a few different signal types (I think–need to verify that they haven't just happened to put them all on Durasigs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 02, 2018, 05:28:11 AM
LEDs, lenses (in an incandescent signal), visors (to an extent), and maybe sometimes reflectors (in an incandescent signal). Backgrounds can also be somewhat interchangeable, but they don't always mix and match well between brands. A door from one brand typically won't fit on a signal body from another brand (or even model!), though two different (complete) sections can be attached to each other without issue most of the time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 03:17:02 PM
Anyone know what kind of traffic signal housing this is? It's a flashing yellow arrow, and the city of Federal Way, WA has installed quite a few of these (all FYA's, no standard three-head signals). Most of them have been installed in the last few years, but not all new installs are of this type. The visors are stuck out slightly farther than normal, and the back of the signals have this reflective white square. They don't seem to be limited visibility signals (I can see the arrows from a wide range of angles on Street View and IRL).

Here's the signal, and the setup below (the signal in question is the FYA facing the camera in the second camera). The opposite approach just uses a standard McCain FYA:

(https://i.imgur.com/gFJKBDB.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/jjtVv6O.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 02, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 03:17:02 PM
Anyone know what kind of traffic signal housing this is? It's a flashing yellow arrow, and the city of Federal Way, WA has installed quite a few of these (all FYA's, no standard three-head signals). Most of them have been installed in the last few years, but not all new installs are of this type. The visors are stuck out slightly farther than normal, and the back of the signals have this reflective white square. They don't seem to be limited visibility signals (I can see the arrows from a wide range of angles on Street View and IRL).

Interesting you ask, because we had a short thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21172.0) about those very signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 03:59:39 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 02, 2018, 03:54:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 03:17:02 PM
Anyone know what kind of traffic signal housing this is? It's a flashing yellow arrow, and the city of Federal Way, WA has installed quite a few of these (all FYA's, no standard three-head signals). Most of them have been installed in the last few years, but not all new installs are of this type. The visors are stuck out slightly farther than normal, and the back of the signals have this reflective white square. They don't seem to be limited visibility signals (I can see the arrows from a wide range of angles on Street View and IRL).

Interesting you ask, because we had a short thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21172.0) about those very signals.

Fuck me, I even commented on that thread.  :pan: :pan:

(https://i.imgur.com/Lb6Gh.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zzyzx on April 06, 2018, 02:49:58 PM
I send a lot of videos on WeTransfer (http://www.wetransfer.com) which always has colorful artwork on the page background. I love the style of the old signal, which is almost camouflaged by the palm tree.
Anyone know where this was taken?


(https://i.imgur.com/2SlhAMZ.jpg)

Image by: kankim
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 06, 2018, 07:56:18 PM
I would guess that it's off Wilton Place in Los Angeles, based on the age of the signals, the mast arm, and the blue street blades.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: adventurernumber1 on April 06, 2018, 08:37:17 PM
That's got to be one of the funkiest-looking traffic signals I've ever seen (due to the fact that it looks like it has a "palm tree hair-doo").  :camera:  :D

As for trying to figure out its location - by looking at the left picture, that style of palm trees look like the kind that is frequently found in southern California (including the Los Angeles area), so Jake is probably right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on April 08, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Recently, I ran into this ancient crouse-hinds art deco, 1950s vintage...pretty damn old, this is the OLDEST signal within a 20 mile radius of Philly:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/892/41304941711_c8bb3452e3_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/25VYC8r)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/25VYC8r) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/805/26433023727_168db2a1ee_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GgNa3p)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/GgNa3p) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/893/26433029537_bdd1758615_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GgNbLz)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (side-view) (https://flic.kr/p/GgNbLz) by Traffic Light Guy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr



Funny thing was, I ran into this ancient artifact by mistake!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 08, 2018, 10:33:45 PM
Some of my best finds have been completely on accident. Great find! It has cast-visors too!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 08:51:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 08, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Recently, I ran into this ancient crouse-hinds art deco, 1950s vintage...pretty damn old, this is the OLDEST signal within a 20 mile radius of Philly:

Are you saying that for a fact? Or is it just from what you could tell based on Street View? Philadelphia is a big city, and I wouldn't jump to that conclusion until you've been able to actually drive around and look about for yourself. I've made more than a few false conclusions based on what I've seen on Street View, that I later found out had been replaced already.

That said, these are clearly ancient. So you may be right. :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on April 09, 2018, 10:42:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 08:51:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 08, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Recently, I ran into this ancient crouse-hinds art deco, 1950s vintage...pretty damn old, this is the OLDEST signal within a 20 mile radius of Philly:

Are you saying that for a fact? Or is it just from what you could tell based on Street View? Philadelphia is a big city, and I wouldn't jump to that conclusion until you've been able to actually drive around and look about for yourself. I've made more than a few false conclusions based on what I've seen on Street View, that I later found out had been replaced already.

That said, these are clearly ancient. So you may be right. :-D


There's nothing older than an art deco around my area, so in short.....yes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 09, 2018, 10:42:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 08:51:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 08, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Recently, I ran into this ancient crouse-hinds art deco, 1950s vintage...pretty damn old, this is the OLDEST signal within a 20 mile radius of Philly:

Are you saying that for a fact? Or is it just from what you could tell based on Street View? Philadelphia is a big city, and I wouldn't jump to that conclusion until you've been able to actually drive around and look about for yourself. I've made more than a few false conclusions based on what I've seen on Street View, that I later found out had been replaced already.

That said, these are clearly ancient. So you may be right. :-D

There's nothing older than an art deco around my area, so in short.....yes.

My inexperience is showing. Does it get much older than Art Deco in the modern (post-40s) era?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 11, 2018, 02:11:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 09, 2018, 10:42:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 09, 2018, 08:51:44 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on April 08, 2018, 07:34:08 PM
Recently, I ran into this ancient crouse-hinds art deco, 1950s vintage...pretty damn old, this is the OLDEST signal within a 20 mile radius of Philly:

Are you saying that for a fact? Or is it just from what you could tell based on Street View? Philadelphia is a big city, and I wouldn't jump to that conclusion until you've been able to actually drive around and look about for yourself. I've made more than a few false conclusions based on what I've seen on Street View, that I later found out had been replaced already.

That said, these are clearly ancient. So you may be right. :-D

There's nothing older than an art deco around my area, so in short.....yes.

My inexperience is showing. Does it get much older than Art Deco in the modern (post-40s) era?
There's a few old Crouse-hinds Type T ("port-hole") signals still hanging around across the US, but they're very few and far between. They date back prior to the Crouse-hinds "Art-deco" (would've been Type D followed by the Type DT) signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 15, 2018, 03:57:00 PM
Quote from: zzyzx on April 06, 2018, 02:49:58 PM
I send a lot of videos on WeTransfer (http://www.wetransfer.com) which always has colorful artwork on the page background. I love the style of the old signal, which is almost camouflaged by the palm tree.
Anyone know where this was taken?the


(https://i.imgur.com/2SlhAMZ.jpg)

Image by: kankim


The photo on the left is definitely at the NW corner of Wilton and Wilshire in Los Angeles.  You can even see the sign for "Right Lane" which denotes the restrictions for a bus and bike lane in the right lane during rush hours.  Wilshire is one of the few streets with this restriction and the only one that intersects Wilton.

The photo on the right is probably also in So Cal, but it is not at Wilshire/Wilton.  If you scan the intersection on GSV, you can see that there are no such palm trees in the area.  It does look like an old City of Los Angeles signal though and the guy wires denote that it is also probably somewhere in the city (most of the nearby cities have mast arms instead).  But there is no easy way to know the specific interesection.

BTW: Los Angeles has a lot of Econolite bullseyes on their guy wires and mastarms on the older signal installs.  I have always liked the way they looked.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2018, 04:19:18 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 15, 2018, 03:57:00 PM
The photo on the left is definitely at the NW corner of Wilton and Wilshire in Los Angeles.  You can even see the sign for "Right Lane" which denotes the restrictions for a bus and bike lane in the right lane during rush hours.  Wilshire is one of the few streets with this restriction and the only one that intersects Wilton.

Dammit! I scanned that intersection before (I recognise the oddly-angled slip lane in the SW corner). Really annoyed I didn't notice (what stands out to me the most) the billboard in the background.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on April 15, 2018, 10:53:51 PM
Springfield, Missouri is phasing out their center curb signal posts and replacing them with standard right corner signal posts.

https://goo.gl/maps/eAKyGZ3H1Vy
https://goo.gl/maps/smjHZ7qbBUt

https://goo.gl/maps/MQeKwc15XDN2

3-light left turn signals will remain 3-light signals.
5 light signals are becoming flashing left arrow signals

The reasoning seems to be the center pole signals obstruct traffic views.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2018, 11:20:31 PM
Quote from: US71 on April 15, 2018, 10:53:51 PM
The reasoning seems to be the center pole signals obstruct traffic views.

I really don't see where the obstruction is occurring. When you're turning left, you are looking to the lanes to the left of the oncoming left turn lane, which is to the left of the signal pole. If anything is in the way, it's other cars turning left, not the signal pole. If you are proceeding straight, I'm not sure what role the center signal pole plays in visibility, period.

To be honest, I do quite like signal poles in medians, so news like this bothers me a little. Here's an intersection that I designed in SketchUp. You can see that I've placed the left turn signals (FYAs) in the medians for the double left turn approaches, and I've used near-side median-mounted signals for all approaches as well (ignore the incomplete nature of it) (I made everything myself, FWIW):

(https://i.imgur.com/QeUFXAj.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on April 16, 2018, 05:35:54 AM
MnDOT loves them in medians on divided highways, too. Here's an example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0358641,-92.8074804,3a,75y,70.59h,92.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-Boes62z96LWnuLr2RQAbA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's two left-turn lanes, but ultimately three left-turn signal heads installed.

Edit: and here's an example (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5361659,-93.2288195,3a,23y,339.96h,88.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbInOtdMXb_znT99QSlY_Xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) from my hometown that even uses a rare (for Minnesota) near-side left turn signal. Double left, but four left-turn signal heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 06:40:38 AM
Quote from: US71 on April 15, 2018, 10:53:51 PM
Springfield, Missouri is phasing out their center curb signal posts and replacing them with standard right corner signal posts.

https://goo.gl/maps/eAKyGZ3H1Vy
https://goo.gl/maps/smjHZ7qbBUt

https://goo.gl/maps/MQeKwc15XDN2

3-light left turn signals will remain 3-light signals.
5 light signals are becoming flashing left arrow signals

The reasoning seems to be the center pole signals obstruct traffic views.


Those are all state highways and therefore MoDOT installs. (Typical City of Springfield signals include a truss arm and mixed-case Series B on the signs, not the all-caps Series C that MoDOT uses.) Signals are weird in Missouri because MoDOT kind of does their own thing on the state highways and the cities don't touch them. Rather than being phased out, you might just be seeing differences between MoDOT and City of Springfield practices.

I'm guessing that abandoning the butterfly mastarms is more to do with the crash risk of having a mast in the median (with the implication that a median incursion could down the whole signal installation) rather than any visibility concerns. This is the same reason why butterfly gantries anchored in gores are considered a safety hazard.

This is what I think of when I think of a Springfield install. I love the hell out of them.
(https://i.imgur.com/zLIbyg4.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 08:10:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2018, 11:20:31 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/QeUFXAj.png)
What's with the solid and dashed extended lane(s) indications? Solid limit lines would indicate a [last minute] stopping point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on April 16, 2018, 08:59:23 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 06:40:38 AM
Quote from: US71 on April 15, 2018, 10:53:51 PM
Springfield, Missouri is phasing out their center curb signal posts and replacing them with standard right corner signal posts.

https://goo.gl/maps/eAKyGZ3H1Vy
https://goo.gl/maps/smjHZ7qbBUt

https://goo.gl/maps/MQeKwc15XDN2

3-light left turn signals will remain 3-light signals.
5 light signals are becoming flashing left arrow signals

The reasoning seems to be the center pole signals obstruct traffic views.


Those are all state highways and therefore MoDOT installs. (Typical City of Springfield signals include a truss arm and mixed-case Series B on the signs, not the all-caps Series C that MoDOT uses.) Signals are weird in Missouri because MoDOT kind of does their own thing on the state highways and the cities don't touch them. Rather than being phased out, you might just be seeing differences between MoDOT and City of Springfield practices.

Signals on Glenstone (Bus 65) have been/are being replaced. A few have new signals in place (like near Steak n Shake), but are bagged.  a few like Cherokee (the 5 signal post) have the new posts up, but no signals hung.

Kansas Expressway is due for this changeover as is Battlefield. Road.  There was a news brief on-line a couple weeks ago about these two roads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 11:40:58 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 16, 2018, 05:35:54 AM
MnDOT loves them in medians on divided highways, too. Here's an example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0358641,-92.8074804,3a,75y,70.59h,92.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-Boes62z96LWnuLr2RQAbA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's two left-turn lanes, but ultimately three left-turn signal heads installed.

Edit: and here's an example (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5361659,-93.2288195,3a,23y,339.96h,88.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbInOtdMXb_znT99QSlY_Xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) from my hometown that even uses a rare (for Minnesota) near-side left turn signal. Double left, but four left-turn signal heads.

Those are both excellent Installations. I distinctly recall from my visit to Minnesota last December some excellent signal placement.

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 08:10:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2018, 11:20:31 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/QeUFXAj.png)

What's with the solid and dashed extended lane(s) indications? Solid limit lines would indicate a [last minute] stopping point.

No difference, I just hadn't finished editing the markings. The dashed limit lines indicate the point where, during the permissive phase, you are supposed to wait. These lines are used in other countries such as Japan, South Africa, and Denmark. Ideally, the word "YIELD" would also be used just in front of the dashed lines.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 12:06:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 11:40:58 AM
No difference, I just hadn't finished editing the markings. The dashed limit lines indicate the point where, during the permissive phase, you are supposed to wait. These lines are used in other countries such as Japan, South Africa, and Denmark. Ideally, the word "YIELD" would also be used just in front of the dashed lines.
Ah, ok... so fictional intersection?

What program is this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 02:41:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 11:40:58 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on April 16, 2018, 05:35:54 AM
MnDOT loves them in medians on divided highways, too. Here's an example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0358641,-92.8074804,3a,75y,70.59h,92.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-Boes62z96LWnuLr2RQAbA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's two left-turn lanes, but ultimately three left-turn signal heads installed.

Edit: and here's an example (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5361659,-93.2288195,3a,23y,339.96h,88.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbInOtdMXb_znT99QSlY_Xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) from my hometown that even uses a rare (for Minnesota) near-side left turn signal. Double left, but four left-turn signal heads.

Those are both excellent Installations. I distinctly recall from my visit to Minnesota last December some excellent signal placement.

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 08:10:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2018, 11:20:31 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/QeUFXAj.png)

What's with the solid and dashed extended lane(s) indications? Solid limit lines would indicate a [last minute] stopping point.

No difference, I just hadn't finished editing the markings. The dashed limit lines indicate the point where, during the permissive phase, you are supposed to wait. These lines are used in other countries such as Japan, South Africa, and Denmark. Ideally, the word "YIELD" would also be used just in front of the dashed lines.

The pavement marking you're looking for is:
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig3b_16.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 03:23:24 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 02:41:28 PM
[...]
You can use Inkscape to take those triangles (that are to specification), and simple add them to your scene. I use PDF pages of the MUTCD to my advantage to create a lot of stuff.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: adventurernumber1 on April 16, 2018, 03:35:23 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 12:06:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 11:40:58 AM
No difference, I just hadn't finished editing the markings. The dashed limit lines indicate the point where, during the permissive phase, you are supposed to wait. These lines are used in other countries such as Japan, South Africa, and Denmark. Ideally, the word "YIELD" would also be used just in front of the dashed lines.
Ah, ok... so fictional intersection?

What program is this?

I believe he said he made it in SketchUp.

Btw, that looks really cool!!   :nod:   :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 04:24:44 PM
Quote from: adventurernumber1 on April 16, 2018, 03:35:23 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 12:06:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 11:40:58 AM
No difference, I just hadn't finished editing the markings. The dashed limit lines indicate the point where, during the permissive phase, you are supposed to wait. These lines are used in other countries such as Japan, South Africa, and Denmark. Ideally, the word "YIELD" would also be used just in front of the dashed lines.
Ah, ok... so fictional intersection?

What program is this?

I believe he said he made it in SketchUp.

Btw, that looks really cool!!   :nod:   :thumbsup:
Oh, I didn't catch that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 16, 2018, 08:12:04 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 02:41:28 PM
The pavement marking you're looking for is:
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig3b_16.gif)

Some things in SketchUp are easier said than done. This scene was one of my first, so I kept shapes simple. I will move on to more complex shapes soon. You'd be surprised how difficult a triangle could be for a beginner.

I also wasn't necessarily going for an NA look. Japan, ZA and Denmark all use lines like those I used.

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 16, 2018, 03:23:24 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 16, 2018, 02:41:28 PM
[...]
You can use Inkscape to take those triangles (that are to specification), and simple add them to your scene. I use PDF pages of the MUTCD to my advantage to create a lot of stuff.

I use Illustrator and export to CAD. I plan on doing some BGSs like that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 17, 2018, 11:07:01 AM
Quote from: US71 on April 15, 2018, 10:53:51 PM
Springfield, Missouri is phasing out their center curb signal posts and replacing them with standard right corner signal posts.
<...>
The reasoning seems to be the center pole signals obstruct traffic views.

If you've got a full signal mast supporting a mast arm, I could see some view obstruction coming into play.

I'd think a larger reason would be less risk of a knockdown. If you think about all the times a post-mounted "Keep right" sign in the median is hit/knocked down, it's a lot more expensive to fix a signal post in that situation. Posts/Masts on the right side seem to have a lower likelihood of getting hit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 06, 2018, 12:03:36 AM
Seems like NYC has found a "new" way to hang a 4 lamp FYA signal.

New is in quotes because the same setup is used for  R-Y-G-GA or R-Y-G-Bimodal arrow signals in the downstate area

https://youtu.be/x9w5iwcZGJg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 06, 2018, 10:57:20 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 06, 2018, 12:03:36 AM
Seems like NYC has found a "new" way to hang a 4 lamp FYA signal.

New is in quotes because the same setup is used for  R-Y-G-GA or R-Y-G-Bimodal arrow signals in the downstate area

https://youtu.be/x9w5iwcZGJg

Interesting. I certainly don't see any issue. I'm guessing the lower height of the mast arm is due to the overhead cables.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ftballfan on May 06, 2018, 02:34:23 PM
Saw a very old signal (that is still in use!) on US-20 at OH-66 in Fayette, OH yesterday
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on May 06, 2018, 02:58:47 PM
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4650/40345861882_1236996e08_z_d.jpg)
I found this one in Bethany, Missouri last Summer.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 06, 2018, 03:14:25 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 06, 2018, 02:58:47 PM
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4650/40345861882_1236996e08_z_d.jpg)
I found this one in Bethany, Missouri last Summer.

Eagle?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: basilicon89 on May 06, 2018, 08:49:16 PM
Nope...it is an Autoflow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 08, 2018, 10:29:45 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2855076,-76.6505585,3a,75y,11.17h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx3Apd5Z7up0rYh8JE26fGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 I see that the two section signal heads for pedestrians are still being manufactured.  This is in Hershey, PA where a signal was just added to replace two older ones as the PA 743 junction with US 422  that had a short one block concurrency until a few years ago.

So these are not that old at all!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on May 09, 2018, 05:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Judging from Streetview, it seems like Washington D.C. still installs them as well.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 09, 2018, 03:09:00 PM
These are the newest sets of two-box pedestrian signals that I've seen in person:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1249019,-75.1329915,3a,90y,241.94h,88.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sFEBZNtI82-Ul61G6PuiyfA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DFEBZNtI82-Ul61G6PuiyfA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D61.695866%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

These signals are late 90s/early-'00s McCains.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 04:01:02 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 09, 2018, 05:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the MOT is doing. Some new projects have the standard single-section pedestrian heads, whereas some will have two sections. None seem to be a newer style than another. They're both installed with regularity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 09, 2018, 04:27:09 PM
Some places still spec 12 inch pedestrian signals as standard. Washington D.C. is probably the most notable example, but I believe Charlottesville, VA and parts of New York still install them as well. 12 inch peds are pretty rare here in Alabama these days, though.

9 inch and 8 inch pedestrian signals are no longer made (at least here in the US).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on May 10, 2018, 06:47:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 04:01:02 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 09, 2018, 05:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the MOT is doing. Some new projects have the standard single-section pedestrian heads, whereas some will have two sections. None seem to be a newer style than another. They're both installed with regularity.

MOT only ever installs 12 inch pedestrian signals. For new signals at least, they'll only add a second section if there's going to be a countdown timer. Many cities (Surrey, Langley, Victoria, Vancouver etc..) install 16 inch signals, while others (Burnaby Coquitlam, Nanaimo etc...) are like the MOT and use 12 inch signals. It all depends on whichever agency is installing them's preference.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 10, 2018, 10:06:53 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 10, 2018, 06:47:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 04:01:02 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 09, 2018, 05:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the MOT is doing. Some new projects have the standard single-section pedestrian heads, whereas some will have two sections. None seem to be a newer style than another. They're both installed with regularity.

MOT only ever installs 12 inch pedestrian signals. For new signals at least, they'll only add a second section if there's going to be a countdown timer. Many cities (Surrey, Langley, Victoria, Vancouver etc..) install 16 inch signals, while others (Burnaby Coquitlam, Nanaimo etc...) are like the MOT and use 12 inch signals. It all depends on whichever agency is installing them's preference.

I believe Vancouver installs single-section heads which also include countdown timers, correct? I can't remember what other cities do. At the 99/16 Ave interchange, the MOT used two-section heads despite the availability of single-section pedestrian heads with countdown timers. That's what I find most interesting. I was not aware that any municipality was still installing ped heads without countdown timers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on May 10, 2018, 11:26:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 10, 2018, 10:06:53 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 10, 2018, 06:47:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 04:01:02 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on May 09, 2018, 05:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2018, 12:28:53 AM
Two-section pedestrian heads are still commonly installed in various parts of British Columbia. They have been phased out in Washington, though.

And weirdly, some areas have switched from 16 inch pedestrian signals back to two-section signals in recent years.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the MOT is doing. Some new projects have the standard single-section pedestrian heads, whereas some will have two sections. None seem to be a newer style than another. They're both installed with regularity.

MOT only ever installs 12 inch pedestrian signals. For new signals at least, they'll only add a second section if there's going to be a countdown timer. Many cities (Surrey, Langley, Victoria, Vancouver etc..) install 16 inch signals, while others (Burnaby Coquitlam, Nanaimo etc...) are like the MOT and use 12 inch signals. It all depends on whichever agency is installing them's preference.

I believe Vancouver installs single-section heads which also include countdown timers, correct? I can't remember what other cities do. At the 99/16 Ave interchange, the MOT used two-section heads despite the availability of single-section pedestrian heads with countdown timers. That's what I find most interesting. I was not aware that any municipality was still installing ped heads without countdown timers.

They do! All the other cities in the first list in my previous comment do as well. As far as I know, only the MOT and Richmond don't always use countdown timers. Here's a brand new 12 inch pedestrian signal in Richmond without countdown timers: https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1774636,-123.1243457,3a,45.3y,15.24h,97.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1skqOlZqyAKaVca4T0bh09_Q!2e0!5s20120501T000000!7i13312!8i6656.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on May 11, 2018, 04:34:59 PM
Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.

(https://vgy.me/6HJnCC.png)

^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.

(https://vgy.me/pXSiey.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 11, 2018, 05:18:03 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on May 11, 2018, 04:34:59 PM
Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.

(https://vgy.me/6HJnCC.png)

^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.

(https://vgy.me/pXSiey.png)

The first one may be a McCain, the second one might be an 8" Peek
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on May 11, 2018, 05:25:19 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 11, 2018, 05:18:03 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on May 11, 2018, 04:34:59 PM
Hartshorne, Oklahoma. I took these yesterday.

(https://vgy.me/6HJnCC.png)

^^ This signal was broken, unfortunately.

(https://vgy.me/pXSiey.png)

The first one may be a McCain, the second one might be an 8" Peek

Thanks for telling me what the models are!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 11, 2018, 07:32:25 PM
Hard to tell, but they both look to be 8 inch McCains. Doesn't sound like the town really takes good care of them...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on May 11, 2018, 10:19:31 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 11, 2018, 07:32:25 PM
Hard to tell, but they both look to be 8 inch McCains. Doesn't sound like the town really takes good care of them...

I don't think they do either. It's pretty hard to see the green color on the signal, and as I mentioned above, the first signal is broken and needs to be replaced pretty badly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 11, 2018, 11:11:22 PM
Not even that old either, I believe those signals date to the mid-90s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM
This video showed up in YouTube's suggestions earlier (I don't know why since I haven't been watching any road related videos), and I just watched it:


It was quite informative.  I've never seen heated LED lenses before.  I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.  The only intersection I can think of this happening to me at is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9284166,-76.6065419,3a,66.8y,256.47h,88.67t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1ssyAzzEtbkOv4TcRHm3PSGA!2e0).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on May 14, 2018, 08:17:21 PM
Lmao I know the exact intersection where he went out to take pictures (https://goo.gl/maps/GdmrCZcgMV52).

LEDs are sooooooooo much better than incandescent bulbs, though I am nostalgic for the incandescent bulbs' appearance.
The buildup of snow on traffic signal visors is very very rare.  It requires a lot of wind to accompany the snowfall.  But visors in his (and my) home state of Illinois have the bottoms cut out anyway, so the snow build up only ever happens if the wind is blowing side-to side.  In the rare occurrences when I've seen snow build up on the lenses, it would be either the left or right half of the lens that is covered; never really the bottom half.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 14, 2018, 08:29:18 PM
Snow buildup is a more serious problem where I live on Long Island because our county traffic agency mostly uses partial visors which allow more snow to accumulate on the lenses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 14, 2018, 08:31:21 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM
I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

I don't, because this means that the signal never has an all-red phase, where the intersection should be completely clear of vehicles from all directions.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 14, 2018, 09:57:11 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM
I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: on_wisconsin on May 16, 2018, 02:07:15 PM
WisDOT's NW division is finally getting in the signal per-lane game. Taken at WIS 25/ N. Broadway St. and Ceder Falls Rd. in Menomonie:

Looking Northbound:
(https://i.imgur.com/ZmrBPve.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/OeMeb7y.jpg)

Southbound:
(https://i.imgur.com/LVIryV6.jpg)


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 05:15:00 PM
Wisconsin has very good signal placement overall, so it surprises me that a far-right mast mounted signal isn't included. For many states, that's the only extra signal DOTs include.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 16, 2018, 05:34:55 PM
The only thing I don't like about that setup is the side-by-side signal heads in the median. I would much rather see the ball indication head mounted on the right mast and leave only the left arrows in the median.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 16, 2018, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2018, 09:57:11 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM
I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.

In this case, there wouldn't be a left turn conflict since the oncoming left turn is protected only, and I can only recall seeing it lead only.  The green ending I'm referring to is straight through for east and west.  The next phase is either left turns from the right and left, or left/through from the right.  Would there still be an issue since there are no left turning cars from the oncoming direction?  The only issue I can think of is if someone jumps the red light before it turns green going straight across from the left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 16, 2018, 09:26:24 PM
The three orb signals being mounted alongside the turn signals is actually pretty creative.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 09:49:36 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 16, 2018, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2018, 09:57:11 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 14, 2018, 07:56:03 PM
I also agree with the point that he makes about the right green arrow delay.  It's annoying to have a green ball go to a red ball, then get an arrow.

The green arrow can't come on while the oncoming left turn has a green or yellow orb. This would give the impression to right turning traffic that no other traffic might conflict with them, when, in fact, left turning traffic will be completing their left turn on yellow/red. Basically, on a yellow, all straight/right turning traffic must slow and stop to allow left turning traffic to go.

In this case, there wouldn't be a left turn conflict since the oncoming left turn is protected only, and I can only recall seeing it lead only.  The green ending I'm referring to is straight through for east and west.  The next phase is either left turns from the right and left, or left/through from the right.  Would there still be an issue since there are no left turning cars from the oncoming direction?  The only issue I can think of is if someone jumps the red light before it turns green going straight across from the left.

The intersection in the video appeared to have pro/per phasing for all approaches. Several frames showed two overhead 5-section towers, which are used in Illinois when the left and right turns have protected phases (but not fully-protected operation). A green arrow coming on during a permissive phase might confuse drivers into thinking their movement is occuring while protected, when they actually have to stop and yield to those completing their left turn at the end of the cycle (common in Illinois).

If the intersection was fully protected, right turn green arrows could be used much more often, because the right turns would in fact be protected (as long as the pedestrian walk sign was not on, and the oncoming left turn had a red arrow).

There is an intersection near me in Tacoma, WA (Waller @ Pioneer), where the right turn onto Waller has a green right arrow that burns for more than 90% of the time. Because Waller is split-phased at that intersection, and the other approach to Pioneer has virtually no one approaching it ever, the only time the right green arrow ever turns off is when the oncoming left turn has a green arrow. I was initially curious why a yield on green signal was not used, but with the constantly burning green arrow giving the impression to right-turning traffic that their movement is fully protected, you could not use a permissive signal for the oncoming left turn. I'm sure such an operation has been permitted in the past, but to the best of my knowledge, a combination of a green orb and a green arrow for opposite approaches is not allowed.

Quote from: traffic light guy on May 16, 2018, 09:26:24 PM
The three orb signals being mounted alongside the turn signals is actually pretty creative.

I like it as well. Very Australian/Kiwi.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 16, 2018, 09:50:17 PM
Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 16, 2018, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 09:49:36 PM
If the intersection was fully protected, right turn green arrows could be used much more often, because the right turns would in fact be protected (as long as the pedestrian walk sign was not on, and the oncoming left turn had a red arrow).

I was thinking of the intersection I posted a link to when I made my initial statement, and all left turns are protected only, so that explains my confusion!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2018, 09:50:17 PM
Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 18, 2018, 10:39:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2018, 09:50:17 PM
Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.

Nevada was never really big on median signals (or at least, not to my knowledge). But you're right in that some of the ones I can think of were on narrow medians and right near the nose of the median... Current practice for nearly all jurisdictions is to just put left turn signals overhead.

There are three locations in Nevada I can think of with post-mounted signals in the median, two in Las Vegas and one in Sparks. In all cases, the posts are located on medians that are at least a traffic lane wide–although one Vegas location still puts the posts pretty close to the median nose.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 18, 2018, 11:58:27 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 18, 2018, 10:39:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 16, 2018, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2018, 09:50:17 PM
Pretty good configuration in those Wisconsin photos, but I wonder how often those median post-mounted heads get knocked down....... California had a lot of those years ago but they phased them out in favor of far-left corner heads.

I don't think California did a very good job placing its signals. Many jurisdictions around the world, including several here in North America, utilize median mounted signals without issue. What California and Nevada never did very well was placing them back from the intersection. If they are placed too close, they will get struck by wide vehicles turning left. British Columbia generally places protected left turns at least a couple of meters back from the crosswalk line.

Nevada was never really big on median signals (or at least, not to my knowledge). But you're right in that some of the ones I can think of were on narrow medians and right near the nose of the median... Current practice for nearly all jurisdictions is to just put left turn signals overhead.

There are three locations in Nevada I can think of with post-mounted signals in the median, two in Las Vegas and one in Sparks. In all cases, the posts are located on medians that are at least a traffic lane wide–although one Vegas location still puts the posts pretty close to the median nose.

It's perfectly logical why post mounted signals would be placed so close to the stop line. The agency's want to make sure that these signals are visible for traffic at the front of the line, however, traffic at the front of the line can usually see the signals in front of them or on the far left. Nearside signals are typically most helpful for cars that are more than three back.

I may have unfairly singled out Nevada and California. Judging by the photos above from Wisconsin, they also placed their median signals quite close to the median nose. So apparently, they don't have quite as many issues as we all may be thinking. Although I seem to recall new signals in Wisconsin not using median signals as often as before, so maybe there have been some issues.

Looking at other countries, such as the UK, Australia, NZ, and South Africa, median signals are all very common. Certainly the norm. Agencies in the US that want to utilize median signals just have to look at these countries for some guidance. Certainly they wouldn't use them as often if they were constantly being knocked over. The key is just to not put them so close to the edges of the medians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/Mqhlbrz.jpg)

I think these are OK, but the yellow borders seem really thick...

(https://i.imgur.com/dRQHD4O.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 19, 2018, 08:41:28 PM
The MUTCD requires the front of backplates to be dull black. Though I know yellow backplates are common in Canada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 19, 2018, 08:47:47 PM
I don't really see how yellow backplates are any worse than regular yellow signals. I would strongly prefer a black or green signal with a yellow backplate, which is prohibited, to a signal with a black backplate with no reflective outline or a yellow signal without a backplate, both of which are permitted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 20, 2018, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 19, 2018, 08:47:47 PM
I don't really see how yellow backplates are any worse than regular yellow signals. I would strongly prefer a black or green signal with a yellow backplate, which is prohibited, to a signal with a black backplate with no reflective outline or a yellow signal without a backplate, both of which are permitted.

I've seen black signals with black backplates before (Pretty counter-productive) 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2186384,-75.2454122,3a,75y,160.11h,99.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_lsyeL-MnXql29545ES9NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

These signals are aluminum McCains, and were added as part of a 2011 US 202 Parkway project. I like these setups, since I rarely see PA do black signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 20, 2018, 04:56:36 PM
Anyway, overuse of yellow signals by some American agencies is a massive pet peeve of mine. I think green or black signals are more appropriate for almost all rural and suburban installations since they provide better contrast against a red light and against snow. Yellow signals only make sense in dense urban environments to cut through the visual clutter.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27fuMGG)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 20, 2018, 06:31:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 20, 2018, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 19, 2018, 08:47:47 PM
I don't really see how yellow backplates are any worse than regular yellow signals. I would strongly prefer a black or green signal with a yellow backplate, which is prohibited, to a signal with a black backplate with no reflective outline or a yellow signal without a backplate, both of which are permitted.

I've seen black signals with black backplates before (Pretty counter-productive) 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2186384,-75.2454122,3a,75y,160.11h,99.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_lsyeL-MnXql29545ES9NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

These signals are aluminum McCains, and were added as part of a 2011 US 202 Parkway project. I like these setups, since I rarely see PA do black signals.

That's pretty much every state west of the Mississippi (and a few east of it). Washington and Oregon have started using yellow retro-reflective borders (improved visibility when dark), but always black backplates.

The point is for the entire assembly to stand out against a bright background (such as the sun). IMO, black-on-black is just as effective as yellow-on-yellow, since both colors occur very rarely in nature.

Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg

Mixed installations are starting to become more common in Washington thanks to the FYA. Through heads might be a mix of Alusigs and Peaks, but the FYA will be a McCain.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 20, 2018, 08:16:28 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27fuMGG)
Happens quite a bit in larger cities, as usually only one or two signals at an intersection may need replacing, so it'd be uneconomical to replaced every signal at an intersection should just one get damaged.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 20, 2018, 08:19:32 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27fuMGG)

That's a regular occurrence in PA and Delaware
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 20, 2018, 08:28:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 20, 2018, 06:31:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 20, 2018, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 19, 2018, 08:47:47 PM
I don't really see how yellow backplates are any worse than regular yellow signals. I would strongly prefer a black or green signal with a yellow backplate, which is prohibited, to a signal with a black backplate with no reflective outline or a yellow signal without a backplate, both of which are permitted.

I've seen black signals with black backplates before (Pretty counter-productive) 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2186384,-75.2454122,3a,75y,160.11h,99.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_lsyeL-MnXql29545ES9NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

These signals are aluminum McCains, and were added as part of a 2011 US 202 Parkway project. I like these setups, since I rarely see PA do black signals.

That's pretty much every state west of the Mississippi (and a few east of it). Washington and Oregon have started using yellow retro-reflective borders (improved visibility when dark), but always black backplates.

The point is for the entire assembly to stand out against a bright background (such as the sun). IMO, black-on-black is just as effective as yellow-on-yellow, since both colors occur very rarely in nature.

For as long as I can remember, NY 318 had black backplates at the intersection of NY 414 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9610131,-76.846027,3a,40.7y,269.31h,102.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1CZ8FDljdJ3dNjlv-w_VnA!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656) until the stoplight was replaced when the resort/casino opened just to the north.  I always thought it was odd, but then one day I realized that since the backplates were on the east and west approaches, that they might be to make the lights easier to see in the sun.  The odd thing is that this was (and still is) the only one I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 09:48:52 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 20, 2018, 08:16:28 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27fuMGG)
Happens quite a bit in larger cities, as usually only one or two signals at an intersection may need replacing, so it'd be uneconomical to replaced every signal at an intersection should just one get damaged.

That makes sense, but Utah loves to replace what isn't broken. Just this past month, all 12 signal heads at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/7rrCpzPgGDz) were replaced, even though there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old ones. There are very few intersections that mix black and yellow signals like this one. In most cases, all three of the signals above would have been replaced as soon as one of them broke.

Anyway, does anyone know the model of each of these signals? They're all pretty common in Utah.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 20, 2018, 09:58:13 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 09:48:52 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 20, 2018, 08:16:28 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 20, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
Here's something I thought was weird: three different signal models, all on the same mast arm:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/958/42170880972_0f19ff4d19_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27fuMGG)
Happens quite a bit in larger cities, as usually only one or two signals at an intersection may need replacing, so it'd be uneconomical to replaced every signal at an intersection should just one get damaged.

That makes sense, but Utah loves to replace what isn't broken. Just this past month, all 12 signal heads at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/7rrCpzPgGDz) were replaced, even though there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old ones. There are very few intersections that mix black and yellow signals like this one. In most cases, all three of the signals above would have been replaced as soon as one of them broke.

Anyway, does anyone know the model of each of these signals? They're all pretty common in Utah.
From left to right: McCain, Siemens (Eagle), Peek or Chapel Hill.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 22, 2018, 04:38:33 PM
I guess they don't want to use yellow signals in Federal Way anymore:

(https://i.imgur.com/p4bi6z3.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 23, 2018, 01:51:54 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2018, 04:38:33 PM
I guess they don't want to use yellow signals in Federal Way anymore:

(https://i.imgur.com/p4bi6z3.jpg)
Marbelite signal on the left, and what looks to be an Intelite on the right. Nice find!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 23, 2018, 12:44:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 20, 2018, 06:31:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 20, 2018, 03:22:08 PM
I've seen black signals with black backplates before

That's pretty much every state west of the Mississippi (and a few east of it).

I was going to say, that looks like–well, a normal stoplight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 23, 2018, 12:56:56 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 23, 2018, 01:51:54 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2018, 04:38:33 PM
I guess they don't want to use yellow signals in Federal Way anymore:

https://i.imgur.com/p4bi6z3.jpg

Marbelite signal on the left, and what looks to be an Intelite on the right. Nice find!

In Federal Way, I think there's more of those Intelites than Marbelites. I've been keeping my eyes peeled for unusual signals, and the Marbelites are not common here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 23, 2018, 06:13:53 PM
I found this undefined signal in Philadelphia, right next to the Crouse-Hinds model M, there is an 8" head with the letters "HS" on the back of the signal, written in cursive, anyone have a clue what this is:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/943/40867721895_81bf33ea55_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/25gkKUK)Crouse-Hinds Type M with an H&amp;S Signal (https://flic.kr/p/25gkKUK) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

The signal's shell has a very close resemblance to the Automatic LFE.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 27, 2018, 02:52:28 AM
That'd be a Highway Signal & Sign signal, from the sound of it. Got a close-up of the back?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 27, 2018, 10:16:55 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on May 27, 2018, 02:52:28 AM
That'd be a Highway Signal & Sign signal, from the sound of it. Got a close-up of the back?

I never got a chance to get a back shot. I'm thinking the signal might've been made by Horni
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right left. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP):

(https://i.imgur.com/sFHZc9B.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 30, 2018, 03:03:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP)

I always thought the power for signal heads came from the pedestal and controller cabinet, regardless of where the head is located. (I could be wrong though.) If that's the case, then placement wouldn't matter.

The example you posted is rather peculiar. That supplemental left turn signal head is so far left that it seems it would be outside the field of view for all cars except first in queue. They could easily have put that signal head on the pole at the corner that is supporting pedestrian signal heads–no extra structural elements required.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 03:34:46 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 30, 2018, 03:03:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP)

I always thought the power for signal heads came from the pedestal and controller cabinet, regardless of where the head is located. (I could be wrong though.) If that's the case, then placement wouldn't matter.

The example you posted is rather peculiar. That supplemental left turn signal head is so far left that it seems it would be outside the field of view for all cars except first in queue. They could easily have put that signal head on the pole at the corner that is supporting pedestrian signal heads–no extra structural elements required.

Based on this FYA study (https://goo.gl/JvhRB7) from 2009 (from Federal Way, WA, where secondary signals are now the rule), secondary signal heads are not always used on retrofit jobs due to lack of available "conduit capacity". I misunderstood this as meaning a power supply issue until this exact moment. I guess it has more to due with the current poles not having enough wiring? It could be that the pedestrian signal head poles that Bellevue has [and continues to] utilise don't have enough wiring to support a signal head. Could also be a wind load issue. I really have no idea.

Here's a brand new signal (https://goo.gl/ccxxrk) that, as of this Street View image, had yet to be finished. As you can see, they always use the mast for the secondary signal heads, despite the availability of pedestrian head poles on all four corners. I wish I had a firm answer for why.

(https://i.imgur.com/cKRPVUq.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 30, 2018, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right left. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP):

(https://i.imgur.com/sFHZc9B.png)

What's the point, I get that it's a wiring problem, but nobody is gonna be able to see a signal that's that far off the intersection
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 30, 2018, 06:56:14 PM
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/908/28134847098_db81d2c511_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JSbrQE)McCain Left Turn Signal with a pair of 3Ms (https://flic.kr/p/JSbrQE) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

Here's something that's a bit cheap, notice how the thru signals are 3Ms, while the protected left turn signal is a normal McCain. Wouldn't it make sense if this were the other way around, instead of having normal turn signal, and PV thru heads; the left turn signal should be a PV signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 30, 2018, 07:20:10 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 30, 2018, 06:56:14 PM
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/908/28134847098_db81d2c511_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JSbrQE)McCain Left Turn Signal with a pair of 3Ms (https://flic.kr/p/JSbrQE) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

Here's something that's a bit cheap, notice how the thru signals are 3Ms, while the protected left turn signal is a normal McCain. Wouldn't it make sense if this were the other way around, instead of having normal turn signal, and PV thru heads; the left turn signal should be a PV signal.
Is there another street coming in at a sharp angle to that intersection, or a railroad crossing or another intersection right behind you? It's entirely possible that they were all 3Ms but the left turn signal got struck and had to be replaced, and all that the town had on hand was a McCain signal and a set of louvers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 07:52:14 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 30, 2018, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right left. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP):

(https://i.imgur.com/sFHZc9B.png)

What's the point, I get that it's a wiring problem, but nobody is gonna be able to see a signal that's that far off the intersection

Supplemental left turn signal heads are required in Bellevue. But, because of this bizarre "rule" that seemingly requires the signals to be on the mast and not its own pole, they sometimes end up pretty far off to the side. I wouldn't argue against the merits of a supplemental left turn head; they are very helpful when behind tall vehicles (amongst other reasons). But this implementation is rather odd. They should be closer to the edge of the road so that they can be seen out of one's peripheral vision while watching oncoming traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on May 30, 2018, 10:11:22 PM
I have a feeling jakeroot would tear his hair out if he saw the signal installs in the Oklahoma City area.

(https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20171031_zero2.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 11:05:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 30, 2018, 10:11:22 PM
I have a feeling jakeroot would tear his hair out if he saw the signal installs in the Oklahoma City area.

(https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20171031_zero2.jpg)

:-D I'm actually pretty used to bare-bones installations. Many cities have only just started using them around here.

What irks me more is a messy installation. Signals not spaced evenly; some signals hanging while some are mounted centrally; mast arms far longer than they needs to be; signals mis-matched in terms of color; poor application of the yellow reflective border and/or not all signals have the border (just some randomly); the list goes on.

I wish secondary signals were required, but some agencies really need to clean up their act before I trust them with installing any more than the standard amount. One city near me that requires secondary signals recently annexed an intersection, and they modified it from 16 signal heads to at least 26 while only adding two lanes. They've been doing this for a while, so it's a clean install. But some places would find a way to cock it up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on May 31, 2018, 12:47:52 AM
Norman has some pretty...weird setups, although they're not messy. Just a little creative?

(https://i.imgur.com/xSKQXpd.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/rvFcvcY.png)

Oklahoma City installs are pretty standardized when it comes to their signal housings–pretty much everything is a yellow housing with a black backplate, other than the Project 360 area downtown–but they have some extremely crappy mastarm signage which comes in about 17 different standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on May 31, 2018, 01:15:45 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 31, 2018, 12:47:52 AM
Oklahoma City installs are pretty standardized when it comes to their signal housings—pretty much everything is a yellow housing with a black backplate, other than the Project 360 area downtown—but they have some extremely crappy mastarm signage which comes in about 17 different standards.

I actually like the look of the horizontal signals with black backplates in downtown OKC. They look sleek and modern.



Salt Lake City is also consistent (mostly) for signal housings. As a general rule, Salt Lake City installs use black housings and black backplates, while UDOT installs opt for yellow housings and black backplates. Most of the time, this is a good way to tell if the road is or recently was a state highway, but of course, there are some exceptions.

But mastarm signage is where you could really start making arguments against Utah for consistency. Salt Lake City alone has at least seven different mastarm signage standards: There are two UDOT standards, an older and a newer. There’s also an older and a newer Salt Lake City standard. There is a rare, much older standard that I’m not sure about, and there’s a relatively uncommon version that I think UDOT tried out briefly around 2000. Finally, there’s a standard  only used on the reconstructed portion of North Temple to accommodate the TRAX Green Line. These signals and street blades look like nothing else in the city or even the state, so I almost wonder if they were done by UTA. There are a few other designs seen around, but they’re so wildly inconsistent I haven’t figured out whether they even belong in a category.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on May 31, 2018, 04:15:15 AM
Quote from: US 89 on May 31, 2018, 01:15:45 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 31, 2018, 12:47:52 AM
Oklahoma City installs are pretty standardized when it comes to their signal housings–pretty much everything is a yellow housing with a black backplate, other than the Project 360 area downtown–but they have some extremely crappy mastarm signage which comes in about 17 different standards.

I actually like the look of the horizontal signals with black backplates in downtown OKC. They look sleek and modern.

Those are the aforementioned P360 signals. They'd look awesome in Dallas or somewhere–the swept-back backplates are really neat. But random horizontal signals in the middle of a city that uses vertical signals, in the middle of a state that by and large uses vertical signals, is asking for trouble. OKC is so consistent otherwise on the vertically-mounted yellow housings with black backplates that when you get to the P360 area it almost feels like you're in another city entirely.

That, and the mastarm signage on those is absolute ass.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 31, 2018, 01:03:55 PM
Here's something that comes into mind. Has anyone ever seen stainless steel signal poles. How do they not get rusty, as many of the signals in this particular area are a couple decades old:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0448469,-75.3254475,3a,75y,203.14h,85.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5Ensxkb_3HQjDABwCAqcZA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I think that at one point, the poles were yellow, but they scrapped all the paint off in order to expose the silver lining. I wonder if these poles have special chemicals in them that don't allow them to get rusty, Wilmington Delaware also had these:
"https://s3-media3.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/lyfxL5ghEOexIooC0-jZGA/ls.jpg"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 31, 2018, 02:26:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 03:34:46 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 30, 2018, 03:03:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP)

I always thought the power for signal heads came from the pedestal and controller cabinet, regardless of where the head is located. (I could be wrong though.) If that's the case, then placement wouldn't matter.

The example you posted is rather peculiar. That supplemental left turn signal head is so far left that it seems it would be outside the field of view for all cars except first in queue. They could easily have put that signal head on the pole at the corner that is supporting pedestrian signal heads–no extra structural elements required.

Based on this FYA study (https://goo.gl/JvhRB7) from 2009 (from Federal Way, WA, where secondary signals are now the rule), secondary signal heads are not always used on retrofit jobs due to lack of available "conduit capacity". I misunderstood this as meaning a power supply issue until this exact moment. I guess it has more to due with the current poles not having enough wiring? It could be that the pedestrian signal head poles that Bellevue has [and continues to] utilise don't have enough wiring to support a signal head. Could also be a wind load issue. I really have no idea.

Here's a brand new signal (https://goo.gl/ccxxrk) that, as of this Street View image, had yet to be finished. As you can see, they always use the mast for the secondary signal heads, despite the availability of pedestrian head poles on all four corners. I wish I had a firm answer for why.

(https://i.imgur.com/cKRPVUq.png)

By "conduit capacity", they are most likely referring to the piping used to hold the wiring. My understanding is that the wires going to signal heads can be rather thick due to one wire powering three (or more) signal indications. So if an underground conduit going over to a mast was originally sized for wiring of three signal heads, there may not be enough space in the existing conduit to run a fourth wire to add a supplemental signal on that mast.

With that new signal example you posted, the supplemental signal heads look fine on the masts instead of the ped head poles. I think that positioning is better visible to drivers further back in the queue (I could be biased, as this represents pretty typical Nevada layout, lack of far right supplemental through signal notwithstanding).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chays on May 31, 2018, 02:57:17 PM
Can someone identify this signal?
http://goldenruleauction.hibid.com/lot/40880198/vintage-stoplight--does-work-missing-some-paint

It has an overlapping-diamond logo on the back:
(https://auctionimages.s3.amazonaws.com/77421/132694/125945707.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 31, 2018, 03:23:33 PM
Quote from: chays on May 31, 2018, 02:57:17 PM
Can someone identify this signal?
http://goldenruleauction.hibid.com/lot/40880198/vintage-stoplight--does-work-missing-some-paint

It has an overlapping-diamond logo on the back:
(https://auctionimages.s3.amazonaws.com/77421/132694/125945707.jpg)

That's a checker signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 02, 2018, 12:14:16 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 31, 2018, 03:23:33 PM
Quote from: chays on May 31, 2018, 02:57:17 PM
Can someone identify this signal?
http://goldenruleauction.hibid.com/lot/40880198/vintage-stoplight--does-work-missing-some-paint

It has an overlapping-diamond logo on the back:
(https://auctionimages.s3.amazonaws.com/77421/132694/125945707.jpg)

That's a checker signal
Want to say there's another name (as in an actual brand) associated with it, but I can't remember it off the top of my head. "Checker" is certainly the common knick-name though.

The signals were essentially a knock-off of the Eagle Flat-back (the 8 inch ones are almost identical!), and, IIRC, weren't very well built. Not many are left in service, that's for sure, though I want to say California has a good few.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 02, 2018, 12:19:20 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 02, 2018, 12:14:16 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on May 31, 2018, 03:23:33 PM
Quote from: chays on May 31, 2018, 02:57:17 PM
Can someone identify this signal?
http://goldenruleauction.hibid.com/lot/40880198/vintage-stoplight--does-work-missing-some-paint

It has an overlapping-diamond logo on the back:
(https://auctionimages.s3.amazonaws.com/77421/132694/125945707.jpg)

That's a checker signal
Want to say there's another name (as in an actual brand) associated with it, but I can't remember it off the top of my head. "Checker" is certainly the common knick-name though.

The signals were essentially a knock-off of the Eagle Flat-back (the 8 inch ones are almost identical!), and, IIRC, weren't very well built. Not many are left in service, that's for sure, though I want to say California has a good few.

It looks a mix between the Crouse-Hinds Model R and the Eagle flatback
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2018, 12:54:16 AM
Kind of getting a PEEK feel from these signals too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 02, 2018, 10:39:26 AM
One of the main differences between Peeks and TCTs, is that Peek signals are more sleek looking. Crouse-Hinds Type Rs, although they have the same mold, have a more beige color.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Signal man619 on June 02, 2018, 10:59:41 AM
Its unknown where the word "Checker" derived from, but the manufacturer that made these signal heads is called Signal Computer Corporation, based out of Texas somewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on June 02, 2018, 11:01:18 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 02, 2018, 12:14:16 AM
The signals were essentially a knock-off of the Eagle Flat-back (the 8 inch ones are almost identical!), and, IIRC, weren't very well built. Not many are left in service, that's for sure, though I want to say California has a good few.

I remember seeing a lot of them back in the day in Cleveland.  Given how they skimped on signal quality in the 80s and early 90s for both traffic and crosswalk signals, they probably were on the el-cheapo side because most seemed to be replaced by the mid-late 90s, while many much older signals outlasted them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2018, 11:16:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 31, 2018, 02:26:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 03:34:46 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 30, 2018, 03:03:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 30, 2018, 02:27:18 PM
Bellevue, WA refuses to place their supplemental post-mounted signals on their own posts, always opting for the mast (probably due to power availability). This sometimes results in the signal being quite far off to the right. I have my own photo, but Street View shows it better (https://goo.gl/ZZ5QcP)

I always thought the power for signal heads came from the pedestal and controller cabinet, regardless of where the head is located. (I could be wrong though.) If that's the case, then placement wouldn't matter.

The example you posted is rather peculiar. That supplemental left turn signal head is so far left that it seems it would be outside the field of view for all cars except first in queue. They could easily have put that signal head on the pole at the corner that is supporting pedestrian signal heads–no extra structural elements required.

Based on this FYA study (https://goo.gl/JvhRB7) from 2009 (from Federal Way, WA, where secondary signals are now the rule), secondary signal heads are not always used on retrofit jobs due to lack of available "conduit capacity". I misunderstood this as meaning a power supply issue until this exact moment. I guess it has more to due with the current poles not having enough wiring? It could be that the pedestrian signal head poles that Bellevue has [and continues to] utilise don't have enough wiring to support a signal head. Could also be a wind load issue. I really have no idea.

Here's a brand new signal (https://goo.gl/ccxxrk) that, as of this Street View image, had yet to be finished. As you can see, they always use the mast for the secondary signal heads, despite the availability of pedestrian head poles on all four corners. I wish I had a firm answer for why.

(https://i.imgur.com/cKRPVUq.png)

By "conduit capacity", they are most likely referring to the piping used to hold the wiring. My understanding is that the wires going to signal heads can be rather thick due to one wire powering three (or more) signal indications. So if an underground conduit going over to a mast was originally sized for wiring of three signal heads, there may not be enough space in the existing conduit to run a fourth wire to add a supplemental signal on that mast.

With that new signal example you posted, the supplemental signal heads look fine on the masts instead of the ped head poles. I think that positioning is better visible to drivers further back in the queue (I could be biased, as this represents pretty typical Nevada layout, lack of far right supplemental through signal notwithstanding).

I see. So really, it should be harder to add an additional signal to a mast, versus a ped head pole, due to the already restrictive thickness of the piping in a mast arm. Seems to me that more signals should be popping up on ped head poles than on the mast for that reason, but I'm no electrician.

For the record, I prefer supplemental heads to be on the mast (looks cleaner to me), but not if the mast is way off to the side like in my first example. So, agreed on the second intersection being well signalised. Just wish they'd start using supplemental through heads while they're at it. More than one signal for a movement is certainly a good start.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 12:53:21 AM
Quote from: Signal man619 on June 02, 2018, 10:59:41 AM
Its unknown where the word "Checker" derived from, but the manufacturer that made these signal heads is called Signal Computer Corporation, based out of Texas somewhere.
Probably in the early days of the internet, based on the text-less logo on the back. And thanks! I had through they were made by Signal Computer Corp. (SCC), but couldn't remember.

Quote from: thenetwork on June 02, 2018, 11:01:18 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 02, 2018, 12:14:16 AM
The signals were essentially a knock-off of the Eagle Flat-back (the 8 inch ones are almost identical!), and, IIRC, weren't very well built. Not many are left in service, that's for sure, though I want to say California has a good few.

I remember seeing a lot of them back in the day in Cleveland.  Given how they skimped on signal quality in the 80s and early 90s for both traffic and crosswalk signals, they probably were on the el-cheapo side because most seemed to be replaced by the mid-late 90s, while many much older signals outlasted them.
They were, from my understanding. Off the top of my head, the only states that I can think of that still have a few of them in service are California, Alabama, and Arkansas. Wouldn't be surprised if there're a few hiding out in Texas somewhere or some up in Ohio that I'm not remembering.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 03, 2018, 01:02:42 AM
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/signals.shtml NYCDOT's webpage on traffic signals in the Big Apple.

The Flashing Left Turn Arrow in NYC is not the same as elsewhere.  In New York, the Flashing Arrow is to alert motorists to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk and not for saying its okay to turn left against oncoming traffic as is elsewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 03, 2018, 02:33:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 03, 2018, 01:02:42 AM
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/signals.shtml NYCDOT's webpage on traffic signals in the Big Apple.

The Flashing Left Turn Arrow in NYC is not the same as elsewhere.  In New York, the Flashing Arrow is to alert motorists to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk and not for saying its okay to turn left against oncoming traffic as is elsewhere.

More common than you think.

I have two videos that show FYA's being used exclusively at crosswalks here in Washington:

https://youtu.be/Yk4m574Bi-o

https://youtu.be/UPhOC9G8s88
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 04:15:17 AM
Three-sections FYAs are used here in downtown Huntsville where one direction is required to all make a turn at an intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 03, 2018, 11:59:20 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 03, 2018, 01:02:42 AM
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/signals.shtml NYCDOT's webpage on traffic signals in the Big Apple.

The Flashing Left Turn Arrow in NYC is not the same as elsewhere.  In New York, the Flashing Arrow is to alert motorists to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk and not for saying its okay to turn left against oncoming traffic as is elsewhere.

The FYA indicates a permitted turn, in which vehicles may cautiously enter the intersection to turn in the direction of the arrow, yielding the right of way to any pedestrians or other vehicles lawfully in the intersection.

So NYC's FYA is the same, they are just applying it for cases of left turns against busy crosswalks or bike lanes, and not necessarily oncoming traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 03, 2018, 04:33:31 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 03, 2018, 01:02:42 AM
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/infrastructure/signals.shtml NYCDOT's webpage on traffic signals in the Big Apple.

The Flashing Left Turn Arrow in NYC is not the same as elsewhere.  In New York, the Flashing Arrow is to alert motorists to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk and not for saying its okay to turn left against oncoming traffic as is elsewhere.

There are 2 such "normal" installs in NYC, one at 57th st at the entranve to the Queensboro Bridge and a recent installation on Staten Island
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on June 03, 2018, 10:38:34 PM
E. Saint Louis, IL

Taken Yesterday.

(https://vgy.me/M215C3.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 04, 2018, 10:10:02 AM
Quote from: TBKS1 on June 03, 2018, 10:38:34 PM
E. Saint Louis, IL

Taken Yesterday.

(https://vgy.me/M215C3.png)

That visor took a mean right hook lmao
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 04, 2018, 11:03:01 AM
In the same vein, here's this from Atlanta:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/981/41316853265_81563e2a5c_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/25X2F24)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 04, 2018, 04:18:20 PM
Here's something that's a bit confusing. These signals are mounted at an askew intersection, notice how the Eagle Siemens and the TCT signal are wired on the same circuit (Showing red at the same time, showing green at the same time, and so and so forth). This looks a bit dangerous, since the TCT is facing a different direction than the Siemens, wouldn't this cause accidents? This has been this way for a while, is this a wiring issue?

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1748/41802745844_d04d343186_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26FXZXj)A TCT, an Eagle Siemens, another TCT, and a third TCT (https://flic.kr/p/26FXZXj) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on June 04, 2018, 05:39:58 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 30, 2018, 10:11:22 PM
I have a feeling jakeroot would tear his hair out if he saw the signal installs in the Oklahoma City area.

(https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20171031_zero2.jpg)
In DT they arent THAT bad... same cannot be said elsewere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 09, 2018, 09:56:12 PM
I have zero clue how this setup works, but Hiroshima seems to use permissive *right* turns across tram lanes. In the US and Canada, turns across tramways and busways are always protected.

Here's an intersection where you can see the cars having pulled forward to the yield line (which is adjacent to the tramway, not on it or across it), seemingly waiting for the tram. Does the city just trust drivers not to plow into trams? There must be a sign that I can't locate. The yellow box clearly states (by its nature) "do not stop here", but how do they know when it's safe to proceed? The light is just solid green, as you can see in Street View:

https://goo.gl/VoeN2w

The way I could see this working would be to allow drivers to yield, but not wait on the tram or busway. If a tram or bus came along, a separate part-time matrix display would come on displaying "NO LEFT TURN", expiring after the tram or bus went through. I can only assume that drivers here instinctively know to wait, since the tram network in Hiroshima has existed for over 100 years.

Note the yield lines (the dotted white lines across the right turn lanes)...

(https://i.imgur.com/mI3Mx1s.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 09, 2018, 10:09:41 PM
The people of Japan are a far more disciplined society than we are. It's possible that their drivers actually can be trusted to be vigilant and drive correctly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 10, 2018, 01:48:12 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 09, 2018, 10:09:41 PM
The people of Japan are a far more disciplined society than we are. It's possible that their drivers actually can be trusted to be vigilant and drive correctly.

Definitely true. They seem to be remarkably well trained. Probably explains why virtually all right turns in Japan are permissive, even those with two lanes. Despite the US having only 60% more people, we have 1000% more road deaths. Yikes!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:29:03 PM
Went through this intersection on my way to a beach in Hampton, Va today. I've never seen a vertical and a horizontal signal side by side like this outside of Texas. This is on Woodland Rd at Pembroke Ave (VA 351). Couldn't get a pick but luckily it's on Street View:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/ad1b027ee517cc6c75e573c34616a684.jpg)

SM-S820L

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:29:03 PM
Went through this intersection on my way to a beach in Hampton, Va today. I've never seen a vertical and a horizontal signal side by side like this outside of Texas. This is on Woodland Rd at Pembroke Ave (VA 351). Couldn't get a pick but luckily it's on Street View:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/ad1b027ee517cc6c75e573c34616a684.jpg)

SM-S820L
Maybe it's used to help people who are colorblind

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:49:33 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:29:03 PM
Went through this intersection on my way to a beach in Hampton, Va today. I've never seen a vertical and a horizontal signal side by side like this outside of Texas. This is on Woodland Rd at Pembroke Ave (VA 351). Couldn't get a pick but luckily it's on Street View:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/ad1b027ee517cc6c75e573c34616a684.jpg)

SM-S820L
Maybe it's used to help people who are colorblind

LG-M327

Looking at it I'm actually thinking the right signal is horizontal because a truck could strike it if it is vertical, judging by the wire span
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 10, 2018, 11:52:38 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:29:03 PM
Went through this intersection on my way to a beach in Hampton, Va today. I've never seen a vertical and a horizontal signal side by side like this outside of Texas. This is on Woodland Rd at Pembroke Ave (VA 351). Couldn't get a pick but luckily it's on Street View:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/ad1b027ee517cc6c75e573c34616a684.jpg)
Maybe it's used to help people who are colorblind

Color blindness isn't actually the issue people make it out to be for traffic signals. Just like red is always on the top of a vertical signal, red is always on the left in horizontal signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 01:25:29 AM
Some newer intersections in Edmonton, Alta have horizontal and vertical signals on the same mast: https://goo.gl/d1Hcsm.

The signal with the pro/per arrow is vertical, whereas the standard through head is horizontal. Edmonton has been using a variation of this for quite a long time. Traditionally, signals with the pro/per arrow were located in the median, aligned vertically (of course), and the overhead through signals were horizontal. Edmonton has recently started placing these left turn signals (protected, or protected/permissive) overhead, but has maintained the vertical alignment. That said, median-mounted signals are still installed, as far as I know.

(https://i.imgur.com/A6pebSc.png)



I'm pretty sure I've seen this in Yakima, WA as well, at intersections with FYA retrofits. But I cannot remember where.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on June 11, 2018, 02:03:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)
(other images snipped)


Late to the party on this one, but why exactly is this (yellow backplates on black/green signals) prohibited in the US?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 11, 2018, 06:18:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 10, 2018, 11:52:38 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 10, 2018, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: plain on June 10, 2018, 11:29:03 PM
Went through this intersection on my way to a beach in Hampton, Va today. I've never seen a vertical and a horizontal signal side by side like this outside of Texas. This is on Woodland Rd at Pembroke Ave (VA 351). Couldn't get a pick but luckily it's on Street View:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/ad1b027ee517cc6c75e573c34616a684.jpg)
Maybe it's used to help people who are colorblind

Color blindness isn't actually the issue people make it out to be for traffic signals. Just like red is always on the top of a vertical signal, red is always on the left in horizontal signals.

Seems to be the default standard response/excuse.  Just like when people say they do certain things up north because of snow, even though snow is covering the road for maybe 5, 10 days  out of the year.  The only thing I have ever remotely seen done related to weather conditions is reflectors built into the road rather than stuck on top of the road.  Otherwise, signage and road markings are generally the same around the country, regardless if the area is in a snowy climate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 12:57:39 PM
Quote from: index on June 11, 2018, 02:03:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)
(other images snipped)


Late to the party on this one, but why exactly is this (yellow backplates on black/green signals) prohibited in the US?

That's a good question. I should point out that yellow is not expressly forbidden. Black is just the only color allowed. Maybe the plan was to ensure no funky colors were used, so they just ruled out everything that wasn't dull black. As it later turned out, Canada was on to something with yellow backplates. But the rule hasn't been changed to allow them just yet. And I'm not sure it will, since backplate advancements more been focused on reflectivity than color. Maybe the ultimate goal is for a fully reflective backplate?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on June 11, 2018, 02:07:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 12:57:39 PM
Quote from: index on June 11, 2018, 02:03:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)
(other images snipped)


Late to the party on this one, but why exactly is this (yellow backplates on black/green signals) prohibited in the US?

That's a good question. I should point out that yellow is not expressly forbidden. Black is just the only color allowed. Maybe the plan was to ensure no funky colors were used, so they just ruled out everything that wasn't dull black. As it later turned out, Canada was on to something with yellow backplates. But the rule hasn't been changed to allow them just yet. And I'm not sure it will, since backplate advancements more been focused on reflectivity than color. Maybe the ultimate goal is for a fully reflective backplate?
IIRC, yellow reflective strips are allowed on backgrounds, but the backgrounds can't be entirely yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 02:24:19 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 11, 2018, 02:07:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 12:57:39 PM
Quote from: index on June 11, 2018, 02:03:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)
(other images snipped)


Late to the party on this one, but why exactly is this (yellow backplates on black/green signals) prohibited in the US?

That's a good question. I should point out that yellow is not expressly forbidden. Black is just the only color allowed. Maybe the plan was to ensure no funky colors were used, so they just ruled out everything that wasn't dull black. As it later turned out, Canada was on to something with yellow backplates. But the rule hasn't been changed to allow them just yet. And I'm not sure it will, since backplate advancements more been focused on reflectivity than color. Maybe the ultimate goal is for a fully reflective backplate?

IIRC, yellow reflective strips are allowed on backgrounds, but the backgrounds can't be entirely yellow.

Yes, of course. I'm just curious if a reflective strip being applied to the entire backplate might be next. The back might still be black (unless painted yellow like in many Washington cities), but the front would be entirely reflective yellow. Maybe a bit extreme? :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on June 11, 2018, 09:04:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 12:57:39 PM
Quote from: index on June 11, 2018, 02:03:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 19, 2018, 07:05:57 PM
A couple examples of all yellow signal backplates in Silverdale and Redmond, WA (respectively). The first one is definitely not allowed, but I think the second one is OK with them being bike signals...

(https://i.imgur.com/hDXig31.jpg)
(other images snipped)


Late to the party on this one, but why exactly is this (yellow backplates on black/green signals) prohibited in the US?

That's a good question. I should point out that yellow is not expressly forbidden. Black is just the only color allowed. Maybe the plan was to ensure no funky colors were used, so they just ruled out everything that wasn't dull black. As it later turned out, Canada was on to something with yellow backplates. But the rule hasn't been changed to allow them just yet. And I'm not sure it will, since backplate advancements more been focused on reflectivity than color. Maybe the ultimate goal is for a fully reflective backplate?


On the topic of odd colors, I've seen both emergency management pink and fluorescent pedestrian green retroreflective backplate outlines, both of which I habe saved GSVs for, if anyone's interested. I wonder if there's any reason for this? They were permanent signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on June 11, 2018, 09:58:07 PM
There are some in Springfield Mass that use yellow on the backside of the backplate while the front is black

https://goo.gl/maps/TW3GTnQyfZp
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 12, 2018, 02:00:51 AM
Quote from: DrSmith on June 11, 2018, 09:58:07 PM
There are some in Springfield Mass that use yellow on the backside of the backplate while the front is black

https://goo.gl/maps/TW3GTnQyfZp

King County, WA (where Seattle is located) continues to use all yellow signals with the backside painted yellow. Many cities in the county (excluding Seattle) followed suit, and continue to paint the backside of their signals yellow as well.

https://goo.gl/3wBZRR (county signal)
https://goo.gl/dvPqfV (new Renton signal)
https://goo.gl/t1EuLX (old-ish Burien signal)

I have not seen any outside of Washington painted this way until now, so it's cool to finally see one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 14, 2018, 02:02:56 AM
So here's an interesting one for yall. This is westbound Ingersoll Ave at MLK Jr Pkwy in Des Moines.

(https://i.imgur.com/lVqVuV4.jpg)

Doghouse, normal 3-section, FYA for right turns (and a light up sign that's supposed to display a "No Right Turn" symbol when the right arrow is red and the bicycle signal is green, I believe, although I never saw this while I was there), and a bicycle signal mounted on the mast. The thing I find most interesting about this signal is that, during the green phase, the FYA activates even when the bicycle signal is red and the pedestrian signal displays "Don't Walk" (pictured). In theory, that combination should actually produce a green right turn arrow, not?

Interestingly, it seemed that the bike detection sensor on the mast arm did not function. While I was taking pictures, a guy on a bicycle came up to the light, but in three or so light cycles, not once did the bike signal change, and he just simply crossed against the light after the system failed to work. I actually talked to him while he waited, and he said that sometimes the sensor worked, and sometimes it didn't. Apparently when I took these pictures Tuesday morning, it was in the dysfunctional phase. I called the city public works dept about the issue and they said "they'll look into it," but as I've learned in my time living here, that may or may not mean anything…
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Does seem like a rather poorly thought-out intersection. Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks, and preferably in timed areas (like downtown cores). Bike detection systems need far more work before they could operate efficiently alongside vehicle sensors. At the very least, they should provide a push button for bikes.

There should definitely be a green arrow when the crosswalk and bike signal aren't activated. It is odd to see an FYA against a green bike signal (how I assume the operation works). All turns across bike paths in Seattle are either green orbs or fully protected turns, no FYAs. There are many right turn FYAs around Western Washington, but they only face crosswalks, and often use a red arrow during the walk phase, and an FYA during the flashing don't walk phase (or FYA during whole phase).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 14, 2018, 02:30:37 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Does seem like a rather poorly thought-out intersection. Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks, and preferably in timed areas (like downtown cores). Bike detection systems need far more work before they could operate efficiently alongside vehicle sensors. At the very least, they should provide a push button for bikes.

There should definitely be a green arrow when the crosswalk and bike signal aren't activated. It is odd to see an FYA against a green bike signal (how I assume the operation works). All turns across bike paths in Seattle are either green orbs or fully protected turns, no FYAs. There are many right turn FYAs around Western Washington, but they only face crosswalks, and often use a red arrow during the walk phase, and an FYA during the flashing don't walk phase (or FYA during whole phase, or red arrow during whole phase).

I never saw how the FYA functioned when the bicycle signal was anything but red. The bike signal stayed red and didn't change once in the entire time I was there, and I watched through maybe 8-10 signal cycles, even with the cyclist waiting to cross. I also never saw the FYA head display a green arrow, either—it always displayed flashing yellow even if both the bike and pedestrian signals were red/don't walk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:48:27 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 14, 2018, 02:30:37 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Does seem like a rather poorly thought-out intersection. Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks, and preferably in timed areas (like downtown cores). Bike detection systems need far more work before they could operate efficiently alongside vehicle sensors. At the very least, they should provide a push button for bikes.

There should definitely be a green arrow when the crosswalk and bike signal aren't activated. It is odd to see an FYA against a green bike signal (how I assume the operation works). All turns across bike paths in Seattle are either green orbs or fully protected turns, no FYAs. There are many right turn FYAs around Western Washington, but they only face crosswalks, and often use a red arrow during the walk phase, and an FYA during the flashing don't walk phase (or FYA during whole phase, or red arrow during whole phase).

I never saw how the FYA functioned when the bicycle signal was anything but red. The bike signal stayed red and didn't change once in the entire time I was there, and I watched through maybe 8-10 signal cycles, even with the cyclist waiting to cross. I also never saw the FYA head display a green arrow, either–it always displayed flashing yellow even if both the bike and pedestrian signals were red/don't walk.

How was the intersection configured? Street View shows the bike lane approaching the intersection between the right and through lanes, which wouldn't require a special bike signal. It doesn't show the FYA so I assume something has changed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 14, 2018, 03:03:11 AM
The FYA and bike signal are very recent additions. I actually only stopped because it was the first time I'd seen them. They have to be less than a month old.

From left to right, WB Ingersoll Ave is currently:
Left turn lane
Two through lanes
Right turn lane
A small gap
And finally, the bike lane, up against the curb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 14, 2018, 12:03:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks

Why? Most protected bike lanes in NYC are one-way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 12:56:11 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 14, 2018, 12:03:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks

Why? Most protected bike lanes in NYC are one-way.

Just seems like overkill. I like protected bike paths, but the single lane ones work fine with normal traffic lights. Two-way cycle paths? Those definitely need full protection. Honestly, I think one-way cycle paths are a waste of time. Just move all traffic to one side of the roadway, and use the extra space for a two-way path on the other side.

Images I've seen from NYC use FYA's against one-way cycle paths, so they really don't operate any different than a standard bike lane with green or blue paint through an intersection. In those instances, they'd be better off just switching the turn lanes and the bike lanes up several dozens of feet prior to an intersection, so the only conflict point is a brief switchover.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 14, 2018, 06:53:01 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 14, 2018, 02:02:56 AM
So here's an interesting one for yall. This is westbound Ingersoll Ave at MLK Jr Pkwy in Des Moines.

(https://i.imgur.com/lVqVuV4.jpg)

Doghouse, normal 3-section, FYA for right turns (and a light up sign that's supposed to display a "No Right Turn" symbol when the right arrow is red and the bicycle signal is green, I believe, although I never saw this while I was there), and a bicycle signal mounted on the mast. The thing I find most interesting about this signal is that, during the green phase, the FYA activates even when the bicycle signal is red and the pedestrian signal displays "Don't Walk" (pictured). In theory, that combination should actually produce a green right turn arrow, not?

Since the opposing left turn is protected-permitted, MUTCD 4D.05 Paragraph 3 Item F requires the flashing yellow arrow to be used instead of a green arrow.  This is an area I hope that gets refined in a future edition of the MUTCD since there is no indication for 'you have the right-of-way but need to watch for conflicting traffic' for turns (maybe a potential use for a flashing green arrow?).  I wouldn't mind having an option for a signal which can control a right turn lane channelized by an island as if a yield sign was present, but also being able to provide a protected phase and a red phase as needed (for time of day phasing or perhaps a right turn towards a railroad crossing).

Couple other notes on that signal:

1) The right turn head may be in violation of MUTCD 4D.13 Paragraph 07.  Can't tell for sure, but based on Streetview it looks like they swapped out one of the through heads.
Quote from: 2009 MUTCDIf an exclusive left-turn, right-turn, or U-turn lane is present on an approach and if a primary separate
turn signal face controlling that lane is mounted over the roadway, the primary separate turn signal face shall not be positioned any further to the right than the extension of the right-hand edge of the exclusive turn lane or any further to the left than the extension of the left-hand edge of the exclusive turn lane.

2) Des Moines does not appear to have gotten interim approval to use bicycle signal faces, nor am I seeing a statewide approval for Iowa.  (link to FHWA listing) (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ialistreq.htm#ia16)

3) The Bicycle signal sign required by the conditions of the interim approval is missing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 14, 2018, 07:32:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 12:56:11 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on June 14, 2018, 12:03:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 02:27:21 AM
Bike signals should really only be used along two-way cycle tracks

Why? Most protected bike lanes in NYC are one-way.

Just seems like overkill. I like protected bike paths, but the single lane ones work fine with normal traffic lights. Two-way cycle paths? Those definitely need full protection. Honestly, I think one-way cycle paths are a waste of time. Just move all traffic to one side of the roadway, and use the extra space for a two-way path on the other side.

Images I've seen from NYC use FYA's against one-way cycle paths, so they really don't operate any different than a standard bike lane with green or blue paint through an intersection. In those instances, they'd be better off just switching the turn lanes and the bike lanes up several dozens of feet prior to an intersection, so the only conflict point is a brief switchover.

I'm going to beg to disagree. The unprotected "mixing zone" that NYC DOT uses is a death trap (http://pic.twitter.com/duuepRzS1Y). You cannot expect drivers to yield to parallel bicycle traffic at speed, dozens of feet before an intersection–they just won't.

All intersections with a turn signal/bike signal treatment in NYC have a full turn protection phase for bicycles that usually switches to a permissive FYA. I can tell you from my own experience that even a short protected phase is a major improvement, similar to a leading pedestrian interval. Yielding behavior is much better when bicycles are allowed to establish themselves in the intersection before vehicles start turning.

One of my pet peeves is how NYC DOT ends the green paint at intersections and driveways–it seems awfully backward, painting the lane green where it's least useful then ending the paint where it's most needed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2018, 09:31:06 PM
It looks to me as though New York City's design of the crossover point is quite poor. Minimal markings, and poor visibility thanks to parked cars. Just rectifying those two things could massively improve the situation, short of installing a two way cycle track.

If there was an opportunity to use a flashing yellow arrow against a bike lane, I would be fine with that (though I'd prefer a combo bike/ped signal). However, at least in Washington, only protected turns are allowed against cycle tracks (or at least that's all that's been used). I have never seen a protected-permissive turn against a cycle track.

By the way, your link is false advertising. No one died ;-). And it looks more like the car that was trying to go left was actually trying to park. They were turning far too sharp just to be turning left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 15, 2018, 11:36:45 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 14, 2018, 06:53:01 PM
Couple other notes on that signal:

1) The right turn head may be in violation of MUTCD 4D.13 Paragraph 07.  Can't tell for sure, but based on Streetview it looks like they swapped out one of the through heads.

For an entirely different set of reasons, I actually have a picture of the old signal setup, and you are correct.

(https://i.imgur.com/ILRWmzs.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on June 16, 2018, 06:24:30 PM
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1733/42474086832_98d988db49_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW)A weird/broken signal (Saint Louis, Missouri) (https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

Saint Louis, Missouri - I took this about 2 weeks ago. This just looks weird.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 16, 2018, 10:46:37 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on June 16, 2018, 06:24:30 PM
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1733/42474086832_98d988db49_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW)A weird/broken signal (Saint Louis, Missouri) (https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

Saint Louis, Missouri - I took this about 2 weeks ago. This just looks weird.

Yeah, the visors are missing, this makes the signal look flat and cartoony
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SR 228 on June 17, 2018, 01:36:47 AM
Found this really odd U-shaped signal in Brazil, is anyone aware of how it functions? It has quite a lot of sections and has rectangular horizontal louvers.

While moving the view around in GSV and changing capture dates, I notice the sections vary in position, possibly a countdown?

GSV link: https://www.google.com/maps/@-5.7899028,-35.2051515,3a,21.4y,27.6h,100.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svOJtRYMXd8GMkKhekmUoDQ!2e0!5s20170901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 17, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Came across these decorative mast arms on Streetview in Juarez, Mexico.  Link (https://goo.gl/maps/t2CxhuHGhkC2)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 17, 2018, 02:48:49 PM
Quote from: SR 228 on June 17, 2018, 01:36:47 AM
Found this really odd U-shaped signal in Brazil, is anyone aware of how it functions? It has quite a lot of sections and has rectangular horizontal louvers.

While moving the view around in GSV and changing capture dates, I notice the sections vary in position, possibly a countdown?

GSV link: https://www.google.com/maps/@-5.7899028,-35.2051515,3a,21.4y,27.6h,100.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svOJtRYMXd8GMkKhekmUoDQ!2e0!5s20170901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

It looks like the bottom portion of the U serves as a traditional sideways R-Y-G. From moving around in street view, it appears that the sides of the U are indeed a countdown–a second red or green ball starts somewhere up the appropriate side and gradually falls in position towards the other red/green ball at the bottom of the U, and the phase changes shortly thereafter.

That's an interesting operation, and an interesting way to provide a countdown without actually displaying numbers to the driver.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on June 17, 2018, 06:10:47 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 17, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Came across these decorative mast arms on Streetview in Juarez, Mexico.  Link (https://goo.gl/maps/t2CxhuHGhkC2)


That isn't too different from decorative masts you see here in some cities like downtown Tampa. They're usually a bit more bulky and have a perfect fit around the signal here though.


For reference: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9474157,-82.4587696,3a,75y,218.65h,97.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0aoc6nkYyn63VGIyDB1XZg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on June 17, 2018, 06:49:27 PM
Quote from: index on June 17, 2018, 06:10:47 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 17, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Came across these decorative mast arms on Streetview in Juarez, Mexico.  Link (https://goo.gl/maps/t2CxhuHGhkC2)


That isn't too different from decorative masts you see here in some cities like downtown Tampa. They're usually a bit more bulky and have a perfect fit around the signal here though.


For reference: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9474157,-82.4587696,3a,75y,218.65h,97.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0aoc6nkYyn63VGIyDB1XZg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And then you have this... (Downtown Little Rock) - I've posted on this thread before

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kkt on June 18, 2018, 01:09:58 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on June 17, 2018, 06:49:27 PM
Quote from: index on June 17, 2018, 06:10:47 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 17, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Came across these decorative mast arms on Streetview in Juarez, Mexico.  Link (https://goo.gl/maps/t2CxhuHGhkC2)


That isn't too different from decorative masts you see here in some cities like downtown Tampa. They're usually a bit more bulky and have a perfect fit around the signal here though.


For reference: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9474157,-82.4587696,3a,75y,218.65h,97.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0aoc6nkYyn63VGIyDB1XZg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And then you have this... (Downtown Little Rock) - I've posted on this thread before

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/39933724651_7366285a1e_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z)A unique stoplight (https://flic.kr/p/23QNM4Z) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

I wouldn't know what to do with that.  Go twice as fast?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 04:38:01 AM
Three protected/permissive right-turn signal heads? Because why not.

(https://i.imgur.com/VwNjXRL.jpg)

Old view of the previous setup in GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.702972,-93.581287,3a,75y,267.86h,82.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svpZVLooKOaxWoiX-u0QBmw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) before the second right-turn lane was added.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 07:37:32 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 04:38:01 AM
Three protected/permissive right-turn signal heads? Because why not.

https://i.imgur.com/VwNjXRL.jpg

Old view of the previous setup in GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.702972,-93.581287,3a,75y,267.86h,82.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svpZVLooKOaxWoiX-u0QBmw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) before the second right-turn lane was added.

Cool, I like it!

There is something similar to that near me, in Federal Way, WA, the only difference being that all right turn signals are on posts:

(https://i.imgur.com/Yx0oalZ.jpg)

There's also this intersection with a doghouse overhead but towers on the side. Only one turn lane here, though:

(https://i.imgur.com/0DaReAB.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 09:42:26 PM
Doghouses for right turns will never not be weird to me, even if they are overhead.

Of course, when I moved to Iowa I had a sort-of adjustment period seeing them all over for left-turns, too... Minnesota almost exclusively uses towers (which, of course, are now getting phased out for FYAs everywhere appropriate.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 23, 2018, 09:54:43 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 09:42:26 PM
Doghouses for right turns will never not be weird to me, even if they are overhead.

Of course, when I moved to Iowa I had a sort-of adjustment period seeing them all over for left-turns, too... Minnesota almost exclusively uses towers (which, of course, are now getting phased out for FYAs everywhere appropriate.)

Where I live, doghouses are used for right turns all the time, so they're never not normal to me
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 11:21:16 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 23, 2018, 09:54:43 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 09:42:26 PM
Doghouses for right turns will never not be weird to me, even if they are overhead.

Of course, when I moved to Iowa I had a sort-of adjustment period seeing them all over for left-turns, too... Minnesota almost exclusively uses towers (which, of course, are now getting phased out for FYAs everywhere appropriate.)

Where I live, doghouses are used for right turns all the time, so they're never not normal to me

I'm kind of in between. Lots of Seattle area intersections have for 4-section right turn filters, in addition to the occasional tower or doghouse. No idea why bi-modal signals are so popular here.

Federal Way specifically takes after California quite a bit too; having doghouses overhead, and towers on the sides, is the norm there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 24, 2018, 01:21:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 11:21:16 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 23, 2018, 09:54:43 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 23, 2018, 09:42:26 PM
Doghouses for right turns will never not be weird to me, even if they are overhead.

Of course, when I moved to Iowa I had a sort-of adjustment period seeing them all over for left-turns, too... Minnesota almost exclusively uses towers (which, of course, are now getting phased out for FYAs everywhere appropriate.)

Where I live, doghouses are used for right turns all the time, so they're never not normal to me

I'm kind of in between. Lots of Seattle area intersections have for 4-section right turn filters, in addition to the occasional tower or doghouse. No idea why bi-modal signals are so popular here.

Federal Way specifically takes after California quite a bit too; having doghouses overhead, and towers on the sides, is the norm there.

4-section right turn filter, interesting, they're not used where I live either. Philly loves using 5-section towers instead of doghouses though, the suburbs on the other hand, use doghouses whenever.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 24, 2018, 01:29:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 11:21:16 PM
I'm kind of in between. Lots of Seattle area intersections have for 4-section right turn filters, in addition to the occasional tower or doghouse. No idea why bi-modal signals are so popular here.

Bi-modal means that one section displays two aspects, right (ie, for example, the green arrow and yellow arrow are combined into one signal lens)?

Because if so, there's a few of those around Des Moines for protected lefts. Here's an example.

(https://i.imgur.com/hlbIs7s.jpg)

That bottom section on the far left displays both the green and yellow arrow, if the protected left is activated by enough waiting vehicles. (Or, just one vehicle, if you're kind of a dick like me and wait above where the sensor loop is embedded in the turn lane, and not at the stop line!)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 24, 2018, 08:40:22 PM
Those bi-modal arrows are common in New Jersey too. Many traffic engineers however believe it's better to have a separate green and yellow arrow so it's more eye catching when it changes. I agree with them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on June 24, 2018, 08:56:16 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on June 16, 2018, 10:46:37 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on June 16, 2018, 06:24:30 PM
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1733/42474086832_98d988db49_b.jpg)

(https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW)A weird/broken signal (Saint Louis, Missouri) (https://flic.kr/p/27HhNeW) by TheInstrumentalist (https://www.flickr.com/photos/154936453@N06/), on Flickr

Saint Louis, Missouri - I took this about 2 weeks ago. This just looks weird.

Yeah, the visors are missing, this makes the signal look flat and cartoony

There's one of these that's permanently like this in Joliet, IL due to a pole in the way.

McDonough & Joyce (https://goo.gl/maps/68c77KTfGP22)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 24, 2018, 09:53:02 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 24, 2018, 01:29:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 11:21:16 PM
I'm kind of in between. Lots of Seattle area intersections have for 4-section right turn filters, in addition to the occasional tower or doghouse. No idea why bi-modal signals are so popular here.

Bi-modal means that one section displays two aspects, right (ie, for example, the green arrow and yellow arrow are combined into one signal lens)?

Because if so, there's a few of those around Des Moines for protected lefts. Here's an example.

(https://i.imgur.com/hlbIs7s.jpg)

That bottom section on the far left displays both the green and yellow arrow, if the protected left is activated by enough waiting vehicles. (Or, just one vehicle, if you're kind of a dick like me and wait above where the sensor loop is embedded in the turn lane, and not at the stop line!)

Why wouldn't they put it at the stop line? It's perfectly normal to let any turning traffic turn first.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 24, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 24, 2018, 08:56:16 PM
McDonough & Joyce (https://goo.gl/maps/68c77KTfGP22)

I had been wondering if diagonal span wire had ever been done in Illinois . . .

At the McDonough/Houbolt intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YMvXcFUUmk82) the signals use horizontal heads on all the mast arms - I am guessing this has to do with the nearby airport.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 24, 2018, 11:36:06 PM
Three right signals on posts (https://goo.gl/maps/9qniGbK6hfJ2) at the end of the NB Exit 4 cloverleaf to West 900 off I-405 in Renton.  It looked pretty weird the first time I saw it a few years ago.

Signal hoods on a swinging light broken off by trolley guy wires (https://goo.gl/maps/5iioQ9sJJSS2), Boren & Madison, Seattle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 12:10:52 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 24, 2018, 01:29:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 23, 2018, 11:21:16 PM
I'm kind of in between. Lots of Seattle area intersections have for 4-section right turn filters, in addition to the occasional tower or doghouse. No idea why bi-modal signals are so popular here.

Bi-modal means that one section displays two aspects, right (ie, for example, the green arrow and yellow arrow are combined into one signal lens)?

Because if so, there's a few of those around Des Moines for protected lefts. Here's an example.

That bottom section on the far left displays both the green and yellow arrow, if the protected left is activated by enough waiting vehicles. (Or, just one vehicle, if you're kind of a dick like me and wait above where the sensor loop is embedded in the turn lane, and not at the stop line!)

That's the one. If you look around Snohomish County, WA, damn near every pro/per signal is bi-modal, minus those that are FYAs. Either way, lots of four-section signals!

By the way, don't wait at the sensor. Just turn in a gap or at the end. You don't need an arrow if you're the only one waiting.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 24, 2018, 09:53:02 PM
Why wouldn't they put it at the stop line? It's perfectly normal to let any turning traffic turn first.

If there's only one waiting car, they probably don't need an arrow to turn. They'll find a gap or turn at the end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 25, 2018, 02:29:39 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
At the McDonough/Houbolt intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YMvXcFUUmk82) the signals use horizontal heads on all the mast arms - I am guessing this has to do with the nearby airport.

I'd accept that explanation, but it seems silly when there appears to be trees taller than the mast arms all around the intersection...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 02:48:14 AM
Quote from: roadfro on June 25, 2018, 02:29:39 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
At the McDonough/Houbolt intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YMvXcFUUmk82) the signals use horizontal heads on all the mast arms - I am guessing this has to do with the nearby airport.

I'd accept that explanation, but it seems silly when there appears to be trees taller than the mast arms all around the intersection...

The only intersection in BC (that I know of) with all-posted mounted signals is right next to an airport, though the takeoff/landing path is hardly at the height of mast arms. FAA/Transport Canada laws can be awfully strict sometimes (even if nearby trees appear to be bigger threats): https://goo.gl/bwCPDg (note the posts have flashing red lights on top, as required by Transport Canada).

I will say that, in that Joliet intersection, the flight path does not appear to intersect with any trees, and the mast arms are the tallest thing after the runway. Also note the short mast lighting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on June 25, 2018, 03:43:28 AM
I had no idea that existed. Good find!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 25, 2018, 04:39:44 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 12:10:52 AMBy the way, don't wait at the sensor. Just turn in a gap or at the end. You don't need an arrow if you're the only one waiting.

Let me clarify: that wasn't something I did all the time (nor is it something I do anymore). For two and a half years I did pizza delivery, and I made hundreds if not more than a thousand left turns at that very specific signal. At 2 pm on a Sunday, that sensor trickery wasn't necessary. But on a week day, during the 4-6 pm time frame? You were, probably >75 percent of the time, waiting until the end of that light cycle to turn left if you didn't. That 90 seconds (or whatever it was) made a big difference in the time it took to make deliveries, and thus the number of deliveries you were able to make (and the amount of tips earned).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 25, 2018, 04:51:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 01:25:29 AM
Some newer intersections in Edmonton, Alta have horizontal and vertical signals on the same mast: https://goo.gl/d1Hcsm.

The signal with the pro/per arrow is vertical, whereas the standard through head is horizontal. Edmonton has been using a variation of this for quite a long time. Traditionally, signals with the pro/per arrow were located in the median, aligned vertically (of course), and the overhead through signals were horizontal. Edmonton has recently started placing these left turn signals (protected, or protected/permissive) overhead, but has maintained the vertical alignment. That said, median-mounted signals are still installed, as far as I know.

(https://i.imgur.com/A6pebSc.png)



I'm pretty sure I've seen this in Yakima, WA as well, at intersections with FYA retrofits. But I cannot remember where.

Lawton, OK has a few intersections with the reverse setup: horizontal turn signals and vertical thru signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:05:30 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on June 25, 2018, 03:43:28 AM
I had no idea that existed. Good find!

I haven't actually been through the intersection in person. I just saw it on a dash cam clip, and saved it for later. It is very unique!

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 25, 2018, 04:39:44 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 12:10:52 AMBy the way, don't wait at the sensor. Just turn in a gap or at the end. You don't need an arrow if you're the only one waiting.

Let me clarify: that wasn't something I did all the time (nor is it something I do anymore). For two and a half years I did pizza delivery, and I made hundreds if not more than a thousand left turns at that very specific signal. At 2 pm on a Sunday, that sensor trickery wasn't necessary. But on a week day, during the 4-6 pm time frame? You were, probably >75 percent of the time, waiting until the end of that light cycle to turn left if you didn't. That 90 seconds (or whatever it was) made a big difference in the time it took to make deliveries, and thus the number of deliveries you were able to make (and the amount of tips earned).

Understandable. My defensive response is mostly the result of my preference for lagging left turns (which if properly programmed, may not need a green arrow phase). I consider the biggest threat to green waves to be the left turn signal, so I try my best to set them off as little as possible (even if it's not in my own best interest -- I'm very considerate behind the wheel) . Sometimes, I'll even sit in the through lane, wait for the light to turn green, and then slide over into the left turn lane just so that oncoming cars can get a move on (cameras are common here so I can't trick it by positioning myself any other way). Many left turn signals in my area have a minimum green arrow time of at least five or six seconds (long after one car has cleared the intersection), which I consider to be insultingly long (really should only be green if someone is waiting behind the stop line -- minimum maybe closer to two or three seconds would be better).

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 25, 2018, 04:51:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2018, 01:25:29 AM
Some newer intersections in Edmonton, Alta have horizontal and vertical signals on the same mast: https://goo.gl/d1Hcsm.

The signal with the pro/per arrow is vertical, whereas the standard through head is horizontal. Edmonton has been using a variation of this for quite a long time. Traditionally, signals with the pro/per arrow were located in the median, aligned vertically (of course), and the overhead through signals were horizontal. Edmonton has recently started placing these left turn signals (protected, or protected/permissive) overhead, but has maintained the vertical alignment. That said, median-mounted signals are still installed, as far as I know.

https://i.imgur.com/A6pebSc.png

Lawton, OK has a few intersections with the reverse setup: horizontal turn signals and vertical thru signals.

Eeek. I don't mind Edmonton's design because it's more or less symmetrical (vertical mast/through, horizontal through, horizontal through, vertical left); the opposite seems to me like it might "trigger" my inner OCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 25, 2018, 05:32:50 AM
Found a couple of pictures on my hard drive.
(https://i.imgur.com/pLJKENp.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/27eyjSP.jpg)

Note that not every intersection in Lawton is like this. The majority are all horizontal or all vertical.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:44:43 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 25, 2018, 05:32:50 AM
Found a couple of pictures on my hard drive.
https://i.imgur.com/pLJKENp.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/27eyjSP.jpg

Note that not every intersection in Lawton is like this. The majority are all horizontal or all vertical.

(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*j_tOGIkKynt11RTYZRvhhA.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 25, 2018, 06:15:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:05:30 AM
...Sometimes, I'll even sit in the through lane, wait for the light to turn green, and then slide over into the left turn lane just so that oncoming cars can get a move on (cameras are common here so I can't trick it by positioning myself any other way). Many left turn signals in my area have a minimum green arrow time of at least five or six seconds (long after one car has cleared the intersection), which I consider to be insultingly long (really should only be green if someone is waiting behind the stop line -- minimum maybe closer to two or three seconds would be better).

That would seem awfully confusing to drivers behind you.  The traffic designers do everything based on normal expectations of drivers, so don't worry if you're making opposing traffic wait.  You don't know how the next signal they encounter will affect them, so your hard work of letting them go here may just let them get stuck at the next red light anyway.

As far as for the length of the green, I'm used to the green being as long as necessary. If there's only one car, that green arrow should have turned to yellow before the car even completed the turn.  Anything else does seem excessive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 25, 2018, 08:08:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:44:43 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 25, 2018, 05:32:50 AM
Found a couple of pictures on my hard drive.
https://i.imgur.com/pLJKENp.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/27eyjSP.jpg

Note that not every intersection in Lawton is like this. The majority are all horizontal or all vertical.
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*j_tOGIkKynt11RTYZRvhhA.gif (https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*j_tOGIkKynt11RTYZRvhhA.gif)

You know, I think it'd actually look halfway decent if they used all arrows on the left-turn heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 25, 2018, 06:15:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:05:30 AM
...Sometimes, I'll even sit in the through lane, wait for the light to turn green, and then slide over into the left turn lane just so that oncoming cars can get a move on (cameras are common here so I can't trick it by positioning myself any other way). Many left turn signals in my area have a minimum green arrow time of at least five or six seconds (long after one car has cleared the intersection), which I consider to be insultingly long (really should only be green if someone is waiting behind the stop line -- minimum maybe closer to two or three seconds would be better).

That would seem awfully confusing to drivers behind you.  The traffic designers do everything based on normal expectations of drivers, so don't worry if you're making opposing traffic wait.  You don't know how the next signal they encounter will affect them, so your hard work of letting them go here may just let them get stuck at the next red light anyway.

As far as for the length of the green, I'm used to the green being as long as necessary. If there's only one car, that green arrow should have turned to yellow before the car even completed the turn.  Anything else does seem excessive.

Well, as you might imagine, the maneuver is only possible when traffic is generally quiet, so I'm not particularly worried about what others around me are thinking. I'd prefer to see oncoming traffic get a move on first so that they have a better chance of making the next green. I don't know what signal they are eventually approaching, of course. But I do know that the longer they wait at the current signal, the less likely they are to make the next signal (should it be green).

Yes, the green arrow phases around here seem excessive. This is the main motive behind my maneuver. Sometimes I'll see them last 10+ seconds without any cars approaching. It's extremely tedious waiting for these types of lights to change, so I try to not set them off.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on June 25, 2018, 01:23:47 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
Quote from: Brandon on June 24, 2018, 08:56:16 PM
McDonough & Joyce (https://goo.gl/maps/68c77KTfGP22)

I had been wondering if diagonal span wire had ever been done in Illinois . . .

At the McDonough/Houbolt intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YMvXcFUUmk82) the signals use horizontal heads on all the mast arms - I am guessing this has to do with the nearby airport.

Yes.  The intersection is at the end of the runway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 26, 2018, 10:01:38 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/43025114281/in/dateposted-public/
Notice that Georgia likes to do the spanwire box with the box being pulled from its strain poles from another cable instead of them strung out directly from the poles.

In Florida a friend of mine working in Orange County Public Works tells me that in Orange County, FL some intersections are done that way as that setup is more stronger in high winds from being blown apart.  Now I imagine in Georgia its not cause of high storm force winds like FL has.  I was wondering what other reason could this spanwire assembly have over normal practices?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 26, 2018, 10:07:13 PM
If they want the installation to be storm resistant, why don't they use mast-arms instead?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on June 26, 2018, 10:18:44 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 25, 2018, 02:29:39 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 24, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
At the McDonough/Houbolt intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/YMvXcFUUmk82) the signals use horizontal heads on all the mast arms - I am guessing this has to do with the nearby airport.

I'd accept that explanation, but it seems silly when there appears to be trees taller than the mast arms all around the intersection...

Can confirm, as I work for the agency that erected the signal lol.  It's because of the airport.  If you look at an aerial, you'll see that the southeast-oriented landing strip takes planes DIRECTLY OVER the intersection.  Upward protrusions close to landing strips like that need a small light at the top to signal to pilots flying in the dark that something's there.  That small colored light would be really confusing for drivers if it's right next to all the sections directing drivers on what to do.  So, just eliminate the protrusion by orienting the signal sideways.  What I like about that signal is that the indications are sequenced from left to right--something that agencies in Illinois will mess up (COUGH CHICAGO COUGH) since horizontally-oriented signal heads are uncommon and foreign to us in the state.

I know the guy who probably made the decision to go with the horizontal signal heads, and I think he made the decision to use horizontal signal heads on this mast arm as well.  https://goo.gl/maps/jmXFg6dttE82

Also, re: the McDonough & Joyce signal...that signal is the most heinous garbage piece of crap disgrace that I have ever seen in the state of Illinois.  It should be demolished and replaced with something...adequate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 26, 2018, 10:32:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 26, 2018, 10:07:13 PM
If they want the installation to be storm resistant, why don't they use mast-arms instead?
Mast arms are too expensive I would believe!  What is interesting is that Hillsborough County is gone back to span wires and are using one cable supports as Florida always had two cables (one on top that supported the weight of the heads while the bottom one had the power supply wrapped around it) and getting to be like NYSDOT with the different length suspending bar to keep the heads level as the one wire assembly droops.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 27, 2018, 03:05:16 PM
I was watching this clip from Oman (Muscat specifically, and this intersection (https://goo.gl/NvdxCV) in particular), and noticed a U-turn signal. I have not seen these outside of the US before:

(If it doesn't jump automatically, go to 16:55).

https://youtu.be/znMpAxlGxJA?t=16m55s
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 27, 2018, 05:06:38 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/FSNYFZwWntr
Noticing how Pennsylvania likes to just change out signal poles when needed.  Here in Collegeville there are mast arms with both types of visors.  Obviously the tunnel visors are new (they are so shiny yellow) and the cut outs are old.

Am I to assume that Pennsylvania phased out cut out visors completely now?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 27, 2018, 05:16:27 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 27, 2018, 05:06:38 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/FSNYFZwWntr
Noticing how Pennsylvania likes to just change out signal poles when needed.  Here in Collegeville there are mast arms with both types of visors.  Obviously the tunnel visors are new (they are so shiny yellow) and the cut outs are old.

Am I to assume that Pennsylvania phased out cut out visors completely now?

Two things that intrigue me more about that intersection:

1) why some signals have backplates and others don't; and
2) why the SB approach from Germantown Pike has a red orb lit up during the green arrow phase. Understandable if a left or straight movement were allowed there, but it's just that slight right. I'm trying to think of a phase where the red orb wouldn't be lit, but can't think of any.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 27, 2018, 05:27:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2018, 05:16:27 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 27, 2018, 05:06:38 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/FSNYFZwWntr
Noticing how Pennsylvania likes to just change out signal poles when needed.  Here in Collegeville there are mast arms with both types of visors.  Obviously the tunnel visors are new (they are so shiny yellow) and the cut outs are old.

Am I to assume that Pennsylvania phased out cut out visors completely now?

Two things that intrigue me more about that intersection:

1) why some signals have backplates and others don't; and
2) why the SB approach from Germantown Pike has a red orb lit up during the green arrow phase. Understandable if a left or straight movement were allowed there, but it's just that slight right. I'm trying to think of a phase where the red orb wouldn't be lit, but can't think of any.

That red light/green arrow was a standard configuration, both in PA and in Delaware. They've done away with most of them, but a few still exist like you see here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on June 27, 2018, 08:25:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2018, 03:05:16 PM
I was watching this clip from Oman (Muscat specifically, and this intersection (https://goo.gl/NvdxCV) in particular), and noticed a U-turn signal. I have not seen these outside of the US before:

(If it doesn't jump automatically, go to 16:55).

https://youtu.be/znMpAxlGxJA?t=16m55s (https://youtu.be/znMpAxlGxJA?t=16m55s)

Also interesting is the option lane signal head over the middle lane starting at 17:40.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 27, 2018, 08:40:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 27, 2018, 05:27:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2018, 05:16:27 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 27, 2018, 05:06:38 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/FSNYFZwWntr
Noticing how Pennsylvania likes to just change out signal poles when needed.  Here in Collegeville there are mast arms with both types of visors.  Obviously the tunnel visors are new (they are so shiny yellow) and the cut outs are old.

Am I to assume that Pennsylvania phased out cut out visors completely now?

Two things that intrigue me more about that intersection:

1) why some signals have backplates and others don't; and
2) why the SB approach from Germantown Pike has a red orb lit up during the green arrow phase. Understandable if a left or straight movement were allowed there, but it's just that slight right. I'm trying to think of a phase where the red orb wouldn't be lit, but can't think of any.

That red light/green arrow was a standard configuration, both in PA and in Delaware. They've done away with most of them, but a few still exist like you see here.
I also see that WB Germantown Pike also when green, is silmutaneous with the left turn permissive left on EB Germantown sort of like Germantown in both directions free flows together.  The straight through for Ridge Pike is sort of like a permanent right on red and goes when WB Ridge is cleared to go onto WB Germantown.

If it were not for the side driveway a permanent green arrow could be placed over EB Germantown and just have a green solo left green arrow over the left lane when the light is red on WB Ridge.

Yes the lack of back plates on some signal heads is more odd, but common in Orlando.  After Charley knocked down many backplates in 2004 some signals are still mismatched with side by side signal heads with one with a back plate and the other without.  Then on CR 532 in Reunion, FL they have a left turn signal head without a back plate but the two straight throughs next to it are back plated.  The protected left was added later and when they removed the original doghouse and for some reason when they had to add two standard 3 section heads they replaced the two with one and the other.

So Florida is bad also and not only PA when it comes to signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on June 28, 2018, 11:20:03 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on June 26, 2018, 10:18:44 PM
Also, re: the McDonough & Joyce signal...that signal is the most heinous garbage piece of crap disgrace that I have ever seen in the state of Illinois.  It should be demolished and replaced with something...adequate.

That thing's been that way since about 1974, when Jefferson Square opened.  It used to feature a right turn arrow for the right turn lane on McDonough.  One of those 3M lights that could also change color from green to yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2018, 01:52:10 AM
Seattle never ceases to confuse me.

I have no idea how long these have been in place, but SDOT has installed a 4-section FYA where the bottom arrow is bi-modal (see 0:04 below):

https://youtu.be/2znH9az2WpE

Google Maps: https://goo.gl/bPsaab

No idea if this is allowed, but I suspect it probably isn't (at least when four heads are used -- obviously normal practice for certain 3-head FYAs). Not sure what the advantage would be either, except that the top solid yellow would only be used at the end of a permissive phase, and the bottom only being used at the end of the protected phase. It's the one thing about FYAs that's always bothered me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on June 30, 2018, 04:19:02 AM
Very strange to have a yellow arrow in three different places...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 30, 2018, 10:51:22 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2018, 01:52:10 AM
Seattle never ceases to confuse me.

I have no idea how long these have been in place, but SDOT has installed a 4-section FYA where the bottom arrow is bi-modal (see 0:04 below):
<snipped video>
No idea if this is allowed, but I suspect it probably isn't (at least when four heads are used -- obviously normal practice for certain 3-head FYAs). Not sure what the advantage would be either, except that the top solid yellow would only be used at the end of a permissive phase, and the bottom only being used at the end of the protected phase. It's the one thing about FYAs that's always bothered me.

Definitely not MUTCD-approved. I don't get the reasoning for that.

Jake, are you saying that using the steady yellow to end both permissive and protected lefts is what bothers you? Why?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2018, 01:42:58 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 30, 2018, 10:51:22 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2018, 01:52:10 AM
Seattle never ceases to confuse me.

I have no idea how long these have been in place, but SDOT has installed a 4-section FYA where the bottom arrow is bi-modal (see 0:04 below):

https://youtu.be/2znH9az2WpE
(reinserted video, since it's a new page)

No idea if this is allowed, but I suspect it probably isn't (at least when four heads are used -- obviously normal practice for certain 3-head FYAs). Not sure what the advantage would be either, except that the top solid yellow would only be used at the end of a permissive phase, and the bottom only being used at the end of the protected phase. It's the one thing about FYAs that's always bothered me.

Definitely not MUTCD-approved. I don't get the reasoning for that.

Jake, are you saying that using the steady yellow to end both permissive and protected lefts is what bothers you? Why?

While the solid yellow arrow means the same thing at the end of both phases, in the permissive phase, there are oncoming drivers who may still be in the intersection, and any drivers that floor it on solid yellow, mistakenly believing that they had a green arrow just a second ago, may unintentionally drive straight into oncoming traffic. For the most part, this is pretty unlikely, since drivers should be able to recognize whether there are cars in front of them turning, or if there are already vehicles in the intersection (and deduce from either of those things whether or not their, or, someone else's right-of-way is ending). Nevertheless, it is an ambiguity that bothers me, and while it may not actually be a true problem, it's an issue that 5-section signals did not have.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on July 03, 2018, 09:10:30 PM
Jakeroot, you may or may not find this interesting, but I kind of did: far left-side mast-mounted signals in Iowa. All four protected/permissive left turns at US-65/69 and Iowa 92 in Indianola have these. This is the only example of them I've ever seen (or remember seeing) in the state.

(https://i.imgur.com/DorVF4l.jpg)

All I can figure is that the intersection is busy and the light cycles are pretty short, and/or Iowa DOT was having crash/safety problems with the intersection. It's not really an irregular intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3582368,-93.5583883,3a,75y,64.27h,92.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svX6Dhmzd0v14VFt3CQ7fCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) otherwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 03:03:49 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 03, 2018, 09:10:30 PM
Jakeroot, you may or may not find this interesting, but I kind of did: far left-side mast-mounted signals in Iowa. All four protected/permissive left turns at US-65/69 and Iowa 92 in Indianola have these. This is the only example of them I've ever seen (or remember seeing) in the state.

https://i.imgur.com/DorVF4l.jpg

All I can figure is that the intersection is busy and the light cycles are pretty short, and/or Iowa DOT was having crash/safety problems with the intersection. It's not really an irregular intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3582368,-93.5583883,3a,75y,64.27h,92.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svX6Dhmzd0v14VFt3CQ7fCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) otherwise.

Indeed, very interesting! Especially on all four corners. Far left green orb repeaters are quite rare in Washington State (though (https://goo.gl/kamdqt) there (https://goo.gl/vAZDjy) are (https://goo.gl/Dut1mv) some (https://goo.gl/U2pUzZ) examples (https://goo.gl/u28faA), usually due to visibility), outside of Spokane (where left and right repeaters have been standard for many years) and Pullman. Are all types of left side mast signals rare in Iowa?

Mast signals have become standard in many areas of Washington lately, such as Federal Way (left and right side), Bellevue (95% left), most of Auburn (left or right, sometimes both), areas of Vancouver (left and right sometimes), occasionally in Renton and Tukwila (random, usually left side), parts of Snohomish County (often left or right), major roads in Pierce County (right only), and many state highway intersections lately as well (sometimes left and/or right). No idea why the sudden change. Many of these (except in Spokane and Bellevue) have popped up in the last 15 years. WSDOT recently activated a single-lane left turn with four signals (https://goo.gl/DP8KSV), two overhead and one on the left and right. They've gone mad!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on July 04, 2018, 07:17:45 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 03, 2018, 09:10:30 PM
Jakeroot, you may or may not find this interesting, but I kind of did: far left-side mast-mounted signals in Iowa. All four protected/permissive left turns at US-65/69 and Iowa 92 in Indianola have these. This is the only example of them I've ever seen (or remember seeing) in the state.

(https://i.imgur.com/DorVF4l.jpg)

All I can figure is that the intersection is busy and the light cycles are pretty short, and/or Iowa DOT was having crash/safety problems with the intersection. It's not really an irregular intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3582368,-93.5583883,3a,75y,64.27h,92.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svX6Dhmzd0v14VFt3CQ7fCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) otherwise.

I fail to anything odd about it.  Looks like a typical intersection in the state to your east, in Illinois: https://goo.gl/maps/GhSG1EX2ML82
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 04, 2018, 11:49:14 AM
Here's a weird signal in Park Forest, IL.  Three 4-section heads face the northbound traffic.  Southbound setup is even weirder because the signals are all 8-inchers.  Didn't have time to get a photo of those, though.  Here's a GSV looking southbound https://goo.gl/maps/Riq4Y1AQBpw

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1768/43187914331_281d36aa62_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28NnmhB)
20180703_120526 (https://flic.kr/p/28NnmhB) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/914/42283534655_dbf853a5b6_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27qsaHz)
20180703_120528 (https://flic.kr/p/27qsaHz) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/919/41377464960_85e02240d0_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/263ojLh)
20180703_184621 (https://flic.kr/p/263ojLh) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 12:16:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on July 04, 2018, 07:17:45 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 03, 2018, 09:10:30 PM
Jakeroot, you may or may not find this interesting, but I kind of did: far left-side mast-mounted signals in Iowa. All four protected/permissive left turns at US-65/69 and Iowa 92 in Indianola have these. This is the only example of them I've ever seen (or remember seeing) in the state.

https://i.imgur.com/DorVF4l.jpg[/img

All I can figure is that the intersection is busy and the light cycles are pretty short, and/or Iowa DOT was having crash/safety problems with the intersection. It's not really an irregular intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3582368,-93.5583883,3a,75y,64.27h,92.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svX6Dhmzd0v14VFt3CQ7fCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) otherwise.

I fail to anything odd about it.  Looks like a typical intersection in the state to your east, in Illinois: https://goo.gl/maps/GhSG1EX2ML82

Illinois is among the minority of states that use left-side mast or pole signals. When they pop up in states that don't use them, it's fair to consider it unusual or odd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on July 04, 2018, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 12:16:28 PM

Illinois is among the minority of states that use left-side mast or pole signals. When they pop up in states that don't use them, it's fair to consider it unusual or odd.

Seems like I saw a couple in South Dakota once.

I've always been a fan of post signals. Most show more imagination than mast mounted signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 05:45:10 PM
Quote from: US71 on July 04, 2018, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 12:16:28 PM

Illinois is among the minority of states that use left-side mast or pole signals. When they pop up in states that don't use them, it's fair to consider it unusual or odd.

Seems like I saw a couple in South Dakota once.

I've always been a fan of post signals. Most show more imagination than mast mounted signals.

I totally agree, I think they're a great addition to any intersection. Not using them is asking for trouble; inability to see signals over tall vehicles, improved peripheral recognition, general redundancy, etc.

I don't know of any states from Ohio -> east that use pole signals extensively. New York City, Pennsylvania, and Mass seem to have quite a few, but not sure if they're still installed. It seems to be a western thing. They're standard in California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Idaho (on the right), Montana (on the right), South Dakota, Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, Nebraska (on the right), Iowa (on the right), Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota (on the right), and in many cities in Washington nowadays (as I noted above). Oregon and Utah are seriously lacking when visibility is normal. I don't know of any cities in either that use them without it being a requirement by the state due to visibility.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 04, 2018, 06:01:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 05:45:10 PM
Quote from: US71 on July 04, 2018, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 12:16:28 PM

Illinois is among the minority of states that use left-side mast or pole signals. When they pop up in states that don't use them, it's fair to consider it unusual or odd.

Seems like I saw a couple in South Dakota once.

I've always been a fan of post signals. Most show more imagination than mast mounted signals.

I totally agree, I think they're a great addition to any intersection. Not using them is asking for trouble; inability to see signals over tall vehicles, improved peripheral recognition, general redundancy, etc.

I don't know of any states from Ohio -> east that use pole signals extensively. New York City, Pennsylvania, and Mass seem to have quite a few, but not sure if they're still installed.

They are still standard and installed at large intersections in New York City, as NYCDOT continues to use the guyed mast arms. Also somewhat common in New Jersey, though decreasing in frequency now that they're switching from truss arms to standard mast arms (Alps and/or signalman could confirm whether or not they're still installed). Massachusetts still installs pole-mounted signals on occasion and many left turn signals (FYA, doghouse, or protected) in the state have a secondary far-left post mount.

New York (state) has started installing near-side post-mounted signals at large intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 08, 2018, 12:53:34 PM
Almost every single Illinois signal uses the post-mounted install at the far left corner.  And most signals along truck routes, and many not along them, ALSO use a post-mounted signal head at the near-right corner.  Adding the post-mounted signals is nice because they add another place to house crosswalk signals on the same post.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 08, 2018, 01:37:26 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 08, 2018, 12:53:34 PM
Almost every single Illinois signal uses the post-mounted install at the far left corner.  And most signals along truck routes, and many not along them, ALSO use a post-mounted signal head at the near-right corner.  Adding the post-mounted signals is nice because they add another place to house crosswalk signals on the same post.

Looking at it from a different angle, posts that are exclusively for pedestrian heads (in states that don't normally use post mounted signals) make a great pole for an extra signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 08, 2018, 10:54:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 05:45:10 PM
I don't know of any states from Ohio -> east that use pole signals extensively. New York City, Pennsylvania, and Mass seem to have quite a few, but not sure if they're still installed. It seems to be a western thing. They're standard in California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Idaho (on the right), Montana (on the right), South Dakota, Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, Nebraska (on the right), Iowa (on the right), Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota (on the right), and in many cities in Washington nowadays (as I noted above). Oregon and Utah are seriously lacking when visibility is normal. I don't know of any cities in either that use them without it being a requirement by the state due to visibility.

There is at least one intersection pole mounted supplemental heads on the left in Lincoln, Nebraska, although they are back to back with heads for on the right for the opposing direction:

Highway 2 at 84th Street (https://goo.gl/maps/R3EdE8Bn2eG2)

I thought there were a few more, but I am only finding ones side mounted on mast arm shafts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 08, 2018, 11:03:22 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 08, 2018, 12:53:34 PM
Almost every single Illinois signal uses the post-mounted install at the far left corner.  And most signals along truck routes, and many not along them, ALSO use a post-mounted signal head at the near-right corner.  Adding the post-mounted signals is nice because they add another place to house crosswalk signals on the same post.
I think Florida should do that as the normal MUTCD mounts cannot be seen when a semi or any truck is three or four car lengths in front of you.  Having the side mounts is a help as if we had them here we could all see around the large vehicle.

In NJ we always had a left side left turn signal in addition to the above ( which I though was normal everyplace until I left the state) which helps to a degree as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 01:32:15 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 08, 2018, 10:54:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2018, 05:45:10 PM
I don't know of any states from Ohio -> east that use pole signals extensively. New York City, Pennsylvania, and Mass seem to have quite a few, but not sure if they're still installed. It seems to be a western thing. They're standard in California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Idaho (on the right), Montana (on the right), South Dakota, Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, Nebraska (on the right), Iowa (on the right), Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota (on the right), and in many cities in Washington nowadays (as I noted above). Oregon and Utah are seriously lacking when visibility is normal. I don't know of any cities in either that use them without it being a requirement by the state due to visibility.

There is at least one intersection pole mounted supplemental heads on the left in Lincoln, Nebraska, although they are back to back with heads for on the right for the opposing direction:

Highway 2 at 84th Street (https://goo.gl/maps/R3EdE8Bn2eG2)

I thought there were a few more, but I am only finding ones side mounted on mast arm shafts.

Oh nice! I didn't see any when I was checking around Google Maps. That intersection is actually really well signalized. Near side on all approaches, and a far left and far right repeater for all approaches as well. Everyone should do this!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 01:36:03 AM
"Let's make sure to hang the signals, so they sit right behind the power lines".

:facepalm:

25 Ave W @ 164 St SW, Lynnwood, WA (https://goo.gl/BQxDMK)

(https://i.imgur.com/rgO1Bek.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
Street viewing around the other day, I found a bascule bridge with really, really old signals to stop traffic, that also has a really weird find.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152229,-78.9009519,3a,42.2y,266.48h,119.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_K9828kIpF28EiZMG6I3lA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Good god, what?? By the looks of it, the right one is in a box of sorts. The other one's in a broken box. Very weird. I don't know what it's doing there.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Extra 12-8-8 signalization. These ones are a teal color. Reminds me of some of LADOTD's older signals.


More 12-8-8s.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


If you look closely at the signals, you'll see that some of them have netting over the visors. Even the cap visors. This is one of the oddest setups I've seen in a while...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 04:06:06 PM
Quote from: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
More 12-8-8s.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I find this one intriguing, as green signals are displayed only feet from a stop sign. Doubt anyone is confused by it at this point, but I think "be prepared to stop when flashing" signs might have been better (if such existed at the time this was installed).



WSDOT installed this new signal in Lynnwood a couple weeks ago, and it has something rather unusual going on. Instead of a standard 4-section signal, this one is a 5-section signal, and the bottom two sections are parallel. Not sure what they display, though. Two green arrows, obviously, with one pointing left. Just not sure what the right-hand signal head displays. I don't believe the off-ramp was a double right turn.

(https://i.imgur.com/swsf6hA.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 09, 2018, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
Street viewing around the other day, I found a bascule bridge with really, really old signals to stop traffic, that also has a really weird find.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152229,-78.9009519,3a,42.2y,266.48h,119.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_K9828kIpF28EiZMG6I3lA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Good god, what?? By the looks of it, the right one is in a box of sorts. The other one's in a broken box. Very weird. I don't know what it's doing there.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Extra 12-8-8 signalization. These ones are a teal color. Reminds me of some of LADOTD's older signals.


More 12-8-8s.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


If you look closely at the signals, you'll see that some of them have netting over the visors. Even the cap visors. This is one of the oddest setups I've seen in a while...
I'm guessing the boxed signal heads and the one with netting are attempts to prevent birds from nesting in the signal visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on July 09, 2018, 05:26:58 PM
Quote from: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
Street viewing around the other day, I found a bascule bridge with really, really old signals to stop traffic, that also has a really weird find.

Speaking of drawbridges, here's what one typically finds for them around Chicago: https://goo.gl/maps/czyKW8C6NXG2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on July 09, 2018, 08:39:13 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 09, 2018, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
Street viewing around the other day, I found a bascule bridge with really, really old signals to stop traffic, that also has a really weird find.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152224,-78.9008564,3a,40y,268.24h,97.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy8pv2TBM3YvW7achXYRntQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152229,-78.9009519,3a,42.2y,266.48h,119.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_K9828kIpF28EiZMG6I3lA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152229,-78.9009519,3a,42.2y,266.48h,119.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_K9828kIpF28EiZMG6I3lA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9152243,-78.9008377,3a,15.4y,267.48h,97.1t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSnMsr3MZEEeeCaU5cNvQ2Q!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Good god, what?? By the looks of it, the right one is in a box of sorts. The other one's in a broken box. Very weird. I don't know what it's doing there.


https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9151665,-78.9015959,3a,41.9y,351.04h,84.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWuLMiVVmXb0o_uJwFzWYhQ!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Extra 12-8-8 signalization. These ones are a teal color. Reminds me of some of LADOTD's older signals.


More 12-8-8s.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.915258,-78.902768,3a,51.3y,116.32h,94.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp2prifDoC-jjHrh-N27FvA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


If you look closely at the signals, you'll see that some of them have netting over the visors. Even the cap visors. This is one of the oddest setups I've seen in a while...
I'm guessing the boxed signal heads and the one with netting are attempts to prevent birds from nesting in the signal visors.


Very possible, although that may not explain the ones with the cap visors, unless birds can nest in those too. I wouldn't know enough about birds to say.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 10, 2018, 10:11:45 AM
Quote from: index on July 09, 2018, 01:44:54 PM
If you look closely at the signals, you'll see that some of them have netting over the visors. Even the cap visors. This is one of the oddest setups I've seen in a while...
Where I grew up, the textural WALK and DONT WALK signs had hoods around them, like traffic lights.  I got to visit the state capitol of Olympia where for the first time I saw more of a grid in front of the signs to keep the sunlight out, something that's standard now.  I asked my uncle what those were for, and he growled, "It's to keep people from throwing rocks at them!"  So that's my theory for the screening.
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 10, 2018, 09:32:00 PM
I saw this when I was camping in Clifton, NY

I never seen a setup like this.. I assume the two lights talk to each other?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180711/d7b2dcdff2a633493a4aecf83b261495.jpg)

The other light was at the other end of the bridge
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 10, 2018, 09:36:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 01:36:03 AM
"Let's make sure to hang the signals, so they sit right behind the power lines".

:facepalm:

25 Ave W @ 164 St SW, Lynnwood, WA (https://goo.gl/BQxDMK)

(https://i.imgur.com/rgO1Bek.png)
That's nothing.. I gotta post the new lights they put up in Stamford with the new Home Depot lots of lines cut in front of the lights looks a mess
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 10, 2018, 09:42:31 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 08, 2018, 11:03:22 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 08, 2018, 12:53:34 PM
Almost every single Illinois signal uses the post-mounted install at the far left corner.  And most signals along truck routes, and many not along them, ALSO use a post-mounted signal head at the near-right corner.  Adding the post-mounted signals is nice because they add another place to house crosswalk signals on the same post.
I think Florida should do that as the normal MUTCD mounts cannot be seen when a semi or any truck is three or four car lengths in front of you.  Having the side mounts is a help as if we had them here we could all see around the large vehicle.

In NJ we always had a left side left turn signal in addition to the above ( which I though was normal everyplace until I left the state) which helps to a degree as well.
Here in Weehawken it's odd how they do the lights here they put them at the extreme left of a intersection on a short pole arm.. if one is not looking it's very easy to run a red light
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 10, 2018, 09:51:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 01:19:27 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 25, 2018, 06:15:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2018, 05:05:30 AM
...Sometimes, I'll even sit in the through lane, wait for the light to turn green, and then slide over into the left turn lane just so that oncoming cars can get a move on (cameras are common here so I can't trick it by positioning myself any other way). Many left turn signals in my area have a minimum green arrow time of at least five or six seconds (long after one car has cleared the intersection), which I consider to be insultingly long (really should only be green if someone is waiting behind the stop line -- minimum maybe closer to two or three seconds would be better).

That would seem awfully confusing to drivers behind you.  The traffic designers do everything based on normal expectations of drivers, so don't worry if you're making opposing traffic wait.  You don't know how the next signal they encounter will affect them, so your hard work of letting them go here may just let them get stuck at the next red light anyway.

As far as for the length of the green, I'm used to the green being as long as necessary. If there's only one car, that green arrow should have turned to yellow before the car even completed the turn.  Anything else does seem excessive.

Well, as you might imagine, the maneuver is only possible when traffic is generally quiet, so I'm not particularly worried about what others around me are thinking. I'd prefer to see oncoming traffic get a move on first so that they have a better chance of making the next green. I don't know what signal they are eventually approaching, of course. But I do know that the longer they wait at the current signal, the less likely they are to make the next signal (should it be green).

Yes, the green arrow phases around here seem excessive. This is the main motive behind my maneuver. Sometimes I'll see them last 10+ seconds without any cars approaching. It's extremely tedious waiting for these types of lights to change, so I try to not set them off.
I do wish more intersections have smart traffic lights... don't give free arrows to the turning lane if no cars are in it!! I not sure if that's a major upgrade but I know some if only one car is in the turning lane and the other side has no car then only one side gets the free arrow to turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 11, 2018, 12:25:01 AM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 10, 2018, 09:32:00 PM
I saw this when I was camping in Clifton, NY

I never seen a setup like this.. I assume the two lights talk to each other?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180711/d7b2dcdff2a633493a4aecf83b261495.jpg)

The other light was at the other end of the bridge

Yes, the lights talk to each other. It's basically a humanless flagger.

Here's one on US 285 in New Mexico, where you can see the light at the other end:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1766/29434469048_3eb2809c07_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LR2maE)

But they can also be used for much longer segments. This one on UT 143 was probably 2 miles long at least:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/840/41497251290_24d6ab9a20_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26dYg4Q)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 11, 2018, 02:58:22 AM
I've seen them used when not acting as a robotic flagger during contraflow. This was in Puyallup, WA, between a span wire signal coming down, and a mast arm going up.

The all-yellow backplate is a bit odd (not allowed but whatever), and cutaway visors are very unusual here. I thought this contraption might have come down from BC, as their signals often have both of those features.

(https://i.imgur.com/cnGli3T.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 11, 2018, 08:33:56 AM
Wow assuming wireless I wonder what range it tops out at? And a all yellow backplate is a bit odd
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 11, 2018, 01:22:04 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 11, 2018, 08:33:56 AM
Wow assuming wireless I wonder what range it tops out at? And a all yellow backplate is a bit odd

Not pictured are cameras mounted on two wooden masts (in opposite corners) which watched traffic and adjusted the signals as necessary. No idea how they talked to the temporary signal; if wireless comms are a thing for these, I suspect that is what they used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 11, 2018, 07:31:23 PM
Edmonton, Alberta has started using the retroreflective borders on signals, and (in keeping with some recent trends in other parts of the city), using a secondary signal head on the left. Turn signals were traditionally mounted vertically in the median, unlike the overhead through signals which were horizontal. But the turn signals remain vertical on the mast arm when used in this position.

Most interesting: as far as I know, this is the only jurisdiction in Canada that uses the retroreflective yellow border without an all-yellow backplate. Calgary and Red Deer use yellow backplates, and I'm not aware of any retroreflective borders in Banff.

https://goo.gl/RvM4Ty

(Edmonton has traditionally used permissive signals for all left turns, hence the "no turn on red" signs and [not pictured] double red orbs)

(https://i.imgur.com/bUwfrqY.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TBKS1 on July 11, 2018, 07:35:22 PM
I'm too late posting this.

Near Tunica, Mississippi. I took this on June 3rd. I've never seen anything like this before.

(https://i.imgur.com/GDnVXoE.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 11, 2018, 07:41:55 PM
^^ An inverted T.  Used when vertical clearance is an issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 11, 2018, 07:54:53 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on July 11, 2018, 07:35:22 PM
I'm too late posting this.

Near Tunica, Mississippi. I took this on June 3rd. I've never seen anything like this before.

(https://i.imgur.com/GDnVXoE.png)

This is extremely common in NJ.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on July 11, 2018, 11:59:06 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 11, 2018, 07:54:53 PM
Quote from: TBKS1 on July 11, 2018, 07:35:22 PM
I'm too late posting this.

Near Tunica, Mississippi. I took this on June 3rd. I've never seen anything like this before.

(https://i.imgur.com/GDnVXoE.png)

This is extremely common in NJ.


Speaking of inverted Ts and being common, does anyone know if any inverted Ts are in NC? I swear I've seen one here before, but all I have of that is a vague memory from when i was three or four or five.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 12, 2018, 07:09:02 PM
Since we are talking yellow borders these are new signals in Stamford that have reflective yellow border(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180712/6daa1b120bd765615079c2b200aa626d.jpg)

And in Weehawken I don't get the whole double red traffic light..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180712/1f3fbb8d1856764b94bd44929e3a7c0b.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 12, 2018, 08:23:55 PM
Wow, that Stamford installation looks very California-like with two right-side pole mounted signals. And the other one with the double-red I assume is from New Jersey? I remember they had some of those in Bayonne years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2018, 08:49:05 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 12, 2018, 08:23:55 PM
Wow, that Stamford installation looks very California-like with two right-side pole mounted signals.

That's what I thought as well. Glad to see some western practices making their way east. Let's just hope there's another pole mounted signal in the left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 03:59:51 AM
Another WSDOT install that has caught my eye. I think they've gone mad!

This left turn from E Bay Street to E 27 St in Tacoma has four left turn signals, for a single-lane left turn. It's not yet activated, but here's the Street View: https://goo.gl/poa2L9

Old WSDOT would have used two overhead signals, and that's all. But they've been throwing up pole-mounted signals all over the place lately. This interchange went from none four years ago, to at least seven today (four intersections in total -- split diamond). Still work to do, but I'm more than pleased!

(https://i.imgur.com/6FGxOaw.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 05:41:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2018, 08:49:05 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 12, 2018, 08:23:55 PM
Wow, that Stamford installation looks very California-like with two right-side pole mounted signals.

That's what I thought as well. Glad to see some western practices making their way east. Let's just hope there's another pole mounted signal in the left.
Hmm I think it is I'd have to check again
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 05:41:56 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 12, 2018, 08:23:55 PM
Wow, that Stamford installation looks very California-like with two right-side pole mounted signals. And the other one with the double-red I assume is from New Jersey? I remember they had some of those in Bayonne years ago.
Yeah the double red is in NJ.. is this just a NJ thing? I haven't seen it anyplace else
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 09:32:51 AM
I've seen people run this light which is stupid because traffic on the other side is out of view because they enter from the right.. still let people try it anyways.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180713/5063f29a18d127697c6a91096b987c58.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 09:47:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 03:59:51 AM
Another WSDOT install that has caught my eye. I think they've gone mad!

This left turn from E Bay Street to E 27 St in Tacoma has four left turn signals, for a single-lane left turn. It's not yet activated, but here's the Street View: https://goo.gl/poa2L9

Old WSDOT would have used two overhead signals, and that's all. But they've been throwing up pole-mounted signals all over the place lately. This interchange went from none four years ago, to at least seven today (four intersections in total -- split diamond). Still work to do, but I'm more than pleased!

(https://i.imgur.com/6FGxOaw.jpg)

Hooray for post-mounts!  Though 4 signal heads for one lane is a bit excessive.  The one on the signal mast just absolutely does not need to be there, unless there's a curve in the approach to the intersection.  I'm just happy to see any DOT cover all their bases--making sure each signal has a duplicate, and making sure a signal is visible from all possible lines of sight stemming from the approach.

I feel personally struck by the crosswalk signals that just stick up straight from the poles (no hooks).  I haven't seen any signals like that in ages.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 13, 2018, 11:52:08 AM
Another of the Stamford signals no traffic light on the left(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180713/cf34ef4eb6fe2c7380725e23d010a1e6.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 02:39:01 PM
Does anyone know about these signal heads with the circular backing for each section? What are these signals?  They're common on old DuPage County installs (Illinois) which I love because of the curved mast arms.

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1810/28486339027_6319d2a6bc_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KpeW9k)
20180704_142838 (https://flic.kr/p/KpeW9k) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 02:46:45 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 09:47:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 03:59:51 AM
Another WSDOT install that has caught my eye. I think they've gone mad!

This left turn from E Bay Street to E 27 St in Tacoma has four left turn signals, for a single-lane left turn. It's not yet activated, but here's the Street View: https://goo.gl/poa2L9

Old WSDOT would have used two overhead signals, and that's all. But they've been throwing up pole-mounted signals all over the place lately. This interchange went from none four years ago, to at least seven today (four intersections in total -- split diamond). Still work to do, but I'm more than pleased!

(https://i.imgur.com/6FGxOaw.jpg)

Hooray for post-mounts!  Though 4 signal heads for one lane is a bit excessive.  The one on the signal mast just absolutely does not need to be there, unless there's a curve in the approach to the intersection.  I'm just happy to see any DOT cover all their bases--making sure each signal has a duplicate, and making sure a signal is visible from all possible lines of sight stemming from the approach.

I feel personally struck by the crosswalk signals that just stick up straight from the poles (no hooks).  I haven't seen any signals like that in ages.

I think they should do away with the right-most mast arm signal, and leave the two on the poles. My personal preference is for all intersections to have post-mounted far left and far right signals at a minimum. I know Illinois doesn't always use a far right signal head (instead using near-side pole mounted signals, which are still fantastic), but they do come in handy when the intersection uses dedicated left turn signals (as is very often the case here in WA). The far left repeater would be a left turn signal, so you'd need a right-side through repeater for redundancy. Even if all four signals on an approach were green orbs (far left pole, two overhead and one on right pole), it helps to have one on the right in the event you can't see to your left or in front of you.

Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 02:39:01 PM
Does anyone know about these signal heads with the circular backing for each section? What are these signals?  They're common on old DuPage County installs (Illinois) which I love because of the curved mast arms.

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1810/28486339027_6319d2a6bc_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KpeW9k)
20180704_142838 (https://flic.kr/p/KpeW9k) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

Those are Econolite Bullseye signals, but the round door variant. According to freebrickproductions, they were produced from the late 50s to an indeterminate point in time, and from the early 60s alongside the square-door variant. I also quite like the curved mast. I don't mind straight-armed masts, but curved is pretty cool too!

There are quite a lot of those near me, and AFAIK are also one of the oldest signals you see around here: https://goo.gl/cBke4z
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 13, 2018, 04:35:09 PM
Bullseyes are not common where I live, plus, they don't get nice repaints like other states do, instead they're left to rot in their original condition.  Several decades ago, these were very common in Philly, hundreds of intersections had these, as of now I'm guessing there's less than twenty left. Unfortunately, most likely due to the non-ambiguous nature of the standards in my area, only the square-door version is used, ironically I kind of prefer this version of the bull's eye:


(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4769/39259373025_7b22c8e90a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/22PdxPP)Econolite Bullseyes (https://flic.kr/p/22PdxPP) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickrftp://

These two Bull's eyes are at the same intersection:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/847/29177443798_2fd04e1eec_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Lsj2vQ)Econolite Bullseye (https://flic.kr/p/Lsj2vQ) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr


(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/843/43049259291_504beea794_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28A7GYt)Another Econolite Bullseye (https://flic.kr/p/28A7GYt) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

I love how the eastern part of the U.S. doesn't repaint their older signals, it keeps the authenticity of their age

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 05:29:41 PM
Do you know of any specific jurisdictions that repaint their signals? Around here, most signals are a dull black or green color, so they aged quite gracefully. In fact, the only way for me to tell if a signal is old, is if it's an old manufacturer. Or, if the backplate is rusty or worn. Either way, no repainting around here that I'm aware of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2018, 08:23:53 PM
Nassau County DPW on Long Island does repaint their yellow signal heads periodically. However I think they may have cut back somewhat on this maintenance as the County government is in dire financial straits and some of their signal heads are looking very faded lately.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 14, 2018, 10:51:03 AM
It seems companies like McCain have an almost impossible to see the black border, compared to eagle: Eagle: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4155121,-71.1530432,3a,17.6y,297.45h,104.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYUGhtrtgTnsuo1nW1k3qWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
McCain: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3978246,-71.1411478,3a,15y,270.3h,98.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5BI8PguGUC9QZodbBaue3w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5BI8PguGUC9QZodbBaue3w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D228.62907%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 14, 2018, 10:57:55 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 04, 2018, 11:49:14 AM
Here's a weird signal in Park Forest, IL.  Three 4-section heads face the northbound traffic.  Southbound setup is even weirder because the signals are all 8-inchers.  Didn't have time to get a photo of those, though.  Here's a GSV looking southbound https://goo.gl/maps/Riq4Y1AQBpw

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1768/43187914331_281d36aa62_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28NnmhB)
20180703_120526 (https://flic.kr/p/28NnmhB) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/914/42283534655_dbf853a5b6_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27qsaHz)
20180703_120528 (https://flic.kr/p/27qsaHz) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/919/41377464960_85e02240d0_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/263ojLh)
20180703_184621 (https://flic.kr/p/263ojLh) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
There's one like this here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3752819,-71.1457835,3a,19.2y,55.07h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHGmj4PgyrLG83qfJ_jxxhA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2018, 02:33:18 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 14, 2018, 10:51:03 AM
It seems companies like McCain have an almost impossible to see the black border, compared to eagle: Eagle: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4155121,-71.1530432,3a,17.6y,297.45h,104.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYUGhtrtgTnsuo1nW1k3qWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
McCain: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3978246,-71.1411478,3a,15y,270.3h,98.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5BI8PguGUC9QZodbBaue3w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5BI8PguGUC9QZodbBaue3w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D228.62907%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

It appears to be a difference between the signal housings being painted, and not. The McCain's in your link have been painted silver, whereas the Eagle's are painted black. Beyond that, they have the same backplate size and same yellow border thickness.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 14, 2018, 03:36:41 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 12, 2018, 07:09:02 PM
And in Weehawken I don’t get the whole double red traffic light..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180712/1f3fbb8d1856764b94bd44929e3a7c0b.jpg)
The second red indication is pretty much for extra visibility while adding a redundant indication should a red bulb go, especially if that's the only signal at the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2018, 08:23:23 PM
Those are very old signals probably from the 1960's. I know they were around in 1972 when I had friends in some of those Hudson County cities.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 14, 2018, 11:36:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 05:29:41 PM
Do you know of any specific jurisdictions that repaint their signals? Around here, most signals are a dull black or green color, so they aged quite gracefully. In fact, the only way for me to tell if a signal is old, is if it's an old manufacturer. Or, if the backplate is rusty or worn. Either way, no repainting around here that I'm aware of.

NYC does it, saw them painting signals in my neighborhood a month or two ago
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on July 15, 2018, 04:50:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 01:36:03 AM
"Let's make sure to hang the signals, so they sit right behind the power lines".

:facepalm:

25 Ave W @ 164 St SW, Lynnwood, WA (https://goo.gl/BQxDMK)
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6815682,-122.3175003,3a,75y,263.52h,89.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-LLZPtwdpAjP0AvyVW8JFw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)'s even worse! The signals are on spanwire that's connected to the same utility poles as the communications wiring, so there's very little separation between them and the wires hit the signal heads when it's windy, so they're missing several visors even though this is a relatively new installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 15, 2018, 08:52:14 AM
Speaking of wires this is a good one(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180715/c2fbfe752842b61ed39f74e98cbf2b34.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 15, 2018, 04:35:16 PM
Quote from: jay8g on July 15, 2018, 04:50:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 09, 2018, 01:36:03 AM
"Let's make sure to hang the signals, so they sit right behind the power lines".

:facepalm:

25 Ave W @ 164 St SW, Lynnwood, WA (https://goo.gl/BQxDMK)
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6815682,-122.3175003,3a,75y,263.52h,89.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-LLZPtwdpAjP0AvyVW8JFw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)'s even worse! The signals are on spanwire that's connected to the same utility poles as the communications wiring, so there's very little separation between them and the wires hit the signal heads when it's windy, so they're missing several visors even though this is a relatively new installation.

I would say the one in Lynnwood is probably worse from a driver's perspective, since there's three wires running in front of the overhead signals, instead of one (although the signals on the masts prevent total blockage). But from a technical standpoint, that Roosevelt example is definitely worse considering how close the signals are to the wires.

SDOT is completely useless at signal placement these days. They almost never post anything on poles anymore. There are exceptions, such as the off-ramp from the southbound 5 collector lanes to Dearborn (Street View is out of date, otherwise I'd post a link), and this intersection (https://goo.gl/XG2ccU) of Republican (both approaches) at Fairview. But for the most part, it's "stuff them on the mast arm", even when there's only one straight-ahead lane (here for example (https://goo.gl/PVGUV9)), where there should be one on the mast (like here (https://goo.gl/h4tdNs)).

Your example would be a prime location for post-mounted signals, due to overhead wiring. But nope, they decided that two arrows right on top of each other, right behind a wire where they will eventually destroy themselves, was the best location :-/ It's hard to believe these even pass the "cone of vision" requirement.

I commented on the below tweet (posted by Dongho Chang, a very social SDOT engineer on Twitter), asking why SDOT put the signals so close together when there's two approach lanes. No response as usual. Any questions about cycle routes and sidewalks, and he's on it. Signals and signs? Good luck getting a response. They did a good job with 2nd; maybe that was a fluke.

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1016692564844412928
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 15, 2018, 05:05:42 PM
Odd approach angle at this intersection (https://goo.gl/BjN117) in SeaTac, WA necessitates one of the left turn signals to be to the right of the left-most primary through signal.

It's a limited-visibility 3M display, but only the red is usually hidden.

(https://i.imgur.com/2dfnYGJ.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 16, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 15, 2018, 05:05:42 PM
Odd approach angle at this intersection (https://goo.gl/BjN117) in SeaTac, WA necessitates one of the left turn signals to be to the right of the left-most primary through signal.

It's a limited-visibility 3M display, but only the red is usually hidden.

(https://i.imgur.com/2dfnYGJ.jpg)

Yeah, kinda bizarre. They could have gotten a bit more creative with the signal head placement than this. Perhaps the supplemental left signal could have been placed on the backside of the nearside mast arm?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:30:03 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 16, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 15, 2018, 05:05:42 PM
Odd approach angle at this intersection (https://goo.gl/BjN117) in SeaTac, WA necessitates one of the left turn signals to be to the right of the left-most primary through signal.

It's a limited-visibility 3M display, but only the red is usually hidden.

https://i.imgur.com/2dfnYGJ.jpg

Yeah, kinda bizarre. They could have gotten a bit more creative with the signal head placement than this. Perhaps the supplemental left signal could have been placed on the backside of the nearside mast arm?

Certainly possible. It would remove the turn signal between the two through signals. I think how they've done it is acceptable, though unusual. At least they used limited visibility signals. Only the green and yellow arrows are visible from the through-movement stop line, so that helps. Red is only visible for a second as one passes through the turn lane's cone of vision.

I find this setup, especially with limited-visibility signals, to be less confusing than the far more common "near-side left corner" primary signal face used at curves. This is a requirement for curved intersections, however, since the signal is required to be a repeater of the primary signal face, it can be misleading for drivers who intend to turn (i.e. not through traffic). See this approach for example: https://goo.gl/3aSgdS.

I don't know if having another turn signal in the same location, or on the far-left corner, would improve the situation. But I feel like the situation in the link above in insufficient, even if it meets MUTCD requirements.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?

According to a Seattle city traffic engineer, this signal is compliant because the primary movement is the slight right at this intersection. However, the MUTCD indicates that two primary signal faces are required for any through movement. My interpretation of "through movement" is not the same as "major movement" (hence why I believe that term was ultimately removed in 2009 -- compare ~4D.15 in the 2003 edition, to 4D.11 in the 2009 edition). AFAIK, a "through movement" is anything that isn't a left or right movement. Even if that means slight right, such as here, that would disqualify it from being considered a "through" movement.

(https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png)

Here's his latest tweet to me:

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018910269467078656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2018, 01:52:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?

According to a Seattle city traffic engineer, this signal is compliant because the primary movement is the slight right at this intersection. However, the MUTCD indicates that two primary signal faces are required for any through movement. My interpretation of "through movement" is not the same as "major movement" (hence why I believe that term was ultimately removed in 2009 -- compare ~4D.15 in the 2003 edition, to 4D.11 in the 2009 edition). AFAIK, a "through movement" is anything that isn't a left or right movement. Even if that means slight right, such as here, that would disqualify it from being considered a "through" movement.

(https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png)

Here's his latest tweet to me:

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018910269467078656

The usual way (say, in NJ) to make this work is to have at least 2 signals with RYG for the thru route overhead.  The right-most signal would also have a green arrow lens at the bottom, and there'll also be a 4 headed signal to the right with a green arrow as well.  Signage would state "Right Turn on Green Arrow Only".

Such as this: https://goo.gl/maps/F38WQSX538N2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:58:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2018, 01:52:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?

According to a Seattle city traffic engineer, this signal is compliant because the primary movement is the slight right at this intersection. However, the MUTCD indicates that two primary signal faces are required for any through movement. My interpretation of "through movement" is not the same as "major movement" (hence why I believe that term was ultimately removed in 2009 -- compare ~4D.15 in the 2003 edition, to 4D.11 in the 2009 edition). AFAIK, a "through movement" is anything that isn't a left or right movement. Even if that means slight right, such as here, that would disqualify it from being considered a "through" movement.

https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png

Here's his latest tweet to me:

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018910269467078656

The usual way (say, in NJ) to make this work is to have at least 2 signals with RYG for the thru route overhead.  The right-most signal would also have a green arrow lens at the bottom, and there'll also be a 4 headed signal to the right with a green arrow as well.  Signage would state "Right Turn on Green Arrow Only".

Such as this: https://goo.gl/maps/F38WQSX538N2

That's actually what I suggested in my first tweet, but he wasn't having it. It would be an easy fix to the situation, but he doesn't believe the situation as-is to be non-compliant.

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018780449705873408
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2018, 02:22:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:58:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2018, 01:52:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?

According to a Seattle city traffic engineer, this signal is compliant because the primary movement is the slight right at this intersection. However, the MUTCD indicates that two primary signal faces are required for any through movement. My interpretation of "through movement" is not the same as "major movement" (hence why I believe that term was ultimately removed in 2009 -- compare ~4D.15 in the 2003 edition, to 4D.11 in the 2009 edition). AFAIK, a "through movement" is anything that isn't a left or right movement. Even if that means slight right, such as here, that would disqualify it from being considered a "through" movement.

https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png

Here's his latest tweet to me:

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018910269467078656

The usual way (say, in NJ) to make this work is to have at least 2 signals with RYG for the thru route overhead.  The right-most signal would also have a green arrow lens at the bottom, and there'll also be a 4 headed signal to the right with a green arrow as well.  Signage would state "Right Turn on Green Arrow Only".

Such as this: https://goo.gl/maps/F38WQSX538N2

That's actually what I suggested in my first tweet, but he wasn't having it. It would be an easy fix to the situation, but he doesn't believe the situation as-is to be non-compliant.

https://twitter.com/dongho_chang/status/1018780449705873408

Because of the lack of any real penalty, he and his department can do and say pretty much whatever they want.   

The only time it could be an issue would be in the case of a fatal accident, and even then many lawyers don't even really get the gist of the MUTCD.  If the signal was working in its present form, that's probably going to pass most smell tests.  They're not going to venture further into why there wasn't 2 identical signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 03:00:35 PM
The only previous time that I contacted a city (Renton, WA) about a missing through signal, they added one about a month later. I quoted the exact same section from the MUTCD.

Before (https://goo.gl/zx8iPN) -- After (https://goo.gl/cSVPp8)

You could argue that the "primary" movement at this intersection is the left turn onto Rainier Ave. But, both the engineer and myself agreed that the straight-ahead movement here still counts as the through movement, thus it requires two primary signal faces.

Here's my email:

Quote from: Jacob Root, 20 Dec 2016
Hello Mr Zimmerman,

I hope you are the right person to contact on this issue. I noticed a couple of days ago that the through movement along S/SW 7th St eastbound, as it crosses over Rainier Ave S, has only one through signal, mounted on the overhead mast arm. It is accompanied by an R3-5a sign ("straight only").

The relevant section of the MUTCD is ~4D.11 (Number of Signal Faces on an Approach). It states that "f a signalized through movement exists on an approach, a minimum of two primary signal faces shall be provided for the through movement."

My suggestion would be to install a new signal on the southeast mast (not overhead on the mast arm -- I feel an extra signal on the overhead mast arm would clutter the arm, and pole mounted signals present additional visibility for those who cannot see over the vehicle in front of them).

His response:

Quote from: Gregg A. Zimmerman, 20 Dec 2016
Dear Jacob Root:

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I am referring this to our Transportation Operations Section who will investigate the situation and provide a response to you in the coming days.

Sincerely,

Gregg A. Zimmerman, P.E.

City of Renton

Public Works Department Administrator

Final follow-up email:

Quote from: Flora Lee, 27 Jan 2017
Dear Mr. Jacob Root:

We appreciate you brought this to our attention. The lane configuration and signal phasing in the east-west direction were modified after the Rainier project completion in order to optimize the operations of the intersection. The eastbound approach was rechannelized from one left turn lane, one shared left-through lane, and one shared through-right lane to two left turn lanes and one shared through-right lane and the signal heads were revised without adding a second through lane signal head.  A work order has been created to install a supplemental three section signal head for the eastbound through movement on the signal pole located on the southeast corner of the intersection.

Thank you,

Flora Lee, PE, PTOE

^^
This was my experience with Renton. Quick responses, and quick action. They even put the signal in where I suggested! I did not expect Mr Chang to be as defensive as he was.

While they can do whatever they want, that doesn't mean that they should. My experience with this kind of stuff is that cities don't intentionally not follow the MUTCD, so I try to alert them when I spot something wrong. IMO, Seattle has not installed a compliant signal, so I let them know. I've talked to Dongho Chang via Twitter quite a lot in the last couple years. He's very responsive to issues, hence why he was my first contact. But, he also rides a bike to work, and many of the improvements that he shares on Twitter are of improvements for those on foot or on transit. This is very important in a city like Seattle, where many people don't drive to work, but that does not negate his commitment to the MUTCD being a "PE". I honestly believe that he doesn't care about this issue, and would rather defend the situation as is, then go through the process of fixing it. I fully intend to write someone else in the DOT, to see what they think.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 16, 2018, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 14, 2018, 08:23:23 PM
Those are very old signals probably from the 1960's. I know they were around in 1972 when I had friends in some of those Hudson County cities.

Back in the 70s, the signal housing was banana yellow instead of brown
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 06:45:26 PM
Follow up from above. I pleaded to him in Vision-Zero speak, but no response :-D

https://twitter.com/jakeroot/status/1018951550545227776
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 16, 2018, 09:31:11 PM
Interesting question whether the MUTCD's use of the word through vs. major was intended by FHWA to mean straight vs. a turning movement being the predominant movement at a signalized intersection.

One way to solve the whole issue would be for all traffic agencies to do what the whole state of California mostly does, that is to have two signal heads for virtually all signalized movements so there doesn't have to be any debate over which is the through or major movement. And that way the driving public is best served by high-quality installations.

Also, my old 1988 Manual uses the words through traffic in section 4B-12 requiring a minimum of two signal faces. So it would seem that the term major movement was only used in the 2003 Manual and the 2009 edition might be a correction of what the FHWA may have considered an error in their 2003 Manual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 16, 2018, 10:09:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 06:45:26 PM
Follow up from above. I pleaded to him in Vision-Zero speak, but no response :-D

https://twitter.com/jakeroot/status/1018951550545227776

Very true, especailly for doghouses, or 4 section heads, they should program the arrow to light up during each cycle
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2018, 12:07:41 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 16, 2018, 09:31:11 PM
Interesting question whether the MUTCD's use of the word through vs. major was intended by FHWA to mean straight vs. a turning movement being the predominant movement at a signalized intersection.

Section 4D.25 does say the following:

Quote from: MUTCD ~4D.25
A lane that is shared by left-turn and right-turn movements is sometimes provided on an approach that has no through movement, such as the stem of a T-intersection or where the opposite approach is a one-way roadway in the opposing direction.

Here, the terms "left", "right", and "through" are all exclusive terms. If the MUTCD wanted "through" to mean "most important" or "major", using the term "through" here would be inappropriate, since it's being used to differentiate between turn movements and those that are proceeding straight (not possible here due to the intersection being an effective "T").

Quote from: SignBridge on July 16, 2018, 09:31:11 PM
One way to solve the whole issue would be for all traffic agencies to do what the whole state of California mostly does, that is to have two signal heads for virtually all signalized movements so there doesn't have to be any debate over which is the through or major movement. And that way the driving public is best served by high-quality installations.

Definitely. The MUTCD recognizes the benefits of using supplemental signal faces (~4D.11, 07-E); I wish they'd just go and make these "should" statements "shall". Why they've remained "should", I don't know. I know the MUTCD states that mast-arm signals are better at getting drivers' attention than just using pole-mounted signals, but they do state that secondary signals improve visibility for certain occasions, such as for those travelling behind large trucks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 17, 2018, 05:33:35 PM
This signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3124345,-73.868985,3a,31y,16.98h,96.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUDaVgjBsebOWzFTyeDjqAw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DUDaVgjBsebOWzFTyeDjqAw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D11.1228695%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) in Cortlandt, NY baffles me. Google shows a bimodal right four-stack, it has since been replaced with a right doghouse. It's a right turn only exit and there's no conflicting marked crosswalk. When I drove through it it just showed a green ball. Am I going crazy? What's the point of the arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2018, 07:10:55 PM
What is up with Ontario?  Not only does the province use two mast arms to do the job of one (as always is like NJ was with some and there with two arms on opposite side across from each other to mount both heads), but the backplates are all painted yellow.

Also they use 8 inch yellows and green lenses instead of all 12 like most states do.  Though the 12-8-8 is not bad as NJ used to have them around in many areas when I was growing up as well as Virginia they were very popular and some intersections in NYC use them as well.

Though the extra arm and all yellow backplates seem odd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on July 17, 2018, 07:23:55 PM
Slightly interesting signal I came across in Grand Rapids, MN today:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3Cpje3l.jpg&hash=92042a01e2d33bb2cd9d37f92b2692f16f40753e)

First, the yellow backplates, which are quite rare in Minnesota. (Maybe starting to become a thing? Not sure.)
Second, they have the housings for FYAs installed, but currently have them set up as standard three section orb heads, with the flashing yellow section covered.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 17, 2018, 07:55:01 PM
I guess they plan to set up the FYA in the near future. The backplates actually are dark color with reflective yellow borders which is becoming increasingly common nationwide. That's actually a good looking, efficient installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 18, 2018, 01:43:56 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2018, 07:10:55 PM
What is up with Ontario?  Not only does the province use two mast arms to do the job of one (as always is like NJ was with some and there with two arms on opposite side across from each other to mount both heads), but the backplates are all painted yellow.

Also they use 8 inch yellows and green lenses instead of all 12 like most states do.  Though the 12-8-8 is not bad as NJ used to have them around in many areas when I was growing up as well as Virginia they were very popular and some intersections in NYC use them as well.

Though the extra arm and all yellow backplates seem odd.

All yellow backplates are extremely common all across Canada. Black backplates are definitely in the minority. I think they're only found in the Prairies. No examples in BC that I know of.

I believe Ontario has switched over to all 300mm (12-inch) signals. BC seems to be the only province that still uses 200mm signals, using them for all (RYG) orbs, depending on location (overhead or pole, nearside or farside, etc). Red Deer, Alberta uses 200-200-200 right-side secondary signals at many intersections, but not sure if that's still normal.

Why double mast arms? No idea. Maybe wind load?



Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 17, 2018, 07:23:55 PM
First, the yellow backplates, which are quite rare in Minnesota. (Maybe starting to become a thing? Not sure.)

Around here, they just popped up everywhere in the span of like two months. Only the city of Bellevue, WA still installs backplates without yellow tape.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 18, 2018, 10:03:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?

According to a Seattle city traffic engineer, this signal is compliant because the primary movement is the slight right at this intersection. However, the MUTCD indicates that two primary signal faces are required for any through movement. My interpretation of "through movement" is not the same as "major movement" (hence why I believe that term was ultimately removed in 2009 -- compare ~4D.15 in the 2003 edition, to 4D.11 in the 2009 edition). AFAIK, a "through movement" is anything that isn't a left or right movement. Even if that means slight right, such as here, that would disqualify it from being considered a "through" movement.

https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png

Late to the party here, but I agree with your assessment. If installed under 2009 MUTCD, this signal is not compliant with the minimum requirement of two signal heads for the through movement.

I also agree with what SignBridge said about having two signal heads for each signalized movement, especially for redundancy purposes. It's something Nevada does right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 18, 2018, 10:24:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 03:00:35 PM
The only previous time that I contacted a city (Renton, WA) about a missing through signal, they added one about a month later. I quoted the exact same section from the MUTCD.

Before (https://goo.gl/zx8iPN) -- After (https://goo.gl/cSVPp8)



Wow, you did that?  This used to be on my daily bus commute.  This intersection was reconfigured when Rainier Avenue was widened to add a BAT lane in the northbound direction.  An existing lane was taken away for this in the southbound direction.  This involved rebuilding a railroad overpass, so it was no small feat, but this was to provide a whopping three blocks of "exclusive" transit lane for the new Rapid Ride F line, the only exclusive footage on the whole line.  Initially, there were two through lanes on that part of the intersection, and thus two through lights.  The middle lane also turned left, so left and through traffic must happen simultaneously.  They untangled that by making the middle lane turn left only, but I noticed it was odd that there was now only one light for through traffic.  I hadn't noticed when the additional light came on.

Once they allowed for simultaneous through movements on 7th, the traffic backups for left turns got worse, especially when pedestrians want to cross on the crosswalk that the left turn crosses.  Bus rapid transit is supposed to include signal prioritization for buses, but this bus always waits at this light.  Metro's version of bus rapid transit is so skimpy and barely qualifies for the requirements.  Stop skipping is minimal, and off-board payments happen at only about half the stops.  Last week at a time of the day when the schedule was on 15 minute headways, my bus was at the lead of a four bus bunch right before it reached the end of the line.  I wanted to get a picture of all four buses crowded at the last stop, but the driver refused to go around the corner to enter the last stop, forcing all passengers to get off early.  Another bus did the same, and only two coaches reached the end.

If Renton is this responsive to traffic signal issues, perhaps I should tell them of a signal I walk by every day that has a left signal that erroneously turns green even when no cars are there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2018, 10:52:18 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on July 18, 2018, 10:24:30 AM
If Renton is this responsive to traffic signal issues, perhaps I should tell them of a signal I walk by every day that has a left signal that erroneously turns green even when no cars are there.

It could easily be a bad sensor.  While their transportation crews may drive around every day, it can sometimes be a chance encounter that they notice or don't notice something.

Definitely give them a call or email!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2018, 02:45:13 AM
Quote from: roadfro on July 18, 2018, 10:03:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM
Do you guys think this signal approach is MUTCD-compliant?
...

https://i.imgur.com/GQHWwJp.png

Late to the party here, but I agree with your assessment. If installed under 2009 MUTCD, this signal is not compliant with the minimum requirement of two signal heads for the through movement.

Thanks. His dismissal is alarming. Any traffic engineer should be able to read that MUTCD section, and understand it as requiring two green orbs at any intersection with a straight movement. Even non-engineers would agree that having only one signal for a movement is a risky proposition. It wouldn't surprise me if he dismissed me because he doesn't want to fix it, or his head is stuck in the past. The old signal had three green orbs: https://goo.gl/TN5Xxe (summer 2008 GSV). This setup, minus the far left 4-section head and 8-inch heads, is identical to what the new signal should have looked like. I believe the current signal was installed in 2010. A while ago, but recently enough to require that extra signal head for the through movement.

Sorry if I sound kind of butthurt. Seattle has had some serious signal issues lately (too closely spaced, poorly placed relative to other intersection objects, not enough altogether, removing (https://goo.gl/5WPQ1D) pole-mounted signals (https://goo.gl/2ebdQw) when switching to overhead signals (why not keep both?), etc); I want to help them fix these shortcomings to the best of my ability, by at least alerting them to basic MUTCD regulations. But for them to just weasel their way around the rule is just...annoying.

Quote from: roadfro on July 18, 2018, 10:03:21 AM
I also agree with what SignBridge said about having two signal heads for each signalized movement, especially for redundancy purposes. It's something Nevada does right.

I definitely agree. Redundancy is key. You never know when a signal might go out, and if common sense has taught us one thing, it's to not trust drivers at a burned-out light. Many Washington cities have started installing extra signals over the last ten years; it's quite encouraging. Even the DOT has been hopping on the bandwagon with some projects. Here's hoping the state might change our MUTCD to require additional redundancy at some point.



Quote from: ErmineNotyours on July 18, 2018, 10:24:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 16, 2018, 03:00:35 PM
The only previous time that I contacted a city (Renton, WA) about a missing through signal, they added one about a month later. I quoted the exact same section from the MUTCD.

Before (https://goo.gl/zx8iPN) -- After (https://goo.gl/cSVPp8)

Wow, you did that?  This used to be on my daily bus commute.

Yep, that were me. One of my lasting legacies! Lol. My mother used to work in Renton before moving to DC, so I spent a fair amount of time driving around the city. One day, while driving together to get lunch, we drove eastbound through that intersection (after it was reconfigured), and I knew something was wrong. So I emailed them, and they fixed it right up impressively fast. A great lasting impression, especially since they listened to my recommendation of placing the new signal on the mast, and not overhead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2018, 02:46:38 AM
This pole-mounted signal in Fife, WA is placed quite low to the ground, due to the pole being mounted slightly below ground level. The intersection is slightly elevated, but this signal pole doesn't seem to be. Oddly, the opposite direction's pole-mounted signal is mounted a bit higher than normal. Spin the GSV around a bit.

https://goo.gl/YpyDBM (Valley Ave @ Freeman Road)

(https://i.imgur.com/peQQwNc.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 19, 2018, 10:13:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2018, 02:46:38 AM
This pole-mounted signal in Fife, WA is placed quite low to the ground, due to the pole being mounted slightly below ground level. The intersection is slightly elevated, but this signal pole doesn't seem to be. Oddly, the opposite direction's pole-mounted signal is mounted a bit higher than normal. Spin the GSV around a bit.

https://goo.gl/YpyDBM (Valley Ave @ Freeman Road)

(https://i.imgur.com/peQQwNc.png)

It doesn't seem that low to me. But it might not be mounted at the minimum of 8 feet from sidewalk (or the pavement grade at the center of the roadway if there is no sidewalk) to bottom of signal housing [See MUTCD 4D.15]. The other pole/mast mounted signals at that intersection seem abnormally high... 

Come to think of it, I've seen that high mast mount in a few other examples you've posted. Must be a Washington thing...? NDOT's standard plans call for a side-mounted 3-section head to be 12 feet (on center) from the bottom of the mast (note the mast arm connects at 18.5 feet on center, so the signal is about 2/3 the way up the mast). And I'm fairly certain all the local agencies use NDOT's standard plans for their signal installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on July 19, 2018, 10:22:08 AM
Seems PennDOT, who mostly (except in the Philly area) used full red circles alongside green and yellow arrows for dedicated turn signals, has been transitioning toward red arrows within the past three years or so. Most of the newest signal installations I see have them, for example here: https://goo.gl/maps/jHeReRx9Wmt
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 19, 2018, 11:46:11 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on July 19, 2018, 10:22:08 AM
Seems PennDOT, who mostly (except in the Philly area) used full red circles alongside green and yellow arrows for dedicated turn signals, has been transitioning toward red arrows within the past three years or so. Most of the newest signal installations I see have them, for example here: https://goo.gl/maps/jHeReRx9Wmt

No, not true, some of Philly's suburbs use the red circle, only the city of Philadelphia uses the red arrow. However, since 2013, the suburbs have been using the arrow for newer installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 20, 2018, 11:26:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 18, 2018, 01:43:56 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2018, 07:10:55 PM
What is up with Ontario?  Not only does the province use two mast arms to do the job of one (as always is like NJ was with some and there with two arms on opposite side across from each other to mount both heads), but the backplates are all painted yellow.

Also they use 8 inch yellows and green lenses instead of all 12 like most states do.  Though the 12-8-8 is not bad as NJ used to have them around in many areas when I was growing up as well as Virginia they were very popular and some intersections in NYC use them as well.

Though the extra arm and all yellow backplates seem odd.

All yellow backplates are extremely common all across Canada. Black backplates are definitely in the minority. I think they're only found in the Prairies. No examples in BC that I know of.

I believe Ontario has switched over to all 300mm (12-inch) signals. BC seems to be the only province that still uses 200mm signals, using them for all (RYG) orbs, depending on location (overhead or pole, nearside or farside, etc). Red Deer, Alberta uses 200-200-200 right-side secondary signals at many intersections, but not sure if that's still normal.

Why double mast arms? No idea. Maybe wind load?



Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 17, 2018, 07:23:55 PM
First, the yellow backplates, which are quite rare in Minnesota. (Maybe starting to become a thing? Not sure.)

Around here, they just popped up everywhere in the span of like two months. Only the city of Bellevue, WA still installs backplates without yellow tape.
Does Canada still use the fast flashing green for permissive left turns?  I remember that was common in Hamilton in 1984 and saw one in Niagara Falls in 1995 also.  So I assume it was a Canada (or a provincial thing).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 20, 2018, 11:44:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 20, 2018, 11:26:36 PM
Does Canada still use the fast flashing green for permissive left turns?  I remember that was common in Hamilton in 1984 and saw one in Niagara Falls in 1995 also.  So I assume it was a Canada (or a provincial thing).

Parts of Québec still use it. Montréal extensively, and I've seen it recently in Gatineau as well.

The other most noticeable difference from North American signing conventions is that Québec will usually post signs showing the obligatory movements at an intersection instead of the prohibited ones. (Green circle around a movement) means that a movement is obligatory. So instead of posting a (red cross through left turn) sign, Québec usually posts a (green circle around straight/right arrow) sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 12:06:37 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 20, 2018, 11:26:36 PM
Does Canada still use the fast flashing green for permissive left turns?  I remember that was common in Hamilton in 1984 and saw one in Niagara Falls in 1995 also.  So I assume it was a Canada (or a provincial thing).

BC and Alberta use flashing green protected arrows (BC only when the left turn has a permissive phase). Always a bi-modal 4-section setup. Except for a few 5-section "towers" in Alberta.

I believe Ontario uses solid green arrows for all circumstances; BC uses solid green arrows but only when the left turn doesn't have a permissive phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 21, 2018, 12:12:06 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 20, 2018, 11:44:48 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 20, 2018, 11:26:36 PM
Does Canada still use the fast flashing green for permissive left turns?  I remember that was common in Hamilton in 1984 and saw one in Niagara Falls in 1995 also.  So I assume it was a Canada (or a provincial thing).

Parts of Québec still use it. Montréal extensively, and I've seen it recently in Gatineau as well.

The other most noticeable difference from North American signing conventions is that Québec will usually post signs showing the obligatory movements at an intersection instead of the prohibited ones. (Green circle around a movement) means that a movement is obligatory. So instead of posting a (red cross through left turn) sign, Québec usually posts a (green circle around straight/right arrow) sign.
Yeah I saw it in Ontario come to think of it.  Another thing that Canada does is leave out Railroad Crossing on the crossbuck but use an orange border and plain white X.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 12:57:35 AM
A few regions/counties in Ontario still use the flashing green arrow, but not many. Most are solid. As far as 12-8-8 (30-20-20) signals, MTO no longer installs them, but some counties/regions continue to. Since several counties/regions/single-tier municipalities maintain every signal in their jurisdiction, we're still seeing new 12-8-8s, even at exit ramps and on provincially-maintained highways.

New Brunswick is flashing. That caught me by surprise when I was out there in 2016.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 01:44:39 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 12:57:35 AM
New Brunswick is flashing. That caught me by surprise when I was out there in 2016.

I want to say that Ontario is the lone user of solid green arrows in bi-modal displays. Unless you've seen it in Quebec? I see (reading above) that the flashing green arrows are pretty common over there.

Pretty sure MB uses the flashing green arrow as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 02:30:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 01:44:39 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 12:57:35 AM
New Brunswick is flashing. That caught me by surprise when I was out there in 2016.

I want to say that Ontario is the lone user of solid green arrows in bi-modal displays. Unless you've seen it in Quebec? I see (reading above) that the flashing green arrows are pretty common over there.

Pretty sure MB uses the flashing green arrow as well.

In Canada? I think so. I haven't seen one elsewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 03:13:10 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 02:30:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 01:44:39 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 12:57:35 AM
New Brunswick is flashing. That caught me by surprise when I was out there in 2016.

I want to say that Ontario is the lone user of solid green arrows in bi-modal displays. Unless you've seen it in Quebec? I see (reading above) that the flashing green arrows are pretty common over there.

Pretty sure MB uses the flashing green arrow as well.

In Canada? I think so. I haven't seen one elsewhere.

Yeah. I've always thought that, if the green and yellow arrows are going to share a single face, one should be differentiated by more than just color. A flashing green arrow, IMO, is brilliant. Surprised that Ontario doesn't utilise it (anymore?). I would love to see the option here in the US. Though, with the advent of the FYA, I doubt any additional research into traditional yield-on-green signals is warranted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 21, 2018, 09:43:49 AM
Sideways signals done the right way!
The indications of a horizontal 5-section head in Wisconsin or Illinois, in order of appearance:

From a red light...

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1769/43051167742_6690c15566_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28AhuhN)
IL-CWL-01-1 (https://flic.kr/p/28AhuhN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

The leading left turn arrow appears...

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/921/29228809348_187e678891_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LwRhGL)
IL-CWL-01-2 (https://flic.kr/p/LwRhGL) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

The yellow arrow appears to signal the end of the left turning phase...

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1785/42382854744_bd48f4a85d_z.jpg)
(https://flic.kr/p/27zed7U)IL-CWL-01-3 (https://flic.kr/p/27zed7U) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

And the light turns green, in this case slightly before the oncoming traffic gets their green light.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/915/43051165052_3708e35b04_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28Ahtuq)
IL-CWL-01-4 (https://flic.kr/p/28Ahtuq) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

This is when there's a leading left turn (99.5% of intersections in Illinois do this), and the sections are ordered in the correct sequence from left to right.  If the green ball is still in the center, you're doing it wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 21, 2018, 12:44:41 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 21, 2018, 09:43:49 AM
Sideways signals done the right way!
The indications of a horizontal 5-section head in Wisconsin or Illinois, in order of appearance:

From a red light...

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1769/43051167742_6690c15566_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28AhuhN)
IL-CWL-01-1 (https://flic.kr/p/28AhuhN) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

The leading left turn arrow appears...

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/921/29228809348_187e678891_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LwRhGL)
IL-CWL-01-2 (https://flic.kr/p/LwRhGL) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

The yellow arrow appears to signal the end of the left turning phase...

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1785/42382854744_bd48f4a85d_z.jpg)
(https://flic.kr/p/27zed7U)IL-CWL-01-3 (https://flic.kr/p/27zed7U) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

And the light turns green, in this case slightly before the oncoming traffic gets their green light.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/915/43051165052_3708e35b04_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28Ahtuq)
IL-CWL-01-4 (https://flic.kr/p/28Ahtuq) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

This is when there's a leading left turn (99.5% of intersections in Illinois do this), and the sections are ordered in the correct sequence from left to right.  If the green ball is still in the center, you're doing it wrong.
NY does their horizontal signals this way as well and I've never seen a five section horizontal signal with green ball in the middle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 21, 2018, 01:54:48 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 21, 2018, 12:44:41 PM
]NY does their horizontal signals this way as well and I've never seen a five section horizontal signal with green ball in the middle.
A green ball in the middle is appropriate when right turn arrows are used.  R-Y-G-YA-GA, though this arrangement is used a lot less frequently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 02:56:53 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 21, 2018, 01:54:48 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 21, 2018, 12:44:41 PM
]NY does their horizontal signals this way as well and I've never seen a five section horizontal signal with green ball in the middle.

A green ball in the middle is appropriate when right turn arrows are used. R-Y-G-YA-GA, though this arrangement is used a lot less frequently.

It's normal in most western states to have the R-Y-G-YA-GA (5-section tower) setup on the right mast for right turn overlap phasing (right turn filters). WA uses many 4-section (bi-modal) signals for the job, but CA, AZ, NV, NM, CO, IL, WI, MN, IA, NE, and SD all use 5-section towers on the right with the green ball in the middle (as you'd expect) for this purpose.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 21, 2018, 03:05:12 PM
I should note, for those who aren't aware:  The reason I posted these signals is because horizontal signal heads are NEVER used in Illinois, except in extremely rare circumstances.  So for Illinoisans, this is a really special case.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 21, 2018, 05:41:10 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 21, 2018, 12:44:41 PM
NY does their horizontal signals this way as well and I've never seen a five section horizontal signal with green ball in the middle.

Here is an example of a 5 light horizontal signal in NY.

Although this was installed relatively recently as a replacement to an older signal, supposedly it is going away as a reconfiguration of the associated parkway exit

NY-231

https://goo.gl/maps/zHLzMa2Dowp
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 21, 2018, 09:37:22 PM
I hadn't realized 'til now that the MUTCD spec for horizontal signals is different for heads with left vs. right turn arrows. With left-turn arrows, the green ball is at the right end of the head. But with right-turn arrows it's in the middle. Anyone know why the difference? You'd think it would be the same for both or at least I thought so....

Also that Illinois signal pictured above is probably next to an airport, judging from the low height of the street lamps. Maybe that's the reason for the rare horizontal heads too, though you wouldn't think that would make any difference to low-flying planes. They don't fly that low!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 21, 2018, 09:38:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 21, 2018, 01:44:39 AM
Quote from: cl94 on July 21, 2018, 12:57:35 AM
New Brunswick is flashing. That caught me by surprise when I was out there in 2016.

I want to say that Ontario is the lone user of solid green arrows in bi-modal displays. Unless you've seen it in Quebec? I see (reading above) that the flashing green arrows are pretty common over there.

Pretty sure MB uses the flashing green arrow as well.

I should have elaborated. Older installations in QC actually use a flashing green ball indication on every signal to indicate a protected left. I don't believe installations with arrows generally flash in the province.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 21, 2018, 09:42:07 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 21, 2018, 09:37:22 PM
I hadn't realized 'til now that the MUTCD spec for horizontal signals is different for heads with left vs. right turn arrows. With left-turn arrows, the green ball is at the right end of the head. But with right-turn arrows it's in the middle. Anyone know why the difference? You'd think it would be the same for both or at least I thought so....
I believe that it is because the left-turning traffic is to the left of through traffic, that the left arrows are to the left of the green ball, anf the right-turning traffic is to the right of through traffic.  Similar the the placement of arrows on a doghouse signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 23, 2018, 08:41:41 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 21, 2018, 09:37:22 PM
I hadn't realized 'til now that the MUTCD spec for horizontal signals is different for heads with left vs. right turn arrows. With left-turn arrows, the green ball is at the right end of the head. But with right-turn arrows it's in the middle. Anyone know why the difference? You'd think it would be the same for both or at least I thought so....

I too would love some guidance on why this is.  Maybe the MUTCD is more particular about the left-turn sideways towers than the right-turn ones because right-turn arrows are more of an auxiliary addition to most intersections?

Quote from: SignBridge on July 21, 2018, 09:37:22 PM
Also that Illinois signal pictured above is probably next to an airport, judging from the low height of the street lamps. Maybe that's the reason for the rare horizontal heads too, though you wouldn't think that would make any difference to low-flying planes. They don't fly that low!

You're absolutely right!  Further protrusions upward into the sky require a small red light to be attached to the end (see the street lamps in the pictures), per aviation guidelines.  Attaching a small red light to the top of a traffic signal head would be, well, confusing to say the least for drivers!!  :-D
And it's not even just the proximity to the airport that's a problem...One of the airport runways leads DIRECTLY toward the intersection home to this signal.  Here's the location on google maps; note the location and orientation of the runway.  https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5147573,-88.1724664,16.62z
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 23, 2018, 09:31:49 PM
Well paul, I think Big John got it pretty much correct in his post above. The arrows are placed on the turning side of the green-ball. Makes sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 23, 2018, 09:41:17 PM
^^
I think that's the best explanation. Same reason doghouses will have the arrows on the left or right side, depending on whether the doghouse is being used for a right or left turn. Might seem inconsistent, but it keeps the arrows on the correct side of the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 24, 2018, 07:29:16 PM
How would FYA be done in a horizontal configuration?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 24, 2018, 08:07:54 PM
^^

Section 4D.10 2009 MUTCD:

03 The relative positions of signal sections in a horizontally-arranged signal face, from left to right, shall be as follows:

    CIRCULAR RED
    Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
    Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
    CIRCULAR YELLOW
    Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Left-turn GREEN ARROW
    CIRCULAR GREEN
    Straight-through GREEN ARROW
    Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Right-turn GREEN ARROW

So it would be:  RA, YA, FYA, GA (for all left or all right arrows)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 24, 2018, 10:55:25 PM
Does Dade County, FL have FYA with their use of all horizontal signals? What about Texas?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 01:50:17 AM
We have a horizontal FYA here in Seattle, in the SODO area. It operates as prescribed above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 25, 2018, 10:15:42 AM
I saw this in Durango, CO and thought it was unique:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1801/43304069081_51efdc4cc1_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28YCF3H)

And here's the other direction:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1824/28434857057_50d0588b08_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KjG5ma)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 12:53:15 PM
Interesting that both a doghouse and side-by-side signal were used on the same mast arm in photo #2. Colorado certainly loves side-by-side signals, and there's plenty of doghouses, but I've never seen two used at the same intersection (never mind same mast arm).

If there's a straight-through movement in photo #1, it is odd to see a green left arrow on the right side of the intersection. Not unprecedented; I've seen it before. But it's certainly unusual!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 26, 2018, 01:44:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 12:53:15 PM
Interesting that both a doghouse and side-by-side signal were used on the same mast arm in photo #2. Colorado certainly loves side-by-side signals, and there's plenty of doghouses, but I've never seen two used at the same intersection (never mind same mast arm).

If there's a straight-through movement in photo #1, it is odd to see a green left arrow on the right side of the intersection. Not unprecedented; I've seen it before. But it's certainly unusual!
I've seen the "side-by-side signals" referred to as "offset doghouses" before... But yea, not very often you see both on the same set-up, anywhere really...

And we used to have a set-up similar to Photo #1 here in Huntsville before, though the doghouse has since been replaced by an upside-down T signal (so I suppose it's still somewhat similar...).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 26, 2018, 02:15:12 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 26, 2018, 01:44:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 12:53:15 PM
Interesting that both a doghouse and side-by-side signal were used on the same mast arm in photo #2. Colorado certainly loves side-by-side signals, and there's plenty of doghouses, but I've never seen two used at the same intersection (never mind same mast arm).

If there's a straight-through movement in photo #1, it is odd to see a green left arrow on the right side of the intersection. Not unprecedented; I've seen it before. But it's certainly unusual!

I've seen the "side-by-side signals" referred to as "offset doghouses" before... But yea, not very often you see both on the same set-up, anywhere really...

I don't really know what to call them. I've called them something else other than side-by-side (something like your suggestion), but I got mauled by a couple of locals who insisted that "side by side" was the only appropriate term.

I personally really like them. Never been a big fan of having the red centered. Just an aesthetic preference.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What's the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 27, 2018, 04:49:14 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What's the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)

Dear God that camera quality is low
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 27, 2018, 05:21:23 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What's the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)
Old. That's an AGA/SSC signal, so likely around the 1930s:
http://kbrhorse.net/signals/ssc_4way01.html

Where is that?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 27, 2018, 06:09:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 12:53:15 PM
If there's a straight-through movement in photo #1, it is odd to see a green left arrow on the right side of the intersection. Not unprecedented; I've seen it before. But it's certainly unusual!

And possibly not MUTCD compliant either, depending on if the head on the mast arm shaft is considered a primary head or not for the left turn.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD 4D.05 Paragraph 08If supplemental signal faces are used, the following limitations shall apply:

A. Left-turn arrows and U-turn arrows to the left shall not be used in near-right signal faces.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD 4D.13 Paragraph 10If supplemental post-mounted signal faces are used, the following limitations shall apply:

A. Left-turn arrows and U-turn arrows to the left shall not be used in near-right signal faces.

The heads also look way too close to the stop bar.  Based on Streetview, (https://goo.gl/maps/ajsmRBEgVQC2) IMHO they should have used a heavier duty mast arm on the far side and mounted most of the heads on it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 08:16:47 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on July 27, 2018, 04:49:14 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What's the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)

Dear God that camera quality is low
That's like 5x on my iPhone X I was too far back and in my car
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 08:18:58 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 27, 2018, 05:21:23 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What's the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)
Old. That's an AGA/SSC signal, so likely around the 1930s:
http://kbrhorse.net/signals/ssc_4way01.html

Where is that?
In Union City on Palisades it's funny now that I think about it for whatever reason here in NJ for one way streets they will still run a 4 sized signal and you will have a signal facing the one way street.. I'm thinking police and fire go down one ways the other way?

I love the visor on that old signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 27, 2018, 08:29:08 PM
That signal head might be from the 1930's but the mast-arm is definitely newer. Probably 1960's, 'cause I remember seeing them in that area in the early 1970's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 27, 2018, 09:26:05 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 08:18:58 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 27, 2018, 05:21:23 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on July 27, 2018, 09:51:04 AM
What’s the age on this one?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180727/2594fc1e680bf8bb0fb8dd4acc1944ea.jpg)
Old. That's an AGA/SSC signal, so likely around the 1930s:
http://kbrhorse.net/signals/ssc_4way01.html

Where is that?
In Union City on Palisades it’s funny now that I think about it for whatever reason here in NJ for one way streets they will still run a 4 sized signal and you will have a signal facing the one way street.. I’m thinking police and fire go down one ways the other way?

I love the visor on that old signal
Probably for pedestrians, so they can know when to cross.

Quote from: SignBridge on July 27, 2018, 08:29:08 PM
That signal head might be from the 1930's but the mast-arm is definitely newer. Probably 1960's, 'cause I remember seeing them in that area in the early 1970's.
It was definitely re-hung at some point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 27, 2018, 11:44:07 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4469843,-83.1028171,3a,75y,267.66h,103.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKl_2ORnmzCTySPygBGVBXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Is Michigan the only state to feature these cube back lit traffic control devices on their signals?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 28, 2018, 01:45:38 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 27, 2018, 06:09:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 25, 2018, 12:53:15 PM
If there's a straight-through movement in photo #1, it is odd to see a green left arrow on the right side of the intersection. Not unprecedented; I've seen it before. But it's certainly unusual!

And possibly not MUTCD compliant either, depending on if the head on the mast arm shaft is considered a primary head or not for the left turn.
...
The heads also look way too close to the stop bar.  Based on Streetview, (https://goo.gl/maps/ajsmRBEgVQC2) IMHO they should have used a heavier duty mast arm on the far side and mounted most of the heads on it.

Looks you might be on to something. I certainly don't mind the positioning, but I'm not sure how I feel about left or right arrows being on the incorrect sides of the intersection. If only one direction is permitted, I don't see the big deal. Of course, that's not the situation here, so I'd rather the signal were just a three-head signal.

I don't think there's anything wrong with having the signals on the near-side mast. And even using the far-side mast, there's only two lanes, so it's better not to crowd the mast arm; put any extra signals on posts or masts. Unless it's a near-side overhead signal (placed behind the opposite side's primary signal faces). In this case, it's possible that far-side mast arm would have been too far from the stop line (which has to be set back due to left turn overlaps). So they just decided to push back the stop lines a bit more, and put the signals on the near side. Honestly, it's a pretty nice setup. I'm just not a fan of the left-facing arrow on the right side. That's my only issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 28, 2018, 01:52:40 AM
Found another flashing yellow arrow with a bi-modal lens. This one is in Auburn, WA. The signal faces right, towards a crosswalk. The top lens is a red orb, apparently to not mislead drivers into thinking right-on-red wasn't permitted (even though it would have been). The middle lenses are yellow arrows (solid and flashing), and the bottom is a bi-modal green/yellow arrow.

Given that the bottom lens is bi-modal, and the top a red orb, this right turn filter signal is almost a Frankenstein signal, basically being a standard 4-section right turn signal, but with two arrow displays in the middle, instead of green and yellow orbs. Literally halfway between a full-blown FYA, and a standard RYG-YA/GA signal.

Bi-modal green/yellow arrows are very common here for right-turn filter signals, so perhaps this is just their way of making the signal slightly more normal. Of course, now, Auburn has quite a few right-facing flashing yellow arrows (they appear to be the new standard for right turn lanes), though the rest are all standard operation, with the yellow arrow being used for the end of both the protected and permissive phases. Most of the others also use red arrows, instead of red orbs (since it doesn't legally matter here).

https://youtu.be/zYO_UTFHzwk
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 28, 2018, 12:16:56 PM
^So the signal has two sections for a solid yellow arrow.  Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
I do like that they tried to specify when right turning traffic has the ROW in cooperation with the crosswalk signal though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 05, 2018, 07:18:21 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 28, 2018, 12:16:56 PM
^So the signal has two sections for a solid yellow arrow.  Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
I do like that they tried to specify when right turning traffic has the ROW in cooperation with the crosswalk signal though.

It's very common over here to have a 4-section right turn filter, so I guess they just tried to morph one into a flashing yellow arrow. It is pretty cool that the signals are used from bottom to top, like with a typical green orb signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 09, 2018, 05:20:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2018, 10:13:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2018, 02:46:38 AM
This pole-mounted signal in Fife, WA is placed quite low to the ground, due to the pole being mounted slightly below ground level. The intersection is slightly elevated, but this signal pole doesn't seem to be. Oddly, the opposite direction's pole-mounted signal is mounted a bit higher than normal. Spin the GSV around a bit.

https://goo.gl/YpyDBM (Valley Ave @ Freeman Road)

(https://i.imgur.com/peQQwNc.png)

It doesn't seem that low to me. But it might not be mounted at the minimum of 8 feet from sidewalk (or the pavement grade at the center of the roadway if there is no sidewalk) to bottom of signal housing [See MUTCD 4D.15]. The other pole/mast mounted signals at that intersection seem abnormally high... 

Come to think of it, I've seen that high mast mount in a few other examples you've posted. Must be a Washington thing...? NDOT's standard plans call for a side-mounted 3-section head to be 12 feet (on center) from the bottom of the mast (note the mast arm connects at 18.5 feet on center, so the signal is about 2/3 the way up the mast). And I'm fairly certain all the local agencies use NDOT's standard plans for their signal installations.

Apologies for taking a while to respond to this.

High-mounted supplemental signals are oddly common in WA, although pole-height supplemental signals are far more common. More often than not, they are placed up high when a slip lane is signalized, and a supplemental signal is placed on the near-side mast (https://goo.gl/h1xTe5).

This placement style could be the result of our inexperience working with supplemental signals (they have become a lot more common in the last 15 years). Even on the same pole, you'll see them placed at different heights (https://goo.gl/SfTc1b). I think a similar signal in NV would have the signals aligned a bit more carefully.

In Tacoma, the signals at the 15th and Commerce St intersection had to be located on the edges of the intersection due to trolley wires. This signal is oddly reminiscent of something you might see in DC, but nevertheless, the outer signals are still placed up rather high on the masts (https://goo.gl/oyaRhy). This intersection also features a decidedly unusual [in WA] left-side green orb signal (and with a bi-modal arrow -- the protected left only activates when a train approaches from the south, to clear out waiting cars).

As you may have noticed in the link in my original post above, the far-side supplemental signal (https://goo.gl/DLf6ZP) for northbound Freeman at Valley Ave in Fife is placed way above the supplemental left turn signal for traffic going from eastbound Valley to northbound Freeman (and closer to the height of the opposite movement's supplemental turn signal, which you already pointed out).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 10, 2018, 02:09:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2018, 05:20:10 PM
In Tacoma, the signals at the 15th and Commerce St intersection had to be located on the edges of the intersection due to trolley wires. This signal is oddly reminiscent of something you might see in DC, but nevertheless, the outer signals are still placed up rather high on the masts (https://goo.gl/SfTc1b). This intersection also features a decidedly unusual [in WA] left-side green orb signal (and with a bi-modal arrow -- the protected left only activates when a train approaches from the south, to clear out waiting cars).
Might want to check that link.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 10, 2018, 03:43:31 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on August 10, 2018, 02:09:43 AM
Might want to check that link.

Whoops! I go a little link-happy, and sometimes I get lost.

https://goo.gl/oyaRhy

(I've edited my original post accordingly)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 11, 2018, 04:17:22 PM
I feel like I'm in California with this new signal in Puyallup, WA. Three through lanes, one overhead signal, one post-mounted on right. Brand new install from about three weeks ago, though it's not complete just yet (still needs some backplate work). The old installation had two overhead signals, one of which was a doghouse (mounted on the now unused tenon between the FYA and through signal).

(https://i.imgur.com/eUQZDwd.jpg)

Doesn't even compare to this signal in Spokane, though: Four/five through lanes, one overhead signal (though it is only one-way): https://goo.gl/dmbPfs

(https://i.imgur.com/fazf95h.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 12, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Found this gem in the New York Transportation Museum in Rush, NY. Looks like it's from the 1930's or 40's. The controller is inside the wooden base they made for it but i'm sure it's a really old mechanical controller.

(https://i.imgur.com/zKUwos8.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/d7lg8mF.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ulFwl84.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 12, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Found this gem in the New York Transportation Museum in Rush, NY. Looks like it's from the 1930's or 40's. The controller is inside the wooden base they made for it but i'm sure it's a really old mechanical controller.

https://i.imgur.com/zKUwos8.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/d7lg8mF.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ulFwl84.jpg

Looks the signal employed a green/amber combo before going red? Or were they just playing around? Cool stuff, man!



Lots of stuff in Spokane, WA, lately.

At this new signal in Spokane (from 2016), there is both a red arrow and red orb face on the same signal. Pretty sure that's not allowed...nor why it would be necessary. Yellow and green orbs below the signals, I believe. The only thing I can think of, is that the red arrow locks out left turns during the pedestrian phase, before disappearing. That would make it very Australian, IIRC.

https://goo.gl/kD6L5X (S Monroe (one-way SB) at Fourth Ave (one-way EB))

(https://i.imgur.com/5Rc4jCV.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on August 14, 2018, 09:02:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2018, 04:17:22 PM
(mounted on the now unused plumbizer between the FYA and through signal).

"Plumbizer"?  Are you talking about this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/KfE2Nha7UTx)?
In Illinois we usually connect to the mastarm using this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/8ARBjz4Usxo).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:34:25 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 14, 2018, 09:02:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2018, 04:17:22 PM
(mounted on the now unused plumbizer between the FYA and through signal).

"Plumbizer"?  Are you talking about this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/KfE2Nha7UTx)?
In Illinois we usually connect to the mastarm using this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/8ARBjz4Usxo).

Yes, that's what I'm referring to. My quote is actually incorrect. A "plumbizer" is only used when a signal is attached. The unused pointy bit is actually a "tenon" (thanks roadfro).

The connection used in Illinois is also used here (https://goo.gl/hdwBLz), and has become more common. But the older way (link #1) is still the most common connection type.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 14, 2018, 02:39:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:34:25 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 14, 2018, 09:02:03 AM
In Illinois we usually connect to the mastarm using this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/8ARBjz4Usxo).

The connection used in Illinois is also used here (https://goo.gl/hdwBLz), and has become more common. But the older way (link #1) is still the most common connection type.
That's an Astro-brac (IIRC).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 03:10:42 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on August 14, 2018, 02:39:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:34:25 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 14, 2018, 09:02:03 AM
In Illinois we usually connect to the mastarm using this: Connector to mastarm (https://goo.gl/maps/8ARBjz4Usxo).
The connection used in Illinois is also used here (https://goo.gl/hdwBLz), and has become more common. But the older way (link #1) is still the most common connection type.
That's an Astro-brac (IIRC).

Google image search confirms that.

They are my preferred connection type, as they allow the signal heads to be centered along the mast arm. Plumbizers are placed in between signal faces, so, technically, only 4-section towers can be truly centered.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on August 14, 2018, 06:42:44 PM
Only case of a 4 head horizontal overhead signal I've ever seen in Arizona:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/W+Olive+Ave+%26+N+El+Mirage+Rd,+El+Mirage,+AZ+85335/@33.5655141,-112.3244528,3a,75y,271.42h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sM8uYAxJvoyme7Uy05xBTdQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DM8uYAxJvoyme7Uy05xBTdQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D271.4227%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x872b4157b6a9b43b:0x754c36902d5cc0e9!8m2!3d33.5654743!4d-112.3244564

I'm pretty sure the green arrow on the overhead should be to the left of the green ball, but it's not. Don't know if it's still like that today.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 14, 2018, 08:15:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 12, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Found this gem in the New York Transportation Museum in Rush, NY. Looks like it's from the 1930's or 40's. The controller is inside the wooden base they made for it but i'm sure it's a really old mechanical controller.

https://i.imgur.com/zKUwos8.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/d7lg8mF.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ulFwl84.jpg

Looks the signal employed a green/amber combo before going red? Or were they just playing around? Cool stuff, man!
Just a sloppy controller. It didn't do that with every cycle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on August 14, 2018, 09:05:38 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 12, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Found this gem in the New York Transportation Museum in Rush, NY. Looks like it's from the 1930's or 40's. The controller is inside the wooden base they made for it but i'm sure it's a really old mechanical controller.

(https://i.imgur.com/zKUwos8.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/d7lg8mF.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ulFwl84.jpg)

The signal looks like an Eagle
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:24 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Lots of stuff in Spokane, WA, lately.

At this new signal in Spokane (from 2016), there is both a red arrow and red orb face on the same signal. Pretty sure that's not allowed...nor why it would be necessary. Yellow and green orbs below the signals, I believe. The only thing I can think of, is that the red arrow locks out left turns during the pedestrian phase, before disappearing. That would make it very Australian, IIRC.

https://goo.gl/kD6L5X (S Monroe (one-way SB) at Fourth Ave (one-way EB))

(https://i.imgur.com/5Rc4jCV.png)

I don't see anything in the national MUTCD prohibiting using a steady red arrow and circular red in the same signal head.

I seem to recall Delaware having an option in their manuals for a cluster with a steady red arrow next to a circular red for when they wanted to occasionally prohibit turns on red with a 'no turn on red arrow'.

EDIT:  Found a picture of this on Page 67 of 132 of https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf (https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf).  It's also mentioned in 4D.22 Paragraph 1A of the Delaware MUTCD (Page 53 of 118 of http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf (http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2018, 09:58:44 PM
I guess it's telling us "No Turn On Red"?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on August 14, 2018, 10:18:27 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 14, 2018, 09:58:44 PM
I guess it's telling us "No Turn On Red"?

On the contrary the arrow is simultaneously lit with the red
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2018, 10:47:42 PM
Yes, that's my point. They're using the combined red arrow and red-ball in place of a sign prohibiting a left turn on red light along with the red ball.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on August 14, 2018, 11:40:02 PM
One of the people I follow on Facebook had the following photo on their Facebook post today -- The Holy Grail of Traffic signals, IMHO.

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/39021206_10216364250200287_8474258297946374144_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=6301d1b3d0b6d03b3ac08dd93385ff6c&oe=5BF4103D)

And now the Million Dollar Question... Where is this beautiful array of traffic signals???
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 15, 2018, 01:03:10 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:24 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Lots of stuff in Spokane, WA, lately.

At this new signal in Spokane (from 2016), there is both a red arrow and red orb face on the same signal. Pretty sure that's not allowed...nor why it would be necessary. Yellow and green orbs below the signals, I believe. The only thing I can think of, is that the red arrow locks out left turns during the pedestrian phase, before disappearing. That would make it very Australian, IIRC.

https://goo.gl/kD6L5X (S Monroe (one-way SB) at Fourth Ave (one-way EB))

(https://i.imgur.com/5Rc4jCV.png)

I don't see anything in the national MUTCD prohibiting using a steady red arrow and circular red in the same signal head.

I seem to recall Delaware having an option in their manuals for a cluster with a steady red arrow next to a circular red for when they wanted to occasionally prohibit turns on red with a 'no turn on red arrow'.

EDIT:  Found a picture of this on Page 67 of 132 of https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf (https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf).  It's also mentioned in 4D.22 Paragraph 1A of the Delaware MUTCD (Page 53 of 118 of http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf (http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf)
Quote from: SignBridge on August 14, 2018, 10:47:42 PM
They're using the combined red arrow and red-ball in place of a sign prohibiting a left turn on red light along with the red ball.

Turning on a red arrow is not prohibited in Washington, so that's not it. There is a sign that prohibits turning on red, as you can see in the image, since the red arrow does not explicitly say this.



Quote from: thenetwork on August 14, 2018, 11:40:02 PM
One of the people I follow on Facebook had the following photo on their Facebook post today -- The Holy Grail of Traffic signals, IMHO.

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/39021206_10216364250200287_8474258297946374144_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=6301d1b3d0b6d03b3ac08dd93385ff6c&oe=5BF4103D)

And now the Million Dollar Question... Where is this beautiful array of traffic signals???

I think that's in the UK.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on August 15, 2018, 05:20:19 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on August 14, 2018, 11:40:02 PM
One of the people I follow on Facebook had the following photo on their Facebook post today -- The Holy Grail of Traffic signals, IMHO.

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/39021206_10216364250200287_8474258297946374144_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=6301d1b3d0b6d03b3ac08dd93385ff6c&oe=5BF4103D)

And now the Million Dollar Question... Where is this beautiful array of traffic signals???
Traffic Light Tree
5TG, Trafalgar Way, London E14 5TG, UK

https://goo.gl/maps/LNNppFVxHFE2

There you go.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 15, 2018, 08:08:37 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 14, 2018, 09:48:24 PM
I seem to recall Delaware having an option in their manuals for a cluster with a steady red arrow next to a circular red for when they wanted to occasionally prohibit turns on red with a 'no turn on red arrow'.

EDIT:  Found a picture of this on Page 67 of 132 of https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf (https://www.deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/de_mutcd/pdfs/draft/DEMUTCD_Part4_training_051611.pdf).  It's also mentioned in 4D.22 Paragraph 1A of the Delaware MUTCD (Page 53 of 118 of http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf (http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/may2018/final/MUTCDPart4HighwayTrafficSignals.pdf)

The option is rarely used, although there's one location that many people probably have passed by that does have it: US13/40 North at Boulden Blvd, which is the last traffic light prior to getting onto I-295.  In this older GSV https://goo.gl/maps/9umcsKg5SAL2 you can see the sign stating 'NO TURN ON RED ->', and the traffic light in the background is Red Ball next to Red Arrow, over Yellow Ball over Green Ball.  The Red Arrow was mostly lit when opposing traffic had a left green arrow.

However, something must've happened there - maybe a pedestrian fatality I'm guessing.  I noticed for quite a period of time the Red Ball and Red Arrow were always lit at the same time.  And the sign has now been replaced with an oversized 'NO TURN ON RED' sign.  https://goo.gl/maps/imhNCtk5GcC2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2018, 10:13:28 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on August 14, 2018, 11:40:02 PM
One of the people I follow on Facebook had the following photo on their Facebook post today -- The Holy Grail of Traffic signals, IMHO.


And now the Million Dollar Question... Where is this beautiful array of traffic signals???

A public sculpture in Poplar, London (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_Light_Tree)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 20, 2018, 10:15:42 PM
I don't think I've seen a signal with green visors but a yellow back before:  Ridge Street at Dirksen Parkway in Springfield, Illinois. (https://goo.gl/maps/aY57uPa1DgM2)

The northbound 5-Section on the trombone mast arm also has a case of disintegrating backplate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 20, 2018, 10:20:42 PM
Same thing happens to backplates here on Long Island every time NYS DOT tries using them. I don't know why they survive in the Chicago area but not in New York.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on August 21, 2018, 03:46:05 PM
Has anyone seen anything like this?  Why is the backplate severed in the middle?  This is on Eisenhower in Mason City, IA.

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1839/43218715025_2d5c78bbf9_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28R6dg4)
IMG_5923 (https://flic.kr/p/28R6dg4) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2018, 05:10:17 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 21, 2018, 03:46:05 PM
Has anyone seen anything like this?  Why is the backplate severed in the middle?  This is on Eisenhower in Mason City, IA.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1839/43218715025_2d5c78bbf9_c.jpg

Great question. The gap isn't big enough for it to have previously been attached to a 4-section signal. Maybe just broke off?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 21, 2018, 10:07:40 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 20, 2018, 10:20:42 PM
Same thing happens to backplates here on Long Island every time NYS DOT tries using them. I don't know why they survive in the Chicago area but not in New York.

Could be the type of backplate?  For some reason the Springfield District of IDOT seems to have issues with backplates falling apart:

* One near I-55 on IL 10 - IL 121 in Lincoln (https://goo.gl/maps/qdZwziNgEmk)

I've seen more than this but can't find them on Streetview so far.

There are a couple examples in Litchfield of the retroflective tape coming off:  IL 16 at Historic Route 66; (https://goo.gl/maps/uE3yXDTgF962)  IL 16 at Ohren Lane (https://goo.gl/maps/V4gNpBLT9wz).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 22, 2018, 07:13:14 PM
I notices that Gren Bay has just put yellow-bordered backplates at a couple intersections (experimental?), but the yellow lines are centered on the backplates and not on their outer edges.  Is this MUTCD compliant?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 22, 2018, 07:38:05 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 22, 2018, 07:13:14 PM
I notices that Gren Bay has just put yellow-bordered backplates at a couple intersections (experimental?), but the yellow lines are centered on the backplates and not on their outer edges.  Is this MUTCD compliant?

I don't think so. Here's the wording from the IA (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/res-ia_retroborder.htm):

Quote
Interim Approval for the use of a yellow retroreflective strip at least 25 mm (1 inch) wide and no wider than 75 mm (3 inches) around the perimeter of the face of signal backplates to project a rectangular appearance at night...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 25, 2018, 01:40:42 PM
The city of Richmond has this unique and rather peculiar setup along Broad St (US 250) where the Pulse (BRT) runs along the median, about a 3.5 mile stretch. It's at every intersection where left turns are allowed (EDIT: except for the intersection at Belvidere St (US 1/301))

The BRT signal is pretty basic, but next to it is an FYA for left turns that doesn't even function as an FYA until late at night (when The Pulse isn't in operation). During Pulse hours, there are no flashing yellows.. if you didn't catch the green in time, you have to wait for the next green.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180825/a735cbfda31486c0ff762514945eb327.jpg)

SM-S820L

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 25, 2018, 02:45:29 PM
That looks strikingly like a Utah signal, with the curved mast arm and yellow signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 25, 2018, 03:16:50 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 25, 2018, 02:45:29 PM
That looks strikingly like a Utah signal, with the curved mast arm and yellow signals.

Yeah it is a Richmond specialty of sorts to use yellow signals on curved mast arms (or on non-curved ones, either way the masts are usually dark green), though the city just started seriously using backplates on the signals about 4 years ago (many signals in the city still doesn't have backplates). This particular signal, as well as the others like this along the Pulse line, went up earlier this year.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2018, 04:18:51 PM
I think that's exactly the sort of phasing that all trolley and BRT roadways should use. The restriction makes sense during operation hours, but outside of that, it's just a nuisance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on August 25, 2018, 04:30:35 PM
Found a dual turn with flashing yellow arrows here in Indiana... Actually, it used to be a single left turn lane with FYA back in 2015...

Location: At the intersection of Allisonville Road and 146th Street in Fishers

2015:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0001966,-86.0193202,3a,75y,0.11h,89.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM8EvTcr3tEVwQF3EdEihsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

2017:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0000641,-86.0195788,3a,15y,33.03h,89.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shs0ZF6sQrZCU0AuxC3MJ4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0003383,-86.0192777,3a,75y,354.94h,89.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slTw4ChhiTboA1Z6WeXEC_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 25, 2018, 06:20:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 25, 2018, 04:18:51 PM
I think that's exactly the sort of phasing that all trolley and BRT roadways should use. The restriction makes sense during operation hours, but outside of that, it's just a nuisance.
Agreed. This is one of the few things traffic control-wise that the city got right. Other cities with similar dedicated median bus lanes should definitely follow this example (except Cleveland, who's BRT runs 24 hrs a day).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 31, 2018, 01:19:24 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 09:47:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 03:59:51 AM
Another WSDOT install that has caught my eye. I think they've gone mad!

This left turn from E Bay Street to E 27 St in Tacoma has four left turn signals, for a single-lane left turn. It's not yet activated, but here's the Street View: https://goo.gl/poa2L9

Old WSDOT would have used two overhead signals, and that's all. But they've been throwing up pole-mounted signals all over the place lately. This interchange went from none four years ago, to at least seven today (four intersections in total -- split diamond). Still work to do, but I'm more than pleased!

(https://i.imgur.com/6FGxOaw.jpg)

Hooray for post-mounts!  Though 4 signal heads for one lane is a bit excessive.  The one on the signal mast just absolutely does not need to be there, unless there's a curve in the approach to the intersection.  I'm just happy to see any DOT cover all their bases--making sure each signal has a duplicate, and making sure a signal is visible from all possible lines of sight stemming from the approach.

I feel personally struck by the crosswalk signals that just stick up straight from the poles (no hooks).  I haven't seen any signals like that in ages.

The biggest qn for me on this corner is why should there even be a signal here if the street is one way in the other way?  (Unless that's about to be changed.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 31, 2018, 01:25:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 12, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
Found this gem in the New York Transportation Museum in Rush, NY. Looks like it's from the 1930's or 40's. The controller is inside the wooden base they made for it but i'm sure it's a really old mechanical controller.

https://i.imgur.com/zKUwos8.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/d7lg8mF.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ulFwl84.jpg

Looks the signal employed a green/amber combo before going red? Or were they just playing around? Cool stuff, man!



Lots of stuff in Spokane, WA, lately.

At this new signal in Spokane (from 2016), there is both a red arrow and red orb face on the same signal. Pretty sure that's not allowed...nor why it would be necessary. Yellow and green orbs below the signals, I believe. The only thing I can think of, is that the red arrow locks out left turns during the pedestrian phase, before disappearing. That would make it very Australian, IIRC.

https://goo.gl/kD6L5X (S Monroe (one-way SB) at Fourth Ave (one-way EB))

(https://i.imgur.com/5Rc4jCV.png)

You are correct about this being a specialized signal for what is known as leading pedestrian interval.  When you first get the green, they want to prohibit turns so that pedestrians can get a head start.  So you will see a green ball with a red left arrow at the beginning of the pedestrian phase.  Once, the pedestrians have made it into the intersection (however many seconds the engineers feel is appropriate) the red arrow vanishes and you are left with a standard green ball controlling the left turn - essentially, yield to pedestrians when turning.

(This is far better than what is typcially (cheaply) done for LPI:  start the walk signal a few seconds ahead of the green ball.  There is no reason to keep the non-turning traffic waiting when the non-turning traffic does not conflict with pedestrians.)

There is a similar signal in Downtown LA.  GSV captured it with green ball and red arrow simultaneously.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462706,-118.2629353,3a,75y,98.5h,79.2t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sru2usup5nXYFNSmiMiP4gg!2e0!5s20150801T000000!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dru2usup5nXYFNSmiMiP4gg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D346.64047%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 31, 2018, 10:56:40 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 31, 2018, 01:19:24 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 13, 2018, 09:47:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2018, 03:59:51 AM
Another WSDOT install that has caught my eye. I think they've gone mad!

This left turn from E Bay Street to E 27 St in Tacoma has four left turn signals, for a single-lane left turn. It's not yet activated, but here's the Street View: https://goo.gl/poa2L9

Old WSDOT would have used two overhead signals, and that's all. But they've been throwing up pole-mounted signals all over the place lately. This interchange went from none four years ago, to at least seven today (four intersections in total -- split diamond). Still work to do, but I'm more than pleased!

(https://i.imgur.com/6FGxOaw.jpg)

Hooray for post-mounts!  Though 4 signal heads for one lane is a bit excessive.  The one on the signal mast just absolutely does not need to be there, unless there's a curve in the approach to the intersection.  I'm just happy to see any DOT cover all their bases--making sure each signal has a duplicate, and making sure a signal is visible from all possible lines of sight stemming from the approach.

I feel personally struck by the crosswalk signals that just stick up straight from the poles (no hooks).  I haven't seen any signals like that in ages.

The biggest qn for me on this corner is why should there even be a signal here if the street is one way in the other way?  (Unless that's about to be changed.)

Will be a two-way street soon. Maybe already (I'm out of town).

Quote from: mrsman on August 31, 2018, 01:25:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2018, 02:44:38 AM
Lots of stuff in Spokane, WA, lately.

At this new signal in Spokane (from 2016), there is both a red arrow and red orb face on the same signal. Pretty sure that's not allowed...nor why it would be necessary. Yellow and green orbs below the signals, I believe. The only thing I can think of, is that the red arrow locks out left turns during the pedestrian phase, before disappearing. That would make it very Australian, IIRC.

https://goo.gl/kD6L5X (S Monroe (one-way SB) at Fourth Ave (one-way EB))

(https://i.imgur.com/5Rc4jCV.png)

You are correct about this being a specialized signal for what is known as leading pedestrian interval.  When you first get the green, they want to prohibit turns so that pedestrians can get a head start.  So you will see a green ball with a red left arrow at the beginning of the pedestrian phase.  Once, the pedestrians have made it into the intersection (however many seconds the engineers feel is appropriate) the red arrow vanishes and you are left with a standard green ball controlling the left turn - essentially, yield to pedestrians when turning.

(This is far better than what is typcially (cheaply) done for LPI:  start the walk signal a few seconds ahead of the green ball.  There is no reason to keep the non-turning traffic waiting when the non-turning traffic does not conflict with pedestrians.)

There is a similar signal in Downtown LA.  GSV captured it with green ball and red arrow simultaneously.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462706,-118.2629353,3a,75y,98.5h,79.2t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sru2usup5nXYFNSmiMiP4gg!2e0!5s20150801T000000!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dru2usup5nXYFNSmiMiP4gg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D346.64047%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192


Thank you very much for the explanation. Makes perfect sense. Very helpful for a shared lane situation (such as this Spokane situation) where a dedicated turn signal would be odd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on September 11, 2018, 01:21:13 PM


And nice find with that 3M 8 inch PV adapter on it! Not too many of those in service.
[/quote]

They installed them on all (pole-mounted) traffic signals in Anaheim in the late 70s (most have since been replaced with 12-12-12 signals). I'm actually not sure what their purpose was (maybe so only oncoming traffic would see the green signal?).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 15, 2018, 02:23:28 PM
The off-ramp from southbound 5 to Disneyland Dr/West St has two post-mounted signals directly over one-another. Took me a while to figure out why, but after I looked closer, I noticed the bottom signal was angled towards the off-ramp from the general purpose lanes, and the top signal angled towards the HOV off-ramp. This is noticeable in street view (https://goo.gl/S8UXd4). The off-ramps come together shortly before the triple left turn.

(https://i.imgur.com/tj3DuNr.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 15, 2018, 07:39:33 PM
I saw one similar to that in San Diego where there was a curved approach. Two heads on the same near-right post, one angled towards the stop-line and the other angled towards vehicles coming around the curve.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on September 16, 2018, 12:52:35 AM
Saw a similar double-mount when I was in Johnson Creek, WI the other week: https://goo.gl/maps/gdBum3WoWaw (https://goo.gl/maps/gdBum3WoWaw)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 16, 2018, 02:30:32 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 15, 2018, 07:39:33 PM
I saw one similar to that in San Diego where there was a curved approach. Two heads on the same near-right post, one angled towards the stop-line and the other angled towards vehicles coming around the curve.

Yet more proof that California is "on it" when it comes to signals.

Quote from: DaBigE on September 16, 2018, 12:52:35 AM
Saw a similar double-mount when I was in Johnson Creek, WI the other week: https://goo.gl/maps/gdBum3WoWaw (https://goo.gl/maps/gdBum3WoWaw)

I like it! Perhaps redundant, but at least there's two through signals on the near-side (only way to do that without using "yield on green" PPLT signals). This setup, and the one I posted above, remind me a bit of some of the setups in other countries (South Africa (https://youtu.be/b8jO0b4wXfk), for example (jump to 2:07)). I personally would prefer, in the Wisconsin example, for one of the signals to be on the far right corner, but at least there's plenty of redundancy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 20, 2018, 08:39:49 PM
This right turn signal in Federal Way, WA accidentally displays both red and green arrows simultaneously. When the parallel left turn has a green arrow, the right turn green arrow comes on while the red arrow is still displayed. The parallel left turn (FYA) is lagging, so the malfunction does not pop up very often

https://youtu.be/Cdb6VwedT5w
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 20, 2018, 09:34:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 20, 2018, 08:39:49 PM
This right turn signal in Federal Way, WA accidentally displays both red and green arrows simultaneously. When the parallel left turn has a green arrow, the right turn green arrow comes on while the red arrow is still displayed. The parallel left turn (FYA) is lagging, so the malfunction does not pop up very often

https://youtu.be/Cdb6VwedT5w
Your use of "parallel" confused me for a second, as I was expecting the adjacent left. Had to watching and read again to make sure I was understanding. (Not sure what the best term would be instead..."complementary"?)

But yeah, that's a problem–definite MUTCD taboo. (If they were a circular reds instead of right red arrows, it'd be a non-issue.) I wonder if the controller was programmed incorrectly or if arrows were incorrectly installed... I'm assuming you've notified the maintaining agency.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 20, 2018, 11:26:00 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 20, 2018, 09:34:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 20, 2018, 08:39:49 PM
This right turn signal in Federal Way, WA accidentally displays both red and green arrows simultaneously. When the parallel left turn has a green arrow, the right turn green arrow comes on while the red arrow is still displayed. The parallel left turn (FYA) is lagging, so the malfunction does not pop up very often

https://youtu.be/Cdb6VwedT5w
Your use of "parallel" confused me for a second, as I was expecting the adjacent left. Had to watching and read again to make sure I was understanding. (Not sure what the best term would be instead..."complementary"?)

I've never known which term to use. I adopted "parallel" as the right turn path and left turn path parallel each other, but it's not a perfect term. I like "complementary".

Quote from: roadfro on September 20, 2018, 09:34:39 PM
But yeah, that's a problem–definite MUTCD taboo. (If they were a circular reds instead of right red arrows, it'd be a non-issue.) I wonder if the controller was programmed incorrectly or if arrows were incorrectly installed... I'm assuming you've notified the maintaining agency.

I assume the programming was adopted from other installations, where the top signal is a red orb, but they didn't realize that there was no orb here. Of course, here in Washington, right facing red arrows are quite common, as there's no right turn restriction with them. Most agencies don't think to exclude them as a result.

Honestly, I have not contacted the city of Federal Way. It's been this way for quite a while; at least a year. I've been trying to get a video of it for a while. Now that I've got the video, I think I should do my civic duty and let them know.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 02:31:14 AM
Anyone got a clue as to what's going on here? N Lakewood Blvd @ E Conant St, Long Beach, CA (https://goo.gl/Ru4A99).

There's a two-lens traffic signal pointing off in a seemingly-random direction, attached to the same pole as a supplemental oncoming left turn signal. I have seen signals facing away from traffic before, but only as a way to alert police to the state of the traffic signal (such as at a ramp meters). That doesn't seem to be the case here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on October 01, 2018, 10:25:29 AM
Hazarding a guess...On the overhead shot, it looks like it was pointing to an old bus station/bus stop and the light was used as a "timer" for the buses to let them know they could leave the station, or was an indicator to the buses what was happening at the intersection's lights -- who had the green.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 02:21:33 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 01, 2018, 10:25:29 AM
Hazarding a guess...On the overhead shot, it looks like it was pointing to an old bus station/bus stop and the light was used as a "timer" for the buses to let them know they could leave the station, or was an indicator to the buses what was happening at the intersection's lights -- who had the green.

So, that old section of pavement that Lakewood and Conant intersect was basically a taxi-way between the former McDonnell Douglas/Boeing factory (NE corner), and the Long Beach Airport (SW corner). It's possible that the signal was for ground crew, when planes were using the crossing. In a way, you are kind of on to something.

Here's a shot of the crossing in action:

(https://i.imgur.com/AvDM9h2.jpg)
Image from Long Beach Airport Twitter

Note that this image shows the old signal, which was replaced in the early 2000s with a newer signal which still had to accommodate planes (which used the crossing for some time after that).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 01, 2018, 02:43:06 PM
Wow an at grade taxiway.  Impressive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 05:36:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 01, 2018, 02:43:06 PM
Wow an at grade taxiway.  Impressive.

There's not very many of them. The only other one I knew of in CA was down at the San Diego Airport (now closed off): https://goo.gl/qSui7J

AK has quite a few, and there's at least one in WA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 01, 2018, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 05:36:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 01, 2018, 02:43:06 PM
Wow an at grade taxiway.  Impressive.

There's not very many of them. The only other one I knew of in CA was down at the San Diego Airport (now closed off): https://goo.gl/qSui7J

AK has quite a few, and there's at least one in WA.

At-grade runway, Gibraltar: https://goo.gl/maps/dfAfvrH5YZw
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 08:02:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 01, 2018, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 01, 2018, 05:36:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 01, 2018, 02:43:06 PM
Wow an at grade taxiway.  Impressive.

There's not very many of them*. The only other one I knew of in CA was down at the San Diego Airport (now closed off): https://goo.gl/qSui7J

AK has quite a few, and there's at least one in WA.

At-grade runway, Gibraltar: https://goo.gl/maps/dfAfvrH5YZw

*In the US. I should have been more specific. That Gibraltar example is pretty cool, though. I've seen it before, yet it never ceases to amaze me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 02, 2018, 08:53:17 AM
A couple of crossings in Seattle (non-signalized)

https://goo.gl/maps/gNpPpDHRD7r

https://goo.gl/maps/R2Y46uGpJ952
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 02, 2018, 12:07:52 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 02, 2018, 08:53:17 AM
A couple of crossings in Seattle (non-signalized)

https://goo.gl/maps/gNpPpDHRD7r

https://goo.gl/maps/R2Y46uGpJ952

I guess that makes sense, with the museum being right there. Odd they never bothered to install a warning sign. Though I seem to recall crossings being a rather big deal when they do finally happen, so I guess there's no point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 07, 2018, 05:45:19 PM
In a long gone era, there was also one in Orange County.  What is now the Great Park was once MCAS El Toro.  In the WWII era, when they first hastily built the air station, they had a traffic signal to stop traffic along US 101 - Trabuco Road - for planes to use the runway.  As the area became suburbanized post-war, and when the freeway was built south of the Air Station, they closed the routing of Trabuco Road through the base.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on October 08, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
Charles City, Iowa, has a couple signals of note:

* This one on US 18 (https://goo.gl/maps/NZ76v4ux9zx) appears to be mainly for pedestrians- I'm guessing the side street indications alternate between flashing red and steady red?

* At the US 18/IA 14 intersection, (https://goo.gl/maps/WTn1nsptp6A2) southbound has one head for each movement with all arrows, including the straight movement.


There's also a couple five-sections on IA 122 on the west side of Mason City that are odd - time of day phasing prior to flashing yellow arrows? (https://goo.gl/maps/aCcQgdJ68XD2)

(Edited to fix link)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 08, 2018, 08:24:20 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 08, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
There's also a couple five-sections on IA 122 on the west side of Mason City that are odd - time of day phasing prior to flashing yellow arrows?

Your link was a duplicate of your second link, but I think I found what you're talking about: https://goo.gl/kECCmA

I have seen such displays a couple of times, in both Colorado and Washington. In Colorado, they were time-of-day "yield on green" signals, and the very few in Washington were former "yield on green" signals that had their faces changed out to permanently run in protected-only mode.

Example from WA: https://goo.gl/FbGs2S (cannot find an example in CO at the moment, but I assure you, there's some).

As for your first link, that's just bizarre. No idea what prompted that sort of creativity. And your second link isn't compliant with the 2009 MUTCD, despite being installed after its release.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 08, 2018, 10:54:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2018, 08:24:20 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 08, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
There's also a couple five-sections on IA 122 on the west side of Mason City that are odd - time of day phasing prior to flashing yellow arrows?

Your link was a duplicate of your second link, but I think I found what you're talking about: https://goo.gl/kECCmA

LOL I actually a took a picture of this EXACT signal so I could ask the people in this thread what the hell is going on with it.  That's a crazy coincidence.

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1820/43218704495_4249de8ce8_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28R6a8v)
IMG_5924 (https://flic.kr/p/28R6a8v) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

So anyway, yeah, wtf is this thing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 09, 2018, 01:02:06 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 08, 2018, 10:54:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2018, 08:24:20 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 08, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
There's also a couple five-sections on IA 122 on the west side of Mason City that are odd - time of day phasing prior to flashing yellow arrows?

Your link was a duplicate of your second link, but I think I found what you're talking about: https://goo.gl/kECCmA

LOL I actually a took a picture of this EXACT signal so I could ask the people in this thread what the hell is going on with it.  That's a crazy coincidence.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1820/43218704495_4249de8ce8_c.jpg

So anyway, yeah, wtf is this thing?

I'm putting my money on "converted yield-on-green signal". I've seen 5-section FYAs, but the top two faces were always double red arrows. Street View suggests the bottom two faces are arrows, and the two above that are orbs, which would fit this right in line with my train of thought.

It could still operate based on time-of-day, but it's odd they wouldn't swap out the green orb for a flashing yellow arrow, since every other display is an arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 11:45:05 AM
This has been up for a few years, but I'm questioning it now.  One head for each lane, including the BAT lane on the right, but the BAT lane additionally has a transit-only signal. https://goo.gl/maps/Xx8YmcXUoK92 The queue jump is for the Metro 102 and 169 for making a quick left lane change for turning into the South Renton Park & Ride, though most drivers try to make the lane changes before the light.

Non-transit traffic shoudln't be going straight through on the BAT lane, so they don't need a non-transit light, except for drivers who never turn right on red.  I guess more is better for visibility, but this seems redundant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 09, 2018, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 11:45:05 AM
This has been up for a few years, but I'm questioning it now.  One head for each lane, including the BAT lane on the right, but the BAT lane additionally has a transit-only signal. https://goo.gl/maps/Xx8YmcXUoK92 The queue jump is for the Metro 102 and 169 for making a quick left lane change for turning into the South Renton Park & Ride, though most drivers try to make the lane changes before the light.

Non-transit traffic shoudln't be going straight through on the BAT lane, so they don't need a non-transit light, except for drivers who never turn right on red.  I guess more is better for visibility, but this seems redundant.

I wouldn't say it's unusual to have a green orb over every lane, including those that exclusively turn right. Maybe their original plan was for that right lane to be HOV instead of bus-only.

I do know the transit signal couldn't over the lane, as they wouldn't want to confuse drivers who might be able to see it from the middle lane. Would have been a gap, then, between the middle lane's signal and the transit signal. I think placing the through signals on the lane lines would have been superior, rather than signal-per-lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 09, 2018, 05:10:55 PM
^^ Yes they do:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmovabilityaustin.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F04%2FScreen-shot-2016-04-06-at-1.10.53-PM.png&hash=bc3771d37eda5dcec4d222a0c9069fe58015307a)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on October 10, 2018, 09:47:43 AM
Have them in the Albany, NY area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 10, 2018, 04:20:36 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)


What about these weird boxes that light up when the train is crossing
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1410753,-75.116411,3a,75y,337.11h,97.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNDtKRatydBkq9-BBwCXiqg!2e0!5s20171101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 10, 2018, 04:41:54 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 10, 2018, 04:20:36 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)


What about these weird boxes that light up when the train is crossing
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1410753,-75.116411,3a,75y,337.11h,97.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNDtKRatydBkq9-BBwCXiqg!2e0!5s20171101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0


??  What I see is not a traffic signal, nor is it specifically for buses or streetcars.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)

The light rail in Baltimore has transit signals for the top and bottom indications, but there is no central triangle indication. 
https://goo.gl/maps/mAPiENxRXJG2

SF Muni has similar two-section signal heads along King Street, but the top indication is red. https://goo.gl/maps/jUPT9mWQ5452
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2018, 04:05:22 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)

The light rail in Baltimore has transit signals for the top and bottom indications, but there is no central triangle indication. 
https://goo.gl/maps/mAPiENxRXJG2

SF Muni has similar two-section signal heads along King Street, but the top indication is red. https://goo.gl/maps/jUPT9mWQ5452

The one's I'm familiar with in Tacoma are closer in relation to the SF version, but use amber and white: https://goo.gl/MsQehp (I believe these are the standard indications, and might be the same used in Baltimore, just with a different signal face style)

It's possible those signals in SF are actually amber, but appear red on Street View. From several angles, the signals in Tacoma look red, but I know from seeing them in person, they're amber.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on October 11, 2018, 08:29:14 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)

The light rail in Baltimore has transit signals for the top and bottom indications, but there is no central triangle indication. 
https://goo.gl/maps/mAPiENxRXJG2

SF Muni has similar two-section signal heads along King Street, but the top indication is red. https://goo.gl/maps/jUPT9mWQ5452

Salt Lake City's light rail (TRAX) uses indications just like those used in Baltimore. https://goo.gl/maps/1vY4JCyisyv
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 11, 2018, 10:30:13 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As I've said before about such signals, the poles are probably aluminum.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 10:43:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 11, 2018, 10:30:13 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As I've said before about such signals, the poles are probably aluminum.
It still amazes me how they don't have a spec of rust after being up for several decades

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on October 11, 2018, 10:53:29 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 10:43:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 11, 2018, 10:30:13 PM
As I've said before about such signals, the poles are probably aluminum.
It still amazes me how they don't have a spec of rust after being up for several decades

Aluminum doesn't rust.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2018, 11:06:50 PM
The bottom edges of the mast arm seem to be showing evidence of corrosion, which would indicate aluminum.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 11:08:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 11, 2018, 11:06:50 PM
The bottom edges of the mast arm seem to be showing evidence of corrosion, which would indicate aluminum.
Pretty neat, more places should use aluminum poles. Yeah, I do notice some corrosion on the edges of the mast-arms

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 11, 2018, 11:08:30 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I've noticed poles in Renton that were painted by the city in silver paint, to spiff them up a bit.  Even more impressive, after I left the city a few years, I noticed the poles supporting the high-tension Seattle City Light power transmission lines were painted from sky blue to grey.  That must have been an impressive task to prevent overspray and to avoid touching the lines.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on October 12, 2018, 02:07:51 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)

The light rail in Baltimore has transit signals for the top and bottom indications, but there is no central triangle indication. 
https://goo.gl/maps/mAPiENxRXJG2

SF Muni has similar two-section signal heads along King Street, but the top indication is red. https://goo.gl/maps/jUPT9mWQ5452
The top signal for Baltimore has two indications, the vertical line and a diagonal line instead of a triangle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on October 15, 2018, 01:51:56 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I've been told in the past that the poles are stainless steel, but that could very well be wrong. Lower Merion Township has been using them for decades, and continue to use them to this day (here's an intersection with them that's been installed within the last 7 years or so (https://goo.gl/maps/rh2Bk4sttDP2)). Those linked in the GSV you attached look to be that of 1970's PennDOT specs, so the signals are likely original to the poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 15, 2018, 10:37:59 PM
Quote from: Ian on October 15, 2018, 01:51:56 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I've been told in the past that the poles are stainless steel, but that could very well be wrong. Lower Merion Township has been using them for decades, and continue to use them to this day (here's an intersection with them that's been installed within the last 7 years or so (https://goo.gl/maps/rh2Bk4sttDP2)). Those linked in the GSV you attached look to be that of 1970's PennDOT specs, so the signals are likely original to the poles.
I've also heard that Lower Merion tends to recycle signal heads. A while ago, I. E-Mailed some guy who works for PennDOT, he says he's not sure, since the signals were done before his time. Wilimington Deleware actually used the same type of pole. Yeah, the old school PennDOT specs are visible, the signals are likely original.

The photo attached was shot in Wilmington Deleware, shot during the Late 1970's. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181016/3ef475c902f80cac84d3ba26527f1ca7.jpg)


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 16, 2018, 01:38:11 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 11:08:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 11, 2018, 11:06:50 PM
The bottom edges of the mast arm seem to be showing evidence of corrosion, which would indicate aluminum.
Pretty neat, more places should use aluminum poles. Yeah, I do notice some corrosion on the edges of the mast-arms

They used to.  The problem is, the price of aluminum is much, much higher than that of steel.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 17, 2018, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy
God that signal looks extremely confusing, I don't understand how a red arrow and a green arrow can be lit simotanuesly while directing ongoing traffic.

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 17, 2018, 07:15:38 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 17, 2018, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy

God that signal looks extremely confusing, I don't understand how a red arrow and a green arrow can be lit simotanuesly while directing ongoing traffic.

It's not unprecedented. I've seen something similar in Illinois.

Three examples in WA where exclusive arrows are used with option lanes:

1) Westbound E Broadway @ I-90, Spokane (https://goo.gl/2Dfx6q) (#2 lane must wait for green to proceed straight from that lane)
2) Southbound 101 @ Boone St, Aberdeen (https://goo.gl/6WxFy3) (#2 lane must wait for green orb to proceed straight from that lane)
3) Westbound James St @ I-5, Seattle (https://goo.gl/w3QMSB) (Lagging FYA is used at this location, so it works far better (no red arrow phase except at end))

#3 is the only acceptable use of such a setup, in my opinion. None are like US-89's example, which looks to be a continuous green-T like my second example. If option lanes are to be used at double turn locations, permissive movements really should be allowed. As most of these are T-intersections, that shouldn't necessarily be dangerous.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 18, 2018, 04:36:58 PM
A new SafeTran signal was just installed in Kent, Washington. Modification of a protected left, into a flashing yellow arrow. You can see that the bottom face is newer.

This is by a mile the newest SafeTran that I know of.

(https://i.imgur.com/LluR7Sf.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 18, 2018, 04:54:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 18, 2018, 04:36:58 PM
A new SafeTran signal was just installed in Kent, Washington. Modification of a protected left, into a flashing yellow arrow. You can see that the bottom face is newer.

This is by a mile the newest SafeTran that I know of.

(https://i.imgur.com/LluR7Sf.jpg)
Safetran heads ended production years ago, what you're seeing may be a recycled signal head

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 18, 2018, 05:14:59 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 18, 2018, 04:54:22 PM
Safetran heads ended production years ago, what you're seeing may be a recycled signal head

That would make sense. I know the brand name is owned by Econolite, but I didn't think they still made signals anymore. No idea how they got their hands on a recycled head. That's a very unusual sight around here. I have seen button back signals converted to flashing yellow arrows, but the signal faces were simply swapped out to create a three head FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 19, 2018, 09:50:03 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy

Move a little to the left and the bottom section of the 4 section signal is lit up as a green left arrow. Im guessing the one above that is a yellow left arrow. The 2 section with the straight arrow is probably something yellow on top
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 19, 2018, 11:48:39 PM
Are 8-8-8 all-arrow signals common anywhere outside of Europe? Even in BC, where 8-inch arrows are somewhat normal, the yellow and red displays are orbs.

Not common in Spokane, WA, but one intersection downtown has a couple in each direction: https://goo.gl/uBUf2s -- they were installed in late 2016 or 2017.

These might be 12 inch signals, but they look a lot like 8-inch signals. Sometimes, street view can be tricky.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 19, 2018, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2018, 11:48:39 PM
Are 8-8-8 all-arrow signals common anywhere outside of Europe? Even in BC, where 8-inch arrows are somewhat normal, the yellow and red displays are orbs.

Not common in Spokane, WA, but one intersection downtown has a couple in each direction: https://goo.gl/uBUf2s

These might be 12 inch signals, but they look a lot like 8-inch signals. Sometimes, street view can be tricky.
Suprised it's still up, 8" arrows got banned from the MUTCD ages ago

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 19, 2018, 11:55:39 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 19, 2018, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2018, 11:48:39 PM
Are 8-8-8 all-arrow signals common anywhere outside of Europe? Even in BC, where 8-inch arrows are somewhat normal, the yellow and red displays are orbs.

Not common in Spokane, WA, but one intersection downtown has a couple in each direction: https://goo.gl/uBUf2s

These might be 12 inch signals, but they look a lot like 8-inch signals. Sometimes, street view can be tricky.

Surprised it's still up, 8" arrows got banned from the MUTCD ages ago

Well this is odd: if you go back to 2011, the intersection barely resembles what we see today: https://goo.gl/929oTF

Skip forward to 2016, and it's still not like it is today. These signals were installed in 2017!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 23, 2018, 10:21:55 AM
I never got to go to the Seattle Children's Museum when I was a kid, even though I wanted to see their traffic light exhibit.  I finally got to go with my sister's daughter, and found the exhibit is still there.

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1942/45468048652_8102cd661c_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2cgRCMj)Seattle Children&#x27;s Museum traffic light exhibit (https://flic.kr/p/2cgRCMj) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 29, 2018, 03:27:40 PM
I seem to constantly keep finding odd things about Spokane, WA.

Before the flashing yellow arrow, the city used 4-section bi-modal left turn signals for lagging lefts, but doghouses for leading lefts.

Example: left turn from northbound Monroe to westbound Broadway: https://goo.gl/pFSWEN (no oncoming left permitted)
Another: left turns from North Foothills towards either direction of US-2: https://goo.gl/WjeKcs (no oncoming lefts as US-2 is split one-way).

Regular left: https://goo.gl/wZ5jqJ (doghouses even for mast signals, oddly).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffe on October 31, 2018, 03:12:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 11, 2018, 04:05:22 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 11, 2018, 03:39:04 PM
SF Muni has similar two-section signal heads along King Street, but the top indication is red. https://goo.gl/maps/jUPT9mWQ5452

The one's I'm familiar with in Tacoma are closer in relation to the SF version, but use amber and white: https://goo.gl/MsQehp (I believe these are the standard indications, and might be the same used in Baltimore, just with a different signal face style)

It's possible those signals in SF are actually amber, but appear red on Street View. From several angles, the signals in Tacoma look red, but I know from seeing them in person, they're amber.

(https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/blog/2017/T%20Signal%20Designs.png)
San Francisco MUNI actually has three legacy styles of signals, show as the left most signals in the above image.  However, they are being upgraded to the type on the far right, which is a red/white combo.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on November 01, 2018, 03:41:23 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 10:43:28 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 11, 2018, 10:30:13 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 11, 2018, 08:18:43 PM
I can't help but to not stop thinking about Lower Merion's signal poles. All the signal arms in the township are silver, and don't have a single spec of rust. Can someone help me figure this out, there are many old signals in this area, but all the poles are bright and silver. Are these poles original or new. I've mentioned this a few times before and all I get are arguments based on what type of metal these poles are.

Here's an intersection on google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0054821,-75.2217476,3a,27.8y,295.19h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCenRXfXfCMt5ZNbcV9uBrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As I've said before about such signals, the poles are probably aluminum.
It still amazes me how they don't have a spec of rust after being up for several decades

Here's an example, in Illinois, of older aluminum trusses mixed with newer galvanized steel monotubes.  It's a good comparison between the two.  The trusses date from the late 1960s/early 1970s, and the mastarms are from the mid/late 1980s.

Larkin & Theodore (https://goo.gl/maps/VGiLoGAtxtS2), Joliet/Crest Hill, looking north.
Larkin & Theodore (https://goo.gl/maps/4za4ukvSuRw), Joliet/Crest Hill, looking south.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 03, 2018, 08:10:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)
This is common in Delaware

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 04, 2018, 12:07:08 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 03, 2018, 08:10:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)
This is common in Delaware

LG-M327

Not really in Delaware... the entire front of their signals is black, not just the visors. However, they are common in North Carolina, particularly in the Charlotte and Winston-Salem areas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)

I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 04, 2018, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 17, 2018, 07:15:38 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 17, 2018, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy

God that signal looks extremely confusing, I don't understand how a red arrow and a green arrow can be lit simotanuesly while directing ongoing traffic.

It's not unprecedented. I've seen something similar in Illinois.

Three examples in WA where exclusive arrows are used with option lanes:

1) Westbound E Broadway @ I-90, Spokane (https://goo.gl/2Dfx6q) (#2 lane must wait for green to proceed straight from that lane)
2) Southbound 101 @ Boone St, Aberdeen (https://goo.gl/6WxFy3) (#2 lane must wait for green orb to proceed straight from that lane)
3) Westbound James St @ I-5, Seattle (https://goo.gl/w3QMSB) (Lagging FYA is used at this location, so it works far better (no red arrow phase except at end))

#3 is the only acceptable use of such a setup, in my opinion. None are like US-89's example, which looks to be a continuous green-T like my second example. If option lanes are to be used at double turn locations, permissive movements really should be allowed. As most of these are T-intersections, that shouldn't necessarily be dangerous.

Although not quite precise allegory, it's reminiscent of this signal in Vancouver that has been posted on this board before:

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2485002,-123.0723746,3a,75y,295.44h,89.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9hf3laXcqpMAs_n3FMnC2w!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i16384!8i8192

The idea is that the thru lanes are continuous green, but the left turn is protected only.  And the central lane is an option lane to go either direction, but turning left only if there is a green arrow.  Unless the green arrow is a dominant phase, you will find most traffic going straight will end up in the right lane so that they can take advantage of the continuous green.

For simplicity, I would put a six-bulb doghouse* in the central lane and a three phase signal over the right lane.  The red straight and yellow straight do not need to come on, but it would be simpler to denote straight thru on green with a protected left turn.

And ideally, as jakeroot noted, this should be a protected-permitted left signal.  But it's hard, because there are only 3 lanes available and there seems to be enough traffic for the left turn to warrant 2 lanes and for the through traffic to warrant 2 lanes, so you're stuck with a middle option lane.  And in most states this requires a protected only left turn.

* Don't know what else to call a signal like this:

RA  R
YA  Y
GA  G
in one casing.  The G will be a green straight arrow instead of an orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 04, 2018, 05:56:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 29, 2018, 03:27:40 PM
I seem to constantly keep finding odd things about Spokane, WA.

Before the flashing yellow arrow, the city used 4-section bi-modal left turn signals for lagging lefts, but doghouses for leading lefts.

Example: left turn from northbound Monroe to westbound Broadway: https://goo.gl/pFSWEN (no oncoming left permitted)
Another: left turns from North Foothills towards either direction of US-2: https://goo.gl/WjeKcs (no oncoming lefts as US-2 is split one-way).

Regular left: https://goo.gl/wZ5jqJ (doghouses even for mast signals, oddly).

Not odd.  A common signaling pattern before more recent versions of MUTCD prohibited it.

The lagging lefts prohibit opposing left turns and prevent yellow trap.  The lagging lefts terminate at the same time as the through singal in that direction.  The warning yellow arrow is not needed, since it would be shown at the exact same time as the yellow orb.  So only 4 light bulbs are needed here.  There are many lagging lefts that are still signalled in this manner and are pefectly safe.  See: 

Los Angeles, CA

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0521948,-118.2433945,3a,75y,101.53h,80.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sweLIbHaUEeeEuvH-Tyax4Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DweLIbHaUEeeEuvH-Tyax4Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D341.26422%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

Queens, NY (but recently updated with yellow arrows, although not necessary IMO)

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7562726,-73.8789245,3a,75y,81.54h,78.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5K-W-WxtGb1G6exwMiau1w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Washington , DC

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9013666,-77.0319598,3a,75y,344.35h,88.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOmhnN3gmTEZDWswTZIfgQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656




The leading left terminates before the through green terminates.  It needs the yellow arrow so there are 5 light bulbs on the doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:44:09 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 04, 2018, 05:56:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 29, 2018, 03:27:40 PM
I seem to constantly keep finding odd things about Spokane, WA.

Before the flashing yellow arrow, the city used 4-section bi-modal left turn signals for lagging lefts, but doghouses for leading lefts.

Not odd.  A common signaling pattern before more recent versions of MUTCD prohibited it.

The lagging lefts prohibit opposing left turns and prevent yellow trap.  The lagging lefts terminate at the same time as the through singal in that direction.  The warning yellow arrow is not needed, since it would be shown at the exact same time as the yellow orb.  So only 4 light bulbs are needed here.  There are many lagging lefts that are still signalled in this manner and are pefectly safe.  See: 
...
The leading left terminates before the through green terminates.  It needs the yellow arrow so there are 5 light bulbs on the doghouse.

I realize this now. I wasn't seeing a pattern before, but only recognized it for the first time at those Spokane signals. Of course, where I'm from on the west side of Washington State, 4-section bi-modal signals are used all the time for regular leading lefts. I had seen 4-section left-turn signals in areas known for 5-section signals before, but I assumed they were one-off clearance-related installations. I see now that the several I've seen in CA are actually for lagging lefts that need only one yellow phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: plain on November 04, 2018, 12:07:08 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 03, 2018, 08:10:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)

This is common in Delaware

Not really in Delaware... the entire front of their signals is black, not just the visors. However, they are common in North Carolina, particularly in the Charlotte and Winston-Salem areas.

Delaware and Maryland share that look. Definitely a lot of examples like mine above in NC. I checked Street View and they are indeed quite common.

Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.

Do you know of any that you can link to? I found a ton of signals in ATL with black fronts and yellow backs via Street View, but none where only the visors were black (as in my example).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 08:08:17 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 04, 2018, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 17, 2018, 07:15:38 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 17, 2018, 07:06:47 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 17, 2018, 06:47:39 PM
Encountered this the other day, and it was one of the weirdest things I've seen. Unfortunately wasn't around long enough to see how the phasing worked.

https://goo.gl/maps/DdGQ42LWyzy

God that signal looks extremely confusing, I don't understand how a red arrow and a green arrow can be lit simotanuesly while directing ongoing traffic.

It's not unprecedented. I've seen something similar in Illinois.

Three examples in WA where exclusive arrows are used with option lanes:

1) Westbound E Broadway @ I-90, Spokane (https://goo.gl/2Dfx6q) (#2 lane must wait for green to proceed straight from that lane)
2) Southbound 101 @ Boone St, Aberdeen (https://goo.gl/6WxFy3) (#2 lane must wait for green orb to proceed straight from that lane)
3) Westbound James St @ I-5, Seattle (https://goo.gl/w3QMSB) (Lagging FYA is used at this location, so it works far better (no red arrow phase except at end))

#3 is the only acceptable use of such a setup, in my opinion. None are like US-89's example, which looks to be a continuous green-T like my second example. If option lanes are to be used at double turn locations, permissive movements really should be allowed. As most of these are T-intersections, that shouldn't necessarily be dangerous.

Although not quite precise allegory, it's reminiscent of this signal in Vancouver that has been posted on this board before:

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2485002,-123.0723746,3a,75y,295.44h,89.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9hf3laXcqpMAs_n3FMnC2w!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i16384!8i8192

The idea is that the thru lanes are continuous green, but the left turn is protected only.  And the central lane is an option lane to go either direction, but turning left only if there is a green arrow.  Unless the green arrow is a dominant phase, you will find most traffic going straight will end up in the right lane so that they can take advantage of the continuous green.

For simplicity, I would put a six-bulb doghouse* in the central lane and a three phase signal over the right lane.  The red straight and yellow straight do not need to come on, but it would be simpler to denote straight thru on green with a protected left turn.

And ideally, as jakeroot noted, this should be a protected-permitted left signal.  But it's hard, because there are only 3 lanes available and there seems to be enough traffic for the left turn to warrant 2 lanes and for the through traffic to warrant 2 lanes, so you're stuck with a middle option lane.  And in most states this requires a protected only left turn.

* Don't know what else to call a signal like this:

RA  R
YA  Y
GA  G
in one casing.  The G will be a green straight arrow instead of an orb.

Combination arrow/orb signals are very common in Australia, where more than one overhead signal on a mast arm is unusual (if not unheard of -- I don't know of any). I think it would be a great toolset for American traffic engineers, as it would allow shorter mast arms that still had plenty of capability. I would like to see version for a FYA, though.

Before the street was closed off, the northbound frontage road of I-44 in Downtown St Louis at Pine Street had a double left with an option lane with protected phasing. This was required due to the lack of storage room between that intersection and the southbound frontage road (Memorial Drive). The far left lane had a standard protected left signal, the middle lane a doghouse, and the other lanes a standard 3-orb through signal: https://goo.gl/DorfEf  --  an Intelight ESB signal was used for all displays, with the idea that, if drivers couldn't see the option lane signal, they might not get angry at drivers waiting to turn from that lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 09:01:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.

Do you know of any that you can link to? I found a ton of signals in ATL with black fronts and yellow backs via Street View, but none where only the visors were black (as in my example).

I assume you're talking about stuff like this?

https://goo.gl/maps/sLbKKJdPGN62
https://goo.gl/maps/bfQCAk8UjCn
https://goo.gl/maps/SqzBBAwhtWo
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 10:02:03 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 09:01:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.

Do you know of any that you can link to? I found a ton of signals in ATL with black fronts and yellow backs via Street View, but none where only the visors were black (as in my example).

I assume you're talking about stuff like this?

https://goo.gl/maps/sLbKKJdPGN62
https://goo.gl/maps/bfQCAk8UjCn
https://goo.gl/maps/SqzBBAwhtWo

No no, not quite that (but it's close). Notice in my photo only the curved sections above/around the traffic lights (the visors) are black, but the entire assembly is otherwise yellow. In those Atlanta signals, the entire front face of the signal is black, including the flat sections of the signal housing surrounding the lights.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on November 05, 2018, 01:02:34 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)

It's standard in Halifax, NS:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.6474052,-63.6075978,3a,40.8y,288.62h,96.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4elQI5kTNIg42x5Vs3PVGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 05, 2018, 01:33:15 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on November 05, 2018, 01:02:34 AM
It's standard in Halifax, NS:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.6474052,-63.6075978,3a,40.8y,288.62h,96.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4elQI5kTNIg42x5Vs3PVGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

"Outbound"?  Is that a normal plaque?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on November 06, 2018, 10:28:12 PM
Within Halifax on the city streets, inbound/outbound are used to make reference to the end/beginning in the city center area. Outside of there, traditional cardinal directions are used
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 07, 2018, 07:11:59 PM
This temp signal in Alderton, WA (SR 162 (Orting Hwy) @ 96 St E) has a side-by-side style doghouse for the left turn signal, but it's being used in protected only mode. Where the arrow would normally be, the lenses are instead wrapped in black plastic.

If it were me, rather than jury-rigging a second overhead signal, I'd have just used a doghouse with the extra signal on the side, but whatever. Not my call.

As it relates to the above photo, things are in MD/DE/GA style with an all-black front and yellow back. Temp signals here are always an odd color scheme. Last one I saw had a completely yellow non-reflective backplate.

For the record, a truck hit old the signal: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article214721030.html

(https://i.imgur.com/6fH5C9s.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/oEQLwkM.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:47:18 PM
I think a doghouse would be too heavy to fit on that temporary signal pole
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:55:06 PM
Here's something odd I've noticed about the doghouses in Levittown, the boxes for the arrow sections are mounted upside-down. Why is that, could it be possible that these signals were meant to be vertically standing five section signals, but at last minute, they were rearranged into a doghouse:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/979/27042833067_925a271f79_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HcFA7x)8&quot; Eagle (w/louvers) and a 12&quot; Eagle Flatback Doghouse (https://flic.kr/p/HcFA7x) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/980/28134853918_2372bf3832_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/JSbtSf)TCT with an Eagle flatback doghouse (rear-view) (https://flic.kr/p/JSbtSf) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

The upside-down Eagle logos are evidence that the arrow sections were mounted upside-down. However, the arrows were installed in the normal configuration. I also think that the bottom doghouse was originally hanging, although the bracket looks just as old as the signal itself.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on November 08, 2018, 06:06:51 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:47:18 PM
I think a doghouse would be too heavy to fit on that temporary signal pole

Did you miss the part where there's already five sections up there, but two are covered?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 06:13:10 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 08, 2018, 06:06:51 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:47:18 PM
I think a doghouse would be too heavy to fit on that temporary signal pole

Did you miss the part where there's already five sections up there, but two are covered?

I did get that part. I'm saying, mounting a signal that way will be easier to mount, as opposed to a regular doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 08, 2018, 06:16:21 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 06:13:10 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 08, 2018, 06:06:51 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:47:18 PM
I think a doghouse would be too heavy to fit on that temporary signal pole

Did you miss the part where there's already five sections up there, but two are covered?

I did get that part. I'm saying, mounting a signal that way will be easier to mount, as opposed to a regular doghouse.

If weight or mounting style was a concern, I doubt they would have mounted two extra housings for no reason.

Me thinks the temp signal came from a setup where the signal was being used in pro/per mode, but WSDOT wanted it run in protected only. So they swapped the lenses and called it good. And apparently they added another signal on the upper corner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: busman_49 on November 09, 2018, 07:15:09 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:55:06 PM
Here's something odd I've noticed about the doghouses in Levittown, the boxes for the arrow sections are mounted upside-down. Why is that, could it be possible that these signals were meant to be vertically standinfg five section signals, but at last minute, they were rearranged into a doghouse:
<SNIP>

They are mounted that way to make it easier to open the doors of the signal for bulb replacement & maintenance.  Otherwise the visors of the sections next to them would be in the way, and it would be very difficult to get to the bulb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 09, 2018, 04:34:08 PM
Quote from: busman_49 on November 09, 2018, 07:15:09 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:55:06 PM
Here's something odd I've noticed about the doghouses in Levittown, the boxes for the arrow sections are mounted upside-down. Why is that, could it be possible that these signals were meant to be vertically standinfg five section signals, but at last minute, they were rearranged into a doghouse:
<SNIP>

They are mounted that way to make it easier to open the doors of the signal for bulb replacement & maintenance.  Otherwise the visors of the sections next to them would be in the way, and it would be very difficult to get to the bulb.

Why on those, and not modern doghouses
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 12, 2018, 02:52:05 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/wqDhXacsQYN2
For New York a span wire signal is not unusual, but in New York City it is.  Usually the city uses double guy mast arms and for subways overhead they usually just mount the heads to the girders.

Anyway, I thought I would share this not cause of its practice but as I think its cool the way its structured.  It soon will be gone when the Sheridan Expressway becomes an at grade boulevard, though so its life is near its end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 18, 2018, 07:47:18 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on October 10, 2018, 04:20:36 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2018, 10:10:46 PM
Quote from: riiga on October 09, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
Does the US not use distinct transit signals? This is something that has not been standardized in Europe, but most countries have their own variant of transit signals so that regular drivers won't be confused in a situation such as this.

The only symbolic traffic signal I've seen in Seattle for rubber-tired buses instead of street cars or light rail is here. (https://goo.gl/maps/c5JFWvXeB422)


What about these weird boxes that light up when the train is crossing
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1410753,-75.116411,3a,75y,337.11h,97.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNDtKRatydBkq9-BBwCXiqg!2e0!5s20171101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

That's known as a blank out sign. It's to make sure traffic will not back up in that direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 18, 2018, 04:56:17 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 09, 2018, 04:34:08 PM
Quote from: busman_49 on November 09, 2018, 07:15:09 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 08, 2018, 05:55:06 PM
Here's something odd I've noticed about the doghouses in Levittown, the boxes for the arrow sections are mounted upside-down. Why is that, could it be possible that these signals were meant to be vertically standinfg five section signals, but at last minute, they were rearranged into a doghouse:
<SNIP>

They are mounted that way to make it easier to open the doors of the signal for bulb replacement & maintenance.  Otherwise the visors of the sections next to them would be in the way, and it would be very difficult to get to the bulb.

Why on those, and not modern doghouses
They do it all the time on modern doghouses around here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 06:52:47 PM
What kind of signal mast/arm setup is this called? Visibly one of Spokane, WA's oldest setups (note text-only ped signals -- signals are Eagle Flatbacks): https://goo.gl/3C1sGa

(https://i.imgur.com/PiIOuHc.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 18, 2018, 06:55:48 PM
Those arec called guy wires

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 18, 2018, 06:55:48 PM
Those arec called guy wires

Thank you. Extremely rare in Washington, but I think they're common in some areas of the northeast?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 18, 2018, 10:48:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 18, 2018, 06:55:48 PM
Those arec called guy wires

Thank you. Extremely rare in Washington, but I think they're common in some areas of the northeast?

Nearly all assemblies in NYC. Can't recall seeing them elsewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 19, 2018, 08:15:37 PM
Older signals in the City of Los Angeles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 20, 2018, 12:53:27 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 18, 2018, 10:48:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 18, 2018, 06:55:48 PM
Those arec called guy wires

Thank you. Extremely rare in Washington, but I think they're common in some areas of the northeast?

Nearly all assemblies in NYC. Can't recall seeing them elsewhere.
Used to be some older signals in Vegas with the guy wires, on some minor streets (these also had curved masts, unusual for southern Nevada except for this style). I'd have to hunt for one on Street view... Most have been replaced with more modern mast assemblies.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on November 20, 2018, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 20, 2018, 12:53:27 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 18, 2018, 10:48:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 18, 2018, 06:55:48 PM
Those arec called guy wires

Thank you. Extremely rare in Washington, but I think they're common in some areas of the northeast?

Nearly all assemblies in NYC. Can't recall seeing them elsewhere.
Used to be some older signals in Vegas with the guy wires, on some minor streets (these also had curved masts, unusual for southern Nevada except for this style). I'd have to hunt for one on Street view... Most have been replaced with more modern mast assemblies.

I remember going thru Vegas with my parents in the early 70s and most of the lights there were like that--very similar to older assemblies in California (guessing late 50s/early 60s). I think I've seen some in Reno, and there are some in Arizona.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on November 20, 2018, 02:31:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: plain on November 04, 2018, 12:07:08 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 03, 2018, 08:10:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD (https://goo.gl/tC36yD)

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)

This is common in Delaware

Not really in Delaware... the entire front of their signals is black, not just the visors. However, they are common in North Carolina, particularly in the Charlotte and Winston-Salem areas.

Delaware and Maryland share that look. Definitely a lot of examples like mine above in NC. I checked Street View and they are indeed quite common.

Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.

Do you know of any that you can link to? I found a ton of signals in ATL with black fronts and yellow backs via Street View, but none where only the visors were black (as in my example).


This scheme with black visors but yellow everything else is also a common sight in the Greenville-Spartanburg area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 04:59:28 PM
Quote from: index on November 20, 2018, 02:31:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 04, 2018, 07:51:36 PM
Quote from: plain on November 04, 2018, 12:07:08 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 03, 2018, 08:10:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2018, 04:55:03 AM
Is this look common anywhere? It's not here, but Federal Way, WA has a one-off older signal where the visors are black, but the body is yellow: https://goo.gl/tC36yD (https://goo.gl/tC36yD)

(https://i.imgur.com/8uGFp4I.png)

This is common in Delaware

Not really in Delaware... the entire front of their signals is black, not just the visors. However, they are common in North Carolina, particularly in the Charlotte and Winston-Salem areas.

Delaware and Maryland share that look. Definitely a lot of examples like mine above in NC. I checked Street View and they are indeed quite common.

Quote from: US 89 on November 04, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
I've seen a fair amount of this in the Atlanta area.

Do you know of any that you can link to? I found a ton of signals in ATL with black fronts and yellow backs via Street View, but none where only the visors were black (as in my example).


This scheme with black visors but yellow everything else is also a common sight in the Greenville-Spartanburg area.
I've never seen a yellow front on a reflective border signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on November 20, 2018, 05:10:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 04:59:28 PM
Quote from: index on November 20, 2018, 02:31:06 PM

This scheme with black visors but yellow everything else is also a common sight in the Greenville-Spartanburg area.
I've never seen a yellow front on a reflective border signal


They're fairly common if you know where to look for them, if you mean yellow signals with reflective-bordered backplates. You can find a lot of them in upstate South Carolina, AFAIK, and I believe Uptown Charlotte too. I'm sure they're found elsewhere, too, but it's not totally the most common configuration. Definitely not rare or uncommon though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 05:32:08 PM
Quote from: index on November 20, 2018, 05:10:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 04:59:28 PM
Quote from: index on November 20, 2018, 02:31:06 PM

This scheme with black visors but yellow everything else is also a common sight in the Greenville-Spartanburg area.
I've never seen a yellow front on a reflective border signal


They're fairly common if you know where to look for them, if you mean yellow signals with reflective-bordered backplates. You can find a lot of them in upstate South Carolina, AFAIK, and I believe Uptown Charlotte too. I'm sure they're found elsewhere, too, but it's not totally the most common configuration. Definitely not rare or uncommon though.
Wait, I do remember a few in Southern NH.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 07:29:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 05:32:08 PM
Wait, I do remember a few in Southern NH.

Probably more common out east. Most western states (Utah excluded) use black signals, and not all use the reflective border. Independent agencies may use yellow signals. Renton, WA is an example of a city that paints damn near everything yellow (including the mounting hardware), leaving only the front-facing section of the backplate unpainted as required by the MUTCD: https://goo.gl/xyTR3g
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 20, 2018, 07:52:58 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 04:59:28 PM
I've never seen a yellow front on a reflective border signal

You mean like these? This is the standard for UDOT signals, as jakeroot was referring to:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1922/44303586155_ea400dc100_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2auXsDH)

Of course, not all signals in Utah are like this; several cities such as Salt Lake City use black signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 07:54:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 07:29:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 05:32:08 PM
Wait, I do remember a few in Southern NH.

Probably more common out east. Most western states (Utah excluded) use black signals, and not all use the reflective border. Independent agencies may use yellow signals. Renton, WA is an example of a city that paints damn near everything yellow (including the mounting hardware), leaving only the front-facing section of the backplate unpainted as required by the MUTCD: https://goo.gl/xyTR3g
I've never seen a painted back section of a backplate
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 09:31:06 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2018, 07:54:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 07:29:59 PM
Independent agencies may use yellow signals. Renton, WA is an example of a city that paints damn near everything yellow (including the mounting hardware), leaving only the front-facing section of the backplate unpainted as required by the MUTCD: https://goo.gl/xyTR3g

I've never seen a painted back section of a backplate

It's an old King County (WA) practice that some cities kept. Not sure if other parts of the country do it.

(https://i.imgur.com/2vJnSFR.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on November 21, 2018, 10:09:03 AM
Saw some very interesting signals in the very upscale Palanco neighborhood of Mexico City while I was on vacation there. These look like the first signals I've seen that were designed specifically for LED heads.
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.4316915,-99.1956805,3a,15y,254.42h,117.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srLAe9J34A0ybr9ESt803TQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Also some unique bus signals using the MetroBus logo.
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.4248492,-99.1721192,3a,15y,55.83h,109.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slFY_EaVROgpoHfvqvs1E7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
Quote from: djlynch on November 21, 2018, 10:09:03 AM
Saw some very interesting signals in the very upscale Palanco neighborhood of Mexico City while I was on vacation there. These look like the first signals I've seen that were designed specifically for LED heads.
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.4316915,-99.1956805,3a,15y,254.42h,117.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srLAe9J34A0ybr9ESt803TQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Also some unique bus signals using the MetroBus logo.
https://www.google.com/maps/@19.4248492,-99.1721192,3a,15y,55.83h,109.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slFY_EaVROgpoHfvqvs1E7g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 21, 2018, 02:24:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That's a pretty cool left turn arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on November 21, 2018, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 21, 2018, 02:24:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That's a pretty cool left turn arrow.


Mexico seems to make common use of these in the country, particularly in more southern regions, based on the GSVing I've done. IMO, I'm not a fan of the look. I don't see the point or benefit over putting a more expensive signal that looks like it uses individually addressable pixels like a monitor, versus a plain old signal, it doesn't seem very practical.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 09:50:09 PM
Quote from: index on November 21, 2018, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 21, 2018, 02:24:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That's a pretty cool left turn arrow.


Mexico seems to make common use of these in the country, particularly in more southern regions, based on the GSVing I've done. IMO, I'm not a fan of the look. I don't see the point or benefit over putting a more expensive signal that looks like it uses individually addressable pixels like a monitor, versus a plain old signal, it doesn't seem very practical.
I agree, it's pretty strange.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 21, 2018, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 09:50:09 PM
Quote from: index on November 21, 2018, 09:37:05 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 21, 2018, 02:24:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That's a pretty cool left turn arrow.


Mexico seems to make common use of these in the country, particularly in more southern regions, based on the GSVing I've done. IMO, I'm not a fan of the look. I don't see the point or benefit over putting a more expensive signal that looks like it uses individually addressable pixels like a monitor, versus a plain old signal, it doesn't seem very practical.
I agree, it's pretty strange.
I don't like it, and I always thought McCains were bland

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 22, 2018, 12:46:15 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 21, 2018, 01:57:34 PM
This Mexican one is also interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742126,-86.8267796,3a,31.3y,244.53h,96.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scqrcCgwh6IIJ9XU5Gd464g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

What I don't like in this image isn't the traffic signals, it's those ugly ass streetlights! Uggghh
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 24, 2018, 02:35:26 AM
Thought this was interesting. In Spokane, WA, the city switches hill routes to flashing yellow during snow events to keep traffic (and plows) moving, hopefully to prevent situations where cars might get stuck due to hill-starts in the snow.

https://youtu.be/tQZFxuir15s
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 24, 2018, 04:04:20 PM
That's genius!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 25, 2018, 10:36:06 AM
Quote from: kphoger on November 24, 2018, 04:04:20 PM
That's genius!

I agree.  At least in this area, when there is significant snow, the traffic level is very low and probably comparable to overnight hours.  Keep traffic moving to the extent possible.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 25, 2018, 06:34:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 24, 2018, 02:35:26 AM
Thought this was interesting. In Spokane, WA, the city switches hill routes to flashing yellow during snow events to keep traffic (and plows) moving, hopefully to prevent situations where cars might get stuck due to hill-starts in the snow.

https://youtu.be/tQZFxuir15s
Great idea, just wanted to point out at 29 seconds the doghouse light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on November 25, 2018, 10:03:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 25, 2018, 06:34:32 PM
Great idea, just wanted to point out at 29 seconds the doghouse light.

What about it?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 26, 2018, 12:38:05 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 25, 2018, 10:03:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 25, 2018, 06:34:32 PM
Great idea, just wanted to point out at 29 seconds the doghouse light.

What about it?

I'm guessing he's pointing out that it's being used on a pole. Usually tower signals are used on poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 28, 2018, 05:02:44 PM
Here's an interesting signal that I just discovered through web browsing on GSV:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4152901,-121.6881783,3a,75y,204.15h,70.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbb5IF88lntTOuBrcv__0rQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

The signal on the mast arm has two red orbs for some reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on November 28, 2018, 05:22:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 28, 2018, 05:02:44 PM
Here's an interesting signal that I just discovered through web browsing on GSV:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4152901,-121.6881783,3a,75y,204.15h,70.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbb5IF88lntTOuBrcv__0rQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

The signal on the mast arm has two red orbs for some reason.
This is fairly commen when the signal needs to be really apparent. I'm guessing it is that way because the road has a high speed limit, and red-light running became a problem.

It's funny, I was about to mention the signals on 5400 W in SLC (which have the same double red orbs), because they need to accommodate the "Flex Lanes" , and so the left turn signal switches as the day progresses. Just thought that was cool, and wanted to mention it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 28, 2018, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: MCRoads on November 28, 2018, 05:22:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on November 28, 2018, 05:02:44 PM
Here's an interesting signal that I just discovered through web browsing on GSV:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4152901,-121.6881783,3a,75y,204.15h,70.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbb5IF88lntTOuBrcv__0rQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

The signal on the mast arm has two red orbs for some reason.
This is fairly commen when the signal needs to be really apparent. I’m guessing it is that way because the road has a high speed limit, and red-light running became a problem.

It’s funny, I was about to mention the signals on 5400 W in SLC (which have the same double red orbs), because they need to accommodate the “Flex Lanes”, and so the left turn signal switches as the day progresses. Just thought that was cool, and wanted to mention it.

FYI, it's 5400 South. The Utah street grids take some getting used to. ;)

I was always under the impression that the double red light was used at intersections with a high red-light crash rate to draw special attention to the red signal. 5400 South is the only road in Utah with Flex lanes, but I know Utah has at least a few more double reds. For example, there are two on SR-193 near Ogden, at Church St (https://goo.gl/maps/qJAu8a9bhTu) and Fairfield Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/92gvPyGWBdE2). There was also one on US 89 at Nicholls Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/rXbA7sWFMiy) in that area as well, but it was removed when the left turns there became protected-only.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on November 28, 2018, 08:06:18 PM
Well I was made aware of an issue the road was having via an online news report: the lane controll structures were confusing drivers, and some were running red lights, thinking the green arrow behind the light, was the light. So, they put the "T"  signals up to emphasize that the light is red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 28, 2018, 09:48:33 PM
Those T-shaped signals in Utah with the double reds are interesting but I would worry that some drivers might confuse them with HAWK signals which are very similar in appearance. And they might be confused about how to comply with them. But maybe not since the double steady-red means the same thing in both types. Still I wonder if Utah would have been smarter to arrange the double reds in a vertical line instead to avoid looking like HAWK signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 28, 2018, 10:32:48 PM
I only know of one installation that uses vertical double red orbs, and it's at a signal located next to a railway crossing. The lower red is for the near-side stopped cars (those stopped on the side closest to the intersection), and the upper red is for cars waiting on the other (far) side of the crossing.

McCarver @ Ruston, Tacoma: https://goo.gl/63N1tu (both are not visible from a driver's perspective).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on November 29, 2018, 09:24:41 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 28, 2018, 10:32:48 PM
I only know of one installation that uses vertical double red orbs, and it's at a signal located next to a railway crossing. The lower red is for the near-side stopped cars (those stopped on the side closest to the intersection), and the upper red is for cars waiting on the other (far) side of the crossing.

McCarver @ Ruston, Tacoma: https://goo.gl/63N1tu (both are not visible from a driver's perspective).

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2080/2530670341_2767feece0_z_d.jpg)
US 271 Paris Texas,  pretty much a standard for protected lefts in Texas
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 11:04:00 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 28, 2018, 09:48:33 PM
I would worry that some drivers might confuse them with HAWK signals

I wouldn't worry about that.



Quote from: US71 on November 29, 2018, 09:24:41 AM
pretty much a standard for protected lefts in Texas

Yep.  There are zillions of double red orbs in Texas over the left-turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.

True that.  The only one that comes to my mind is Naper Blvd @ Plank Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/LW71FPz8KTm) in DuPage County, IL.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on November 29, 2018, 03:53:49 PM
I remember posting about this before somewhere on the forum, but anyway, there's a set of double red signals on NY 104 at NY 3 in Hannibal.  This is the only one I've ever seen.  Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3230738,-76.5676901,3a,47.3y,357h,91.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXM2ATQn09HrjliDPhRGW5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the eastbound view, and here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3235246,-76.5677573,3a,51.7y,165.02h,91.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSHsqUn2k6Vn6x1hcB4x0AA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the westbound view.  It was installed in either the late 90s or early 2000s.  In addition to having double red balls, there is also a strobe.  The speed limit is 55 in this area, and this is the only signal between Oswego and Wolcott, so it makes sense to have extra emphasis on the red light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:58:20 PM
Quote from: Michael on November 29, 2018, 03:53:49 PM
I remember posting about this before somewhere on the forum, but anyway, there's a set of double red signals on NY 104 at NY 3 in Hannibal.  This is the only one I've ever seen.  Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3230738,-76.5676901,3a,47.3y,357h,91.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXM2ATQn09HrjliDPhRGW5Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the eastbound view, and here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3235246,-76.5677573,3a,51.7y,165.02h,91.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSHsqUn2k6Vn6x1hcB4x0AA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) the westbound view.  It was installed in either the late 90s or early 2000s.  In addition to having double red balls, there is also a strobe.  The speed limit is 55 in this area, and this is the only signal between Oswego and Wolcott, so it makes sense to have extra emphasis on the red light.

Yep, you posted it on the thread about stoplights with strobes here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1931.msg42776#msg42776).  You must have a pretty good memory, because that was nine years ago!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 04:13:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.

True that.  The only one that comes to my mind is Naper Blvd @ Plank Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/LW71FPz8KTm) in DuPage County, IL.

You beat me to that one - it's the only one I know of around here.  I believe it (both northbound and southbound Naper) were installed due to the curve that Naper takes in both directions prior to Plank Road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 04:17:49 PM
Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 04:13:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.

True that.  The only one that comes to my mind is Naper Blvd @ Plank Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/LW71FPz8KTm) in DuPage County, IL.

You beat me to that one - it's the only one I know of around here.  I believe it (both northbound and southbound Naper) were installed due to the curve that Naper takes in both directions prior to Plank Road.

Hmmm.  For some reason, I didn't remember there being a T-signal or advance warning sign with flashing light for the southbound direction.  I haven't driven that road since 2006, but GSV from 2007 shows a T-signal in that direction as well. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 04:34:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.

True that.  The only one that comes to my mind is Naper Blvd @ Plank Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/LW71FPz8KTm) in DuPage County, IL.

Interesting to see one posted on a nearside pole and not overhead. Seems like most agencies replace one of the primary signals when using double red signals, even at curves.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 04:36:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 04:34:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 29, 2018, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 03:40:43 PM
Double red orbs are certainly far from rare, but they're unusual in the T-configuration as posted up thread.

True that.  The only one that comes to my mind is Naper Blvd @ Plank Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/LW71FPz8KTm) in DuPage County, IL.

Interesting to see one posted on a nearside pole and not overhead. Seems like most agencies replace one of the primary signals when using double red signals, even at curves.

Here's a view from further away: https://goo.gl/maps/rR9jSpAJfWu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 29, 2018, 09:08:27 PM
I'm surprised to see the double-red orbs on the Texas left-turn signals heads above. Didn't the 2009 Manual mandate a change to red-arrows in left-turn heads? New York State DOT has changed many of them in recent years.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 09:35:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 29, 2018, 09:08:27 PM
I'm surprised to see the double-red orbs on the Texas left-turn signals heads above. Didn't the 2009 Manual mandate a change to red-arrows in left-turn heads? New York State DOT has changed many of them in recent years.

Almost certainly, that Paris signal predates Texas' adoption of the 2009 MUTCD. WA didn't adopt it until mid 2011. And if TX and WA are anything alike, local agencies are not going to rush to make their old signal compliant unless other modifications are made to the intersection (which would then necessitate such a change).

EDIT: to clarify, I think US71 is alluding to a former, very widespread standard, not the actual, current standard.

I would like to preface something I said above. I actually know of a shit ton of double red vertical orb signals, it's just that they're all in Alberta.  :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 30, 2018, 01:33:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2018, 09:35:06 PM
I actually know of a shit ton of double red vertical orb signals, it's just that they're all in Alberta.  :)

Likewise me, except in Mexico.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 30, 2018, 09:51:08 PM
Look at this signal: The doghouse has 3m signals, I also like the queue jump:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2018, 01:59:32 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 30, 2018, 09:51:08 PM
Look at this signal: The doghouse has 3m signals, I also like the queue jump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsAVL0XXaeo

It's nice to see queue-jump signals outside of the obvious places like Seattle or Snohomish County. Clark County, WA (where the video is from) has never been pro-transit, so to see queue jump signals is quite a surprise, though it is a wise addition given that it accommodates their BRT service.

That doghouse is a mess! Seems like it was piece-mealed haphazardly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 02, 2018, 10:14:22 AM
Pertaining to the double red orb T-signals, there are tons of them in and around downtown High Point, NC, especially on Main St.

North Carolina used to have many more statewide (mostly used as protected left signals) but most if not all of those are gone now. I believe a few exists in South Carolina though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on December 02, 2018, 02:23:34 PM
Quote from: plain on December 02, 2018, 10:14:22 AM
Pertaining to the double red orb T-signals, there are tons of them in and around downtown High Point, NC, especially on Main St.

North Carolina used to have many more statewide (mostly used as protected left signals) but most if not all of those are gone now. I believe a few exists in South Carolina though.


South Carolina actually still makes wide use of them, including putting new ones up. You almost can't go through SC without seeing one, in fact.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 02, 2018, 02:55:36 PM
Quote from: index on December 02, 2018, 02:23:34 PM
Quote from: plain on December 02, 2018, 10:14:22 AM
Pertaining to the double red orb T-signals, there are tons of them in and around downtown High Point, NC, especially on Main St.

North Carolina used to have many more statewide (mostly used as protected left signals) but most if not all of those are gone now. I believe a few exists in South Carolina though.


South Carolina actually still makes wide use of them, including putting new ones up. You almost can't go through SC without seeing one, in fact.

It's been several years since I've been through South Carolina (other than interstates). I thought they would've got rid of many of them like NC did, glad to hear they didn't. Thanks!

Are there any with double red arrows instead of orbs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on December 02, 2018, 09:03:35 PM
Quote from: plain on December 02, 2018, 02:55:36 PM
Quote from: index on December 02, 2018, 02:23:34 PM
Quote from: plain on December 02, 2018, 10:14:22 AM
Pertaining to the double red orb T-signals, there are tons of them in and around downtown High Point, NC, especially on Main St.

North Carolina used to have many more statewide (mostly used as protected left signals) but most if not all of those are gone now. I believe a few exists in South Carolina though.


South Carolina actually still makes wide use of them, including putting new ones up. You almost can't go through SC without seeing one, in fact.

It's been several years since I've been through South Carolina (other than interstates). I thought they would've got rid of many of them like NC did, glad to hear they didn't. Thanks!

Are there any with double red arrows instead of orbs?


Yep, there's quite a few of those too.


Here's one with mixed arrows/orbs in Darlington:


https://www.google.com/maps/@34.3037353,-79.8720654,3a,32y,70.85h,89.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRe-w7RuhCj2yifYxzoRA-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


And a full arrow one in Mt Pleasant:


https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8191588,-79.8435773,3a,15y,15.19h,95.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOhXj1Dpo3YzmboWyzuuONA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


And if you want to see something that looks ridiculous, just have this 12-12-12-8 fire signal in Florida with a slightly mismatched backplate. I can't remember where this was:


(https://i.imgur.com/2hSheU7.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 03, 2018, 04:33:03 PM
Has anyone seen or knows why these covers were installed?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181203/40f6496eb8a2ce1d437b59ebcecf7a13.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181203/d0d9a47a258fa54d3d61d465196b8305.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181203/853e3d1a77761cbf47475177e13b54ee.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 03, 2018, 05:14:13 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 03, 2018, 04:33:03 PM
Has anyone seen or knows why these covers were installed?

Probably to keep drivers from staring at them while waiting at a red light (instead of watching for peds or cross traffic, if any). They make the signal harder to see from an angle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 03, 2018, 09:05:54 PM
Look at this bike indicator: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkCaVuL-L1U
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 03, 2018, 09:15:37 PM
Many bicyclists won't even pay attention to those things, and they probably won't work right half the time anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 03, 2018, 09:48:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 03, 2018, 09:15:37 PM
Many bicyclists won't even pay attention to those things, and they probably won't work right half the time anyway.

Apparently not a fan of off-topic discussions nor bike signals, eh? :-D

There's not really anything to "pay attention" to. The only new thing in the video is the tiny alert signal, which does not have to be visually acknowledged to work.

Bike detection systems are important for lengthening the minimum green time, so slower cyclists can clear the junction in time. Plus, they keep them from having to hop off and hit the ped button, since typical traffic light detectors can't "see" cyclists.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 03, 2018, 10:44:57 PM
Well, I too have apologized for straying off-topic on occasion. LOL

My issue with bicyclists is that they don't follow the law which in New York designates them as vehicles subject to the usual traffic laws. A few months back I almost got run over by one who blew thru a red light in NYC near Ground Zero, while I was crossing with the pedestrian "walk" signal. A common problem in NYC.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 04, 2018, 01:11:23 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 03, 2018, 10:44:57 PM
bicyclists ... who blew thru a red light ... A common problem in NYC all over everywhere.

FTFY.

(Don't get some people on here started about cyclists or pedestrians acting like they own the road.  It can get pretty heated.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 04, 2018, 02:41:23 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 04, 2018, 01:11:23 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 03, 2018, 10:44:57 PM
bicyclists ... who blew thru a red light ... A common problem in NYC all over everywhere.

FTFY.

(Don't get some people on here started about cyclists or pedestrians acting like they own the road.  It can get pretty heated.)
I noticed
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 04, 2018, 09:21:24 PM
I guess I'm in a party of one here, but cyclists do not bother me at all. Even if they are ignoring traffic laws, at least they're not in my way doing it. If they blow through a red light, and I almost hit them, then there's a problem. But, if they stop at a red light, don't see anybody, and go, I don't care. It makes no difference to me. Slow vehicles bother me a lot more then aggressive, quick vehicles

if they are riding slowly, then just overtake them. The same as you would any other vehicle. If they are riding in the middle of the lane, that is them trying to preserve what little safety they have, by avoiding manholes, debris, and quite often car doors. All they ask is that you overtake them in the next lane.

Here in Seattle, it's common for traffic to scoot over to accommodate oncoming traffic passing a cyclist. This should be practiced in all cities, if it's not already.

Just remember this, guys: cyclists are moving way too fast to ride on a sidewalk. If a pedestrian walks out of a building, and gets whacked by a cyclist, there's a very high chance of injury. Cyclist travel much closer to the speed of traffic on city roads. In suburban areas, I can see riding on sidewalks, but it may not be legal, since bicycles are usually considered vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 05, 2018, 12:15:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 04, 2018, 09:21:24 PM
I guess I'm in a party of one here, but cyclists do not bother me at all. Even if they are ignoring traffic laws, at least they're not in my way doing it. If they blow through a red light, and I almost hit them, then there's a problem. But, if they stop at a red light, don't see anybody, and go, I don't care. It makes no difference to me. Slow vehicles bother me a lot more then aggressive, quick vehicles

if they are riding slowly, then just overtake them. The same as you would any other vehicle. If they are riding in the middle of the lane, that is them trying to preserve what little safety they have, by avoiding manholes, debris, and quite often car doors. All they ask is that you overtake them in the next lane.

Here in Seattle, it's common for traffic to scoot over to accommodate oncoming traffic passing a cyclist. This should be practiced in all cities, if it's not already.

Just remember this, guys: cyclists are moving way too fast to ride on a sidewalk. If a pedestrian walks out of a building, and gets whacked by a cyclist, there's a very high chance of injury. Cyclist travel much closer to the speed of traffic on city roads. In suburban areas, I can see riding on sidewalks, but it may not be legal, since bicycles are usually considered vehicles.
You're not a party of one, I love to bike and since I don't own a car it's how I get around. I stop at red lights unless it's a walk phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 05, 2018, 02:07:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 04, 2018, 09:21:24 PM
I guess I'm in a party of one here, but cyclists do not bother me at all. Even if they are ignoring traffic laws, at least they're not in my way doing it. If they blow through a red light, and I almost hit them, then there's a problem. But, if they stop at a red light, don't see anybody, and go, I don't care. It makes no difference to me.

Same here.

I feel the same way about cars too (I don't care if a driver stops and then goes at a red light), but I might be more a party of one on that topic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 05, 2018, 04:24:35 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 05, 2018, 02:07:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 04, 2018, 09:21:24 PM
I guess I'm in a party of one here, but cyclists do not bother me at all. Even if they are ignoring traffic laws, at least they're not in my way doing it. If they blow through a red light, and I almost hit them, then there's a problem. But, if they stop at a red light, don't see anybody, and go, I don't care. It makes no difference to me.

Same here.

I feel the same way about cars too (I don't care if a driver stops and then goes at a red light), but I might be more a party of one on that topic.

No, actually I'm there with you. Traffic lights only exist because of the sheer number of movements through an intersection. Late at night, or during mid-day when no one is out, a signal's purpose diminishes greatly. While I'm not advocating widespread red-light ignorance, if there's no one around, it's not going to bring harm to anyone.

Here in WA (and in several other places), the only times you cannot go on red are straight-ahead movements, and left-turns to two-way streets. To conclude:

right turn: ✔
left turn from one-way to one-way: ✔
left turn from two-one to one-way: ✔
straight ahead: ❌
left turn to two-way: ❌

There are more movements that permit movements on red than not. What's a couple more? :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 05, 2018, 05:04:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 05, 2018, 04:24:35 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 05, 2018, 02:07:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 04, 2018, 09:21:24 PM
I guess I'm in a party of one here, but cyclists do not bother me at all. Even if they are ignoring traffic laws, at least they're not in my way doing it. If they blow through a red light, and I almost hit them, then there's a problem. But, if they stop at a red light, don't see anybody, and go, I don't care. It makes no difference to me.

Same here.

I feel the same way about cars too (I don't care if a driver stops and then goes at a red light), but I might be more a party of one on that topic.

No, actually I'm there with you. Traffic lights only exist because of the sheer number of movements through an intersection. Late at night, or during mid-day when no one is out, a signal's purpose diminishes greatly. While I'm not advocating widespread red-light ignorance, if there's no one around, it's not going to bring harm to anyone.

Here in WA (and in several other places), the only times you cannot go on red are straight-ahead movements, and left-turns to two-way streets. To conclude:

right turn:
left turn from one-way to one-way:
left turn from two-one to one-way:
straight ahead:
left turn to two-way:

There are more movements that permit movements on red than not. What's a couple more? :-D
I agree with the rules besides:
left turn from two-one to one-way:
That's seem very stupid especially for an intersection with high traffic and a dual left turn lane: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181205/e41690deac5871c07e128e4f619e9c13.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 05, 2018, 05:31:40 PM
Such a maneuver is technically permitted in WA, OR, ID, MI, and BC, regardless of the number of turn lanes. I don't think it's a problem, as visibility is good without an oncoming left turn. Note in your screenshot the ample view of oncoming traffic that the left turn has, even though there's two lanes.

I have a thread on double permissive left turns here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17051.0). Technically, all the states above have a ton of them, just that they require a stop first.

Here's a video I made a while back (with accordingly poor quality) showing the legal maneuvers you can make on red in those states, except ID I believe since turns on red arrows aren't permitted there.

https://youtu.be/2Qa7vD0_TkY
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 15, 2018, 11:28:01 PM
Can anyone figure out the movement the RYG signal on the back is controlling?: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7834667,-92.3774233,3a,15y,119.72h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKTR0recd4zxVZIEyON1oSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here is one in Fort Smith with a more obvious purpose: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2935114,-94.4234506,3a,15y,172.9h,93.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ-ScNVdVel94StkwdzruGg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 - Both five section are mounted on the backs of the mast arms.


See, I thought the one on Robinwood was controlling a movement or either an advance notice of some sort or a study place blind corner thing. But, it seems they just had an extra signal laying around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 16, 2018, 02:29:55 AM


Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on December 15, 2018, 11:28:01 PM
Can anyone figure out the movement the RYG signal on the back is controlling?: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7834667,-92.3774233,3a,15y,119.72h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKTR0recd4zxVZIEyON1oSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

...

See, I thought the one on Robinwood was controlling a movement or either an advance notice of some sort or a study place blind corner thing. But, it seems they just had an extra signal laying around.

I think it's just a supplemental signal for the through movement. The other through signals are on the inside edge of the road curve. So this one signal placed on the back of the mast arm for the other direction is a bit more visible further back from the stop line, so drivers can better react to a changing signal.

Here's a similar situation in Vegas:
https://goo.gl/maps/CwNbae4UqiQ2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2018, 03:33:21 AM
As roadfro said, it's there for better signal visibility along the curve.

Sometimes, though, you can have signal heads facing a way where no vehicular traffic should be coming from. This one, at US-69 and E Court Ave in Des Moines (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5897331,-93.5951201,3a,47.6y,206.43h,88.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0cMxih3wuCoGpiYiPwsm2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), is in lieu of a pedestrian head. There used to be one on the other corner too, but that has since been replaced with an actual pedestrian signal head. You can see it if you go back in time in GSV.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on December 16, 2018, 09:53:51 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 16, 2018, 03:33:21 AM
As roadfro said, it's there for better signal visibility along the curve.

Sometimes, though, you can have signal heads facing a way where no vehicular traffic should be coming from. This one, at US-69 and E Court Ave in Des Moines (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5897331,-93.5951201,3a,47.6y,206.43h,88.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0cMxih3wuCoGpiYiPwsm2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), is in lieu of a pedestrian head. There used to be one on the other corner too, but that has since been replaced with an actual pedestrian signal head. You can see it if you go back in time in GSV.

Downtown Uniontown, PA has traffic signals used for pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 16, 2018, 01:28:53 PM
Quote from: US71 on December 16, 2018, 09:53:51 AM

Downtown Uniontown, PA has traffic signals used for pedestrians.

Same with Pioneer Square in Seattle.  You don't have a flashing Don't Walk to judge how soon the light will change, but most pedestrians ignore that anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 16, 2018, 06:04:46 PM
Does anyone know why louvered backplates are used?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 16, 2018, 07:42:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 16, 2018, 06:04:46 PM
Does anyone know why louvered backplates are used?


iPhone
Backplates can act like a sail. Several signal heads with backplates can cause quite the strain on a span wire or mast arm in high wind conditions. The louvers allow some of the wind to pass through instead of blowing against the backplate, decreasing wind resistance on the setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2018, 10:08:13 PM
roadfro, maybe you can explain to me how this works.

At Sharlands Ave & Robb Dr in Reno, the left turn from westbound Sharlands to southbound Robb has a flashing yellow arrow. The right turn from eastbound Sharlands to southbound Robb has a double right turn that's fully signalized.

Satellite: http://bit.ly/2USHWK3
westbound Sharlands: http://bit.ly/2LjfTit
eastbound Sharlands: http://bit.ly/2S69SIe

Assuming the right turn goes at the same time as eastbound Sharlands, this would mean that the oncoming traffic turning left onto Robb (towards I-80) would have a flashing yellow arrow concurrent with a right turn green arrow (for the oncoming right turn).

Last I checked, permissive lefts cannot be used when they are against green arrows. This is especially misleading in this scenario, since traffic turning left wouldn't be likely to expect the slip lane traffic to have the ROW. Perhaps a double right turn yield might be in order? Similar to the nearby westbound 80 off-ramp.

I will say that, in the street view images, it seems like Sharlands runs split-phase, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 16, 2018, 11:38:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2018, 10:08:13 PM
roadfro, maybe you can explain to me how this works.

At Sharlands Ave & Robb Dr in Reno, the left turn from westbound Sharlands to southbound Robb has a flashing yellow arrow. The right turn from eastbound Sharlands to southbound Robb has a double right turn that's fully signalized.

Satellite: http://bit.ly/2USHWK3
westbound Sharlands: http://bit.ly/2LjfTit
eastbound Sharlands: http://bit.ly/2S69SIe

Assuming the right turn goes at the same time as eastbound Sharlands, this would mean that the oncoming traffic turning left onto Robb (towards I-80) would have a flashing yellow arrow concurrent with a right turn green arrow (for the oncoming right turn).

Last I checked, permissive lefts cannot be used when they are against green arrows. This is especially misleading in this scenario, since traffic turning left wouldn't be likely to expect the slip lane traffic to have the ROW. Perhaps a double right turn yield might be in order? Similar to the nearby westbound 80 off-ramp.

I will say that, in the street view images, it seems like Sharlands runs split-phase, but I could be wrong.
I used to live near there and would go through that intersection daily.

Sharlands runs leading protected lefts. This allows the eastbound protected right turn to go simultaneously with eastbound through. Robb also runs leading lefts (and U-turns are prohibited northbound), so the eastbound right turn also overlaps the northbound left turn in one continuous phase.

It has been about a year since I've gone through there regularly. However, I'm fairly certain that the FYAs on Sharlands are never displayed. Due to the curve, the sight distance isn't too great (especially with the 40mph speed limit eastbound). I always wondered why they bothered installing them there...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2018, 11:53:48 PM
Ahh, thanks for the info. Figured that it might not be running with FYA, since I couldn't find it in street view.

I really want to like the concept of such an installation, but the only way I can see it working would be if the double right turn had a right-facing flashing yellow arrow, with a supplemental "yield to traffic from left" sign. Such a phase would only activate during the parallel through phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 17, 2018, 02:35:33 AM


Quote from: jakeroot on December 16, 2018, 11:53:48 PM
Ahh, thanks for the info. Figured that it might not be running with FYA, since I couldn't find it in street view.

I really want to like the concept of such an installation, but the only way I can see it working would be if the double right turn had a right-facing flashing yellow arrow, with a supplemental "yield to traffic from left" sign. Such a phase would only activate during the parallel through phase.

And I would not see that happening (flashing yellow arrow for eastbound right turn), at least not without a policy change. Nevada, as far as I'm aware, does not currently allow dual permitted signalized turns in either direction. (The nearby I-80 westbound off ramp to Robb Dr is one of two locations in Nevada I can think of with an dual right turn using yield control, and they're both unsignalized.)

And besides, for the Sharlands/Robb intersection, there is far less traffic for the westbound left turn than the eastbound right, such that an EB right turn FYA could significantly increase intersection delay (especially during the am peak).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 17, 2018, 03:07:18 AM
Even in WA, while there is a fair few double permissive left turns, there are many double permissive right turns, where drivers yield to peds. This would be slightly different, but not significantly so. Are there no signalized double rights turns with pedestrian yields in NV? Something like this: http://bit.ly/2A3TvFa

There's also roundabouts, where the entire concept is "yield to traffic from left". They're not signalized, but the entire concept (beyond the two existing double right yields that you've mentioned) isn't exactly foreign. For left turns? Definitely more unusual, but not so much for right turns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 17, 2018, 05:19:35 PM
I got a slightly better look at this thing today, on the Mountain View Corridor (UT 85) and South Jordan Parkway:

(https://i.imgur.com/b1rr1KK.jpg)

As is obvious, the top of the doghouse is a red bicycle. The upper left of the lower part is a bicycle as well, while the lower left indication was a straight arrow. Both indications on the right were right arrows.

I would love to see how it functions, but I've never been down there long enough to observe anything other than the red bicycle on top.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 17, 2018, 11:14:03 PM


Quote from: jakeroot on December 17, 2018, 03:07:18 AM
Even in WA, while there is a fair few double permissive left turns, there are many double permissive right turns, where drivers yield to peds. This would be slightly different, but not significantly so. Are there no signalized double rights turns with pedestrian yields in NV? Something like this: http://bit.ly/2A3TvFa

There's also roundabouts, where the entire concept is "yield to traffic from left". They're not signalized, but the entire concept (beyond the two existing double right yields that you've mentioned) isn't exactly foreign. For left turns? Definitely more unusual, but not so much for right turns.

Nope, I can't think of any double right turn like that. Most, if not all, double right turns are designed with a pork chop island and  signalization of the ped crossing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 18, 2018, 03:05:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 17, 2018, 11:14:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 17, 2018, 03:07:18 AM
Even in WA, while there is a fair few double permissive left turns, there are many double permissive right turns, where drivers yield to peds. This would be slightly different, but not significantly so. Are there no signalized double rights turns with pedestrian yields in NV? Something like this: http://bit.ly/2A3TvFa

There's also roundabouts, where the entire concept is "yield to traffic from left". They're not signalized, but the entire concept (beyond the two existing double right yields that you've mentioned) isn't exactly foreign. For left turns? Definitely more unusual, but not so much for right turns.

Nope, I can't think of any double right turn like that. Most, if not all, double right turns are designed with a pork chop island and  signalization of the ped crossing.

Well, I'll be damned. I thought each state had at least one. I'm pretty sure CA has a few too, though they have decidedly fewer pork chop islands than Nevada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 01:54:43 AM
In Springfield, Oregon, I found a doghouse with a red arrow display. I think it has flashing yellow arrows, judging by this street view image (http://bit.ly/2QIRCYT), but I'm not 100% sure.

I know during the pictured phase below, the opposing direction has green for all directions (green arrow + green orb for through), so it must be displaying a flashing yellow. The "yield on green" signs were also removed, further solidifying the likeliness of it being a flashing yellow. Odd thing is, there's still orb displays. Perhaps there was some swapping?

EDIT: not the only one in Springfield (http://bit.ly/2Gv1Nfb). Note through phase ending...if you keep clicking northbound, a lagging green arrow pops up for southbound Mohawk traffic.

(https://i.imgur.com/W7QxHFh.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on December 19, 2018, 08:14:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 01:54:43 AM
In Springfield, Oregon, I found a doghouse with a red arrow display. I think it has flashing yellow arrows, judging by this street view image (http://bit.ly/2QIRCYT), but I'm not 100% sure.

I know during the pictured phase below, the opposing direction has green for all directions (green arrow + green orb for through), so it must be displaying a flashing yellow. The "yield on green" signs were also removed, further solidifying the likeliness of it being a flashing yellow. Odd thing is, there's still orb displays. Perhaps there was some swapping?

EDIT: not the only one in Springfield (http://bit.ly/2Gv1Nfb). Note through phase ending...if you keep clicking northbound, a lagging green arrow pops up for southbound Mohawk traffic.

(https://i.imgur.com/W7QxHFh.png)

I think the signal is a yellow trap, but it's reconfigured in the form of a doghouse
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2018, 09:32:19 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 17, 2018, 05:19:35 PM
I got a slightly better look at this thing today, on the Mountain View Corridor (UT 85) and South Jordan Parkway:

(https://i.imgur.com/b1rr1KK.jpg)

As is obvious, the top of the doghouse is a red bicycle. The upper left of the lower part is a bicycle as well, while the lower left indication was a straight arrow. Both indications on the right were right arrows.

I would love to see how it functions, but I've never been down there long enough to observe anything other than the red bicycle on top.
Wow! If you can get a video I'd love to see it!!


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 10:29:03 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 19, 2018, 08:14:12 PM
I think the signal is a yellow trap, but it's reconfigured in the form of a doghouse

You mean "flashing yellow arrow", not "yellow trap" correct? Yellow trap is a phasing style, not a signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 20, 2018, 02:17:58 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 10:29:03 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 19, 2018, 08:14:12 PM
I think the signal is a yellow trap, but it's reconfigured in the form of a doghouse

You mean "flashing yellow arrow", not "yellow trap" correct? Yellow trap is a phasing style, not a signal.
Technically, yellow trap is not a phasing still, but rather is a result of particular phase combinations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 20, 2018, 05:35:36 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 20, 2018, 02:17:58 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 10:29:03 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 19, 2018, 08:14:12 PM
I think the signal is a yellow trap, but it's reconfigured in the form of a doghouse
You mean "flashing yellow arrow", not "yellow trap" correct? Yellow trap is a phasing style, not a signal.
Technically, yellow trap is not a phasing still, but rather is a result of particular phase combinations.

Conceptually, "yellow trap phasing" could be when an agency specifically implements a yellow trap as part of regular phasing. That's not something you really see anymore, but it could have been at one point. Nowadays it's a mistake, but at one point it may have been intentional.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 20, 2018, 09:16:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 20, 2018, 05:35:36 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 20, 2018, 02:17:58 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 10:29:03 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 19, 2018, 08:14:12 PM
I think the signal is a yellow trap, but it's reconfigured in the form of a doghouse
You mean "flashing yellow arrow", not "yellow trap" correct? Yellow trap is a phasing style, not a signal.
Technically, yellow trap is not a phasing still, but rather is a result of particular phase combinations.

Conceptually, "yellow trap phasing" could be when an agency specifically implements a yellow trap as part of regular phasing. That's not something you really see anymore, but it could have been at one point. Nowadays it's a mistake, but at one point it may have been intentional.

It's not a phase style though. Phase styles would be something like split phasing, lead-lag left turns, or larger concepts like a TTI-4 phase (a specific sequence of phases used at both signals some diamond interchanges to keep the middle relatively clear).

Yellow trap is a specific result of lead-lag PPLT phasing where the old 5-section displays were used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 21, 2018, 01:07:41 PM
It's like the difference between liberty and freedom.  Liberty is granted by the authority, and freedom is what you enjoy as a result.  Freedom can also be enjoyed by different means (during a hike through Bir Tawil, for example).

Bad signal phasing is a construct implemented by an agency, and yellow trap is what you enjoy as a result.  Yellow trap can also be enjoyed by different means (due to a mistake in signal timing, for example.).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 21, 2018, 01:30:28 PM
I see, I see. Phasing error, not style.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 27, 2018, 07:11:04 PM
While browsing street view, I found what must be one of the strangest signal heads in the US: a straight-through and left turn arrow together in a cross shape (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1479343,-72.6071039,3a,60.1y,90.8h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stxIOjsvkDWfPd_EoUe-5QA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)! I don't know how signal jurisdiction works in Massachussets, but this is on a state route–it's pretty crazy that a state DOT would allow an installation like this, but knowing MassDOT I can't say I'm surprised.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on December 27, 2018, 07:30:22 PM
^^ Those have been banned in the MUTCD since the 1970s
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 27, 2018, 08:06:34 PM
Well LOL All bets are off when we're talking about Massachusetts!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 27, 2018, 10:41:43 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 27, 2018, 08:06:34 PM
Well LOL All bets are off when we're talking about Massachusetts!

Agreed. Mass (though it doesn't bother me) still installs flashing green signals, so even if this was installed after the ban, it wouldn't surprise me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 28, 2018, 07:37:03 AM
I'm gonna have to get some pictures of that light!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on December 28, 2018, 08:41:57 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 27, 2018, 07:11:04 PM
While browsing street view, I found what must be one of the strangest signal heads in the US: a straight-through and left turn arrow together in a cross shape (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1479343,-72.6071039,3a,60.1y,90.8h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stxIOjsvkDWfPd_EoUe-5QA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)! I don't know how signal jurisdiction works in Massachussets, but this is on a state route–it's pretty crazy that a state DOT would allow an installation like this, but knowing MassDOT I can't say I'm surprised.
There is a similar light in Sandusky, OH.  Got a picture of it somewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on December 28, 2018, 12:26:45 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 27, 2018, 07:11:04 PM
While browsing street view, I found what must be one of the strangest signal heads in the US: a straight-through and left turn arrow together in a cross shape (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1479343,-72.6071039,3a,60.1y,90.8h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stxIOjsvkDWfPd_EoUe-5QA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)! I don't know how signal jurisdiction works in Massachussets, but this is on a state route–it's pretty crazy that a state DOT would allow an installation like this, but knowing MassDOT I can't say I'm surprised.
The model of the signal shown is an Alusig. So these signals were installed after the MUTCD banned the double arrow

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 28, 2018, 03:27:50 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 28, 2018, 12:26:45 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 27, 2018, 07:11:04 PM
While browsing street view, I found what must be one of the strangest signal heads in the US: a straight-through and left turn arrow together in a cross shape (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1479343,-72.6071039,3a,60.1y,90.8h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stxIOjsvkDWfPd_EoUe-5QA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)! I don't know how signal jurisdiction works in Massachussets, but this is on a state route–it's pretty crazy that a state DOT would allow an installation like this, but knowing MassDOT I can't say I'm surprised.
The model of the signal shown is an Alusig. So these signals were installed after the MUTCD banned the double arrow

LG-M327
MassDot ia like f*** the MUTCD:
Proof: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5381397,-70.9357007,3a,20.3y,148.96h,92.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szYmm3ChGipzRGDkz-wLmMg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1069514,-72.6231577,3a,31.6y,62.29h,93.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc-SAIn8frJeJ0QOtiOrb1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This one is fine but I think this sign may be a bit redundent, even for MA: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0906584,-72.6262897,3a,33.5y,18.99h,100.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snLZUrr0WGiNRDDOUW2ZBBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
And this: (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7908/46452298042_48458a74f0_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dLQaQo)Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.22.11 PM (https://flic.kr/p/2dLQaQo) by Petru Sofio (https://www.flickr.com/photos/155056147@N08/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 28, 2018, 10:05:49 PM
Can't seem to find the thread were someone was complaining about ped signals hung on wires.  Here's another example from Seattle, another installation that's been replaced by pole-mounted signals.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4834/46507485491_8928d527d4_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dRH298)Wire-mounted pedestrain signal (https://flic.kr/p/2dRH298) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on December 28, 2018, 10:20:20 PM
^^ That was a MUTCD no-no

Section 4E.05 Location and Height of Pedestrian Signal Heads

Standard:
01 Pedestrian signal heads shall be mounted with the bottom of the signal housing including brackets not less than 7 feet or more than 10 feet above sidewalk level, and shall be positioned and adjusted to provide maximum visibility at the beginning of the controlled crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 29, 2018, 11:35:22 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 28, 2018, 03:27:50 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on December 28, 2018, 12:26:45 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 27, 2018, 07:11:04 PM
While browsing street view, I found what must be one of the strangest signal heads in the US: a straight-through and left turn arrow together in a cross shape (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1479343,-72.6071039,3a,60.1y,90.8h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stxIOjsvkDWfPd_EoUe-5QA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)! I don't know how signal jurisdiction works in Massachussets, but this is on a state route–it's pretty crazy that a state DOT would allow an installation like this, but knowing MassDOT I can't say I'm surprised.
The model of the signal shown is an Alusig. So these signals were installed after the MUTCD banned the double arrow

LG-M327
MassDot ia like f*** the MUTCD:
Proof: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5381397,-70.9357007,3a,20.3y,148.96h,92.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szYmm3ChGipzRGDkz-wLmMg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1069514,-72.6231577,3a,31.6y,62.29h,93.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc-SAIn8frJeJ0QOtiOrb1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This one is fine but I think this sign may be a bit redundent, even for MA: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0906584,-72.6262897,3a,33.5y,18.99h,100.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snLZUrr0WGiNRDDOUW2ZBBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
And this: (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7908/46452298042_48458a74f0_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dLQaQo)Screen Shot 2018-12-28 at 3.22.11 PM (https://flic.kr/p/2dLQaQo) by Petru Sofio (https://www.flickr.com/photos/155056147@N08/), on Flickr
Or flashing green lights/arrows as seen in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3-UugI0JoA).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on December 29, 2018, 11:44:34 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 29, 2018, 11:35:22 AM
Or flashing green lights/arrows as seen in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3-UugI0JoA).
Why didn't that signal notice the overheight truck and change to red?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 29, 2018, 05:01:19 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 29, 2018, 11:44:34 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 29, 2018, 11:35:22 AM
Or flashing green lights/arrows as seen in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3-UugI0JoA).
Why didn't that signal notice the overheight truck and change to red?
I've been trying to figure out what that signal does for a long time, still have no idea, may email WestWood,


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 31, 2018, 10:20:25 AM
^^
It's possible the signal isn't tied to the undercrossing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2018, 03:45:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 31, 2018, 10:20:25 AM
^^
It's possible the signal isn't tied to the undercrossing.
I've been trying to figure it out, there seems to be no purpose
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 31, 2018, 03:55:43 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2018, 03:45:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 31, 2018, 10:20:25 AM
^^
It's possible the signal isn't tied to the undercrossing.
I've been trying to figure it out, there seems to be no purpose

Is there a cross street with a stop sign, or a crosswalk?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on January 02, 2019, 07:29:20 PM
A few nights ago, I came across a temporary crosswalk on NY 38 with pedestrian signals at a bridge replacement north of Owego (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1458035,-76.2626223,3a,52.2y,55.85h,86.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shi_TGnlM6L09rVQJjfA0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  There's another crosswalk at the north end of the bridge too (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1468369,-76.2622064,3a,75y,208.36h,79.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seWNNnf8t867GtOxiQZ9sag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  I've never seen temporary crosswalks at bridge replacements before, and it's not in a town or city, and there aren't even sidewalks!  I wonder why they put in crosswalks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 02, 2019, 09:22:24 PM
Quote from: Michael on January 02, 2019, 07:29:20 PM
A few nights ago, I came across a temporary crosswalk on NY 38 with pedestrian signals at a bridge replacement north of Owego (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1458035,-76.2626223,3a,52.2y,55.85h,86.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shi_TGnlM6L09rVQJjfA0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  There's another crosswalk at the north end of the bridge too (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1468369,-76.2622064,3a,75y,208.36h,79.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seWNNnf8t867GtOxiQZ9sag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  I've never seen temporary crosswalks at bridge replacements before, and it's not in a town or city, and there aren't even sidewalks!  I wonder why they put in crosswalks.
The light increases traffic in the area, even though some stop, it's more confusing, and there are houses nearby.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 02, 2019, 10:16:33 PM
Quote from: Michael on January 02, 2019, 07:29:20 PM
A few nights ago, I came across a temporary crosswalk on NY 38 with pedestrian signals at a bridge replacement north of Owego (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1458035,-76.2626223,3a,52.2y,55.85h,86.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shi_TGnlM6L09rVQJjfA0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  There's another crosswalk at the north end of the bridge too (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1468369,-76.2622064,3a,75y,208.36h,79.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seWNNnf8t867GtOxiQZ9sag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  I've never seen temporary crosswalks at bridge replacements before, and it's not in a town or city, and there aren't even sidewalks!  I wonder why they put in crosswalks.

I was so certain I had the answer.  I figured it's because pedestrians walking along one edge of the road have to cross to the other side at the bridge–then cross back over again once they're across.  But, now that I think about it more, that would mean either they were not facing traffic already or else they would have to not face traffic in the construction zone.  So now I don't know again.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 03, 2019, 05:54:47 AM
I don't really see why a crosswalk shouldn't be included, even during construction. No sidewalks ≠ no pedestrians. If peds aren't allowed to cross the bridge, at the very least, there needs to be access to the side road from both edges of the main road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 03, 2019, 06:13:59 AM
Probably just part of the rules that all traffic lights must have pedestrian crossings, and no waiver was granted here.

The crosswalk is probably rarely if ever used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 03, 2019, 06:31:08 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 03, 2019, 06:13:59 AM
Probably just part of the rules that all traffic lights must have pedestrian crossings, and no waiver was granted here.

The crosswalk is probably rarely if ever used.
Speaking of Portable signals, has anyone seen this in the "wild": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpBKW6bgJS4
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 03, 2019, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2019, 05:54:47 AM
I don't really see why a crosswalk shouldn't be included, even during construction. No sidewalks ≠ no pedestrians. If peds aren't allowed to cross the bridge, at the very least, there needs to be access to the side road from both edges of the main road.

I don't see any signs anywhere prohibiting pedestrians on the bridge during construction.

Neither side of the bridge has any more room for walking than the other due to the barriers.

The southern crosswalk should be sufficient to provide walking access to/from the side street, no need for the northern one at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on January 03, 2019, 09:34:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 02, 2019, 10:16:33 PM
Quote from: Michael on January 02, 2019, 07:29:20 PM
A few nights ago, I came across a temporary crosswalk on NY 38 with pedestrian signals at a bridge replacement north of Owego (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1458035,-76.2626223,3a,52.2y,55.85h,86.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shi_TGnlM6L09rVQJjfA0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  There's another crosswalk at the north end of the bridge too (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1468369,-76.2622064,3a,75y,208.36h,79.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seWNNnf8t867GtOxiQZ9sag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  I've never seen temporary crosswalks at bridge replacements before, and it's not in a town or city, and there aren't even sidewalks!  I wonder why they put in crosswalks.

I was so certain I had the answer.  I figured it's because pedestrians walking along one edge of the road have to cross to the other side at the bridge–then cross back over again once they're across.  But, now that I think about it more, that would mean either they were not facing traffic already or else they would have to not face traffic in the construction zone.  So now I don't know again.

At first, I thought I saw a pair of Jersey barriers to make a walkway, but there's just a single barrier.

Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2019, 05:54:47 AM
I don't really see why a crosswalk shouldn't be included, even during construction. No sidewalks ≠ no pedestrians. If peds aren't allowed to cross the bridge, at the very least, there needs to be access to the side road from both edges of the main road.

Why would they need to cross at the northern end of the bridge?  They could walk along either the guardrail or the the Jersey barrier and cross at the southern end. (I see that kphoger said the same thing as I was writing this post)

Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 02, 2019, 09:22:24 PM
The light increases traffic in the area, even though some stop, it's more confusing, and there are houses nearby.

The last alternating one way setup I saw was at this bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0925744,-75.6410042,171m/data=!3m1!1e3) on NY 365A in Oneida, and I didn't see any crosswalks there.  There's sidewalks on both sides, nearby houses, and an AADT of 6791 as opposed to an AADT of 5467 on NY 38.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 03, 2019, 06:13:59 AM
Probably just part of the rules that all traffic lights must have pedestrian crossings, and no waiver was granted here.

The crosswalk is probably rarely if ever used.
I looked at the NYSDOT Work Zone Traffic Control Manual (https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/operating/oom/transportation-systems/safety-program-technical-operations/work-zone-control/repository/Work%20Zone%20Traffic%20Control%20Manual.pdf), and there's no mention of crosswalks being required.

After reading all these comments, I guess I'll say that maybe it's just a Region 9 quirk.  The only other alternating one way setups I've seen were in Regions 2 and 3.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 04, 2019, 11:02:25 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 03, 2019, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2019, 05:54:47 AM
I don't really see why a crosswalk shouldn't be included, even during construction. No sidewalks ≠ no pedestrians. If peds aren't allowed to cross the bridge, at the very least, there needs to be access to the side road from both edges of the main road.

I don't see any signs anywhere prohibiting pedestrians on the bridge during construction.

Neither side of the bridge has any more room for walking than the other due to the barriers.

The southern crosswalk should be sufficient to provide walking access to/from the side street, no need for the northern one at all.

It would appear to be a crosswalk to get peds from one side of the bridge to the other. This would be ideal, as pedestrian traffic would likely be more comfortable crossing on the side of the bridge without work occurring. If there was no crosswalk, pedestrians on the work-zone side would have to walk between the work zone and traffic.

Quote from: Michael on January 03, 2019, 09:34:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2019, 05:54:47 AM
I don't really see why a crosswalk shouldn't be included, even during construction. No sidewalks ≠ no pedestrians. If peds aren't allowed to cross the bridge, at the very least, there needs to be access to the side road from both edges of the main road.

Why would they need to cross at the northern end of the bridge?  They could walk along either the guardrail or the the Jersey barrier and cross at the southern end. (I see that kphoger said the same thing as I was writing this post)

See my above response.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 06, 2019, 10:21:47 PM
Would this doghouse be considered MUTCD compliant?

I think the bottom left is a bimodal arrow, and the middle left is a red arrow that lights up when the thru signal is not red and the protected left signals are red

https://goo.gl/maps/71KqSk4E71S2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:47:19 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 06, 2019, 10:21:47 PM
Would this doghouse be considered MUTCD compliant?

I think the bottom left is a bimodal arrow, and the middle left is a red arrow that lights up when the thru signal is not red and the protected left signals are red

https://goo.gl/maps/71KqSk4E71S2

No - it runs afoul of MUTCD 4D.09, which does not allow a red indication to horizontally adjacent to an indication of a different color in the same signal head.  It also does not comply with MUTCD 4D.19 (even if that is not a red arrow and instead a yellow arrow), which only allows shared signal heads for protected only turning movements when the begin and end at the same time as the adjacent through movement.

It is also confusing, and would appear to contradict the signing and pavement marking by making the center lane appeared to be a shared thru-left instead of a left turn lane.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 08, 2019, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:47:19 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 06, 2019, 10:21:47 PM
Would this doghouse be considered MUTCD compliant?

I think the bottom left is a bimodal arrow, and the middle left is a red arrow that lights up when the thru signal is not red and the protected left signals are red

https://goo.gl/maps/71KqSk4E71S2

No - it runs afoul of MUTCD 4D.09, which does not allow a red indication to horizontally adjacent to an indication of a different color in the same signal head.  It also does not comply with MUTCD 4D.19 (even if that is not a red arrow and instead a yellow arrow), which only allows shared signal heads for protected only turning movements when the begin and end at the same time as the adjacent through movement.

It is also confusing, and would appear to contradict the signing and pavement marking by making the center lane appeared to be a shared thru-left instead of a left turn lane.

Not only is the doghouse illegal, it really serves no purpose.  There are three other RA-YA-GA signals to control the left turn.  The doghouse should be replaced with a standard RYG for the straight movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 08, 2019, 01:45:42 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 08, 2019, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:47:19 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 06, 2019, 10:21:47 PM
Would this doghouse be considered MUTCD compliant?

I think the bottom left is a bimodal arrow, and the middle left is a red arrow that lights up when the thru signal is not red and the protected left signals are red

https://goo.gl/maps/71KqSk4E71S2

No - it runs afoul of MUTCD 4D.09, which does not allow a red indication to horizontally adjacent to an indication of a different color in the same signal head.  It also does not comply with MUTCD 4D.19 (even if that is not a red arrow and instead a yellow arrow), which only allows shared signal heads for protected only turning movements when the begin and end at the same time as the adjacent through movement.

It is also confusing, and would appear to contradict the signing and pavement marking by making the center lane appeared to be a shared thru-left instead of a left turn lane.

Not only is the doghouse illegal, it really serves no purpose.  There are three other RA-YA-GA signals to control the left turn.  The doghouse should be replaced with a standard RYG for the straight movement.

Agreed.

This is the absolute WORST!!! use of a doghouse I've ever seen. And of course, New Jersey  :pan:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jamess on January 08, 2019, 04:13:59 PM
It makes some sense.

There are two left turn lanes AND a protected left - both rare in NJ.

Hence the use of a trillion signals to make the point. You have two red left turn arrows facing the lanes - one per lane, ok. You have a near side left turn red, also required.

You need two through green arrows, but theres no near side pole, so they stuck another one up there.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 08, 2019, 04:17:33 PM
Quote from: plain on January 08, 2019, 01:45:42 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 08, 2019, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:47:19 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 06, 2019, 10:21:47 PM
Would this doghouse be considered MUTCD compliant?

I think the bottom left is a bimodal arrow, and the middle left is a red arrow that lights up when the thru signal is not red and the protected left signals are red

https://goo.gl/maps/71KqSk4E71S2

No - it runs afoul of MUTCD 4D.09, which does not allow a red indication to horizontally adjacent to an indication of a different color in the same signal head.  It also does not comply with MUTCD 4D.19 (even if that is not a red arrow and instead a yellow arrow), which only allows shared signal heads for protected only turning movements when the begin and end at the same time as the adjacent through movement.

It is also confusing, and would appear to contradict the signing and pavement marking by making the center lane appeared to be a shared thru-left instead of a left turn lane.

Not only is the doghouse illegal, it really serves no purpose.  There are three other RA-YA-GA signals to control the left turn.  The doghouse should be replaced with a standard RYG for the straight movement.

Agreed.

This is the absolute WORST!!! use of a doghouse I've ever seen. And of course, New Jersey  :pan:

It ranks right up there with this: https://goo.gl/maps/Rbje6emQQVB2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on January 08, 2019, 10:54:53 PM
Quote from: jamess on January 08, 2019, 04:13:59 PM
There are two left turn lanes AND a protected left - both rare in NJ.


Uh, no they're not.  NJ has many intersections with two left turn lanes, all of which (to my knowledge) are protected only.  That doghouse is indeed bizarre and not allowed, but welcome to Newark.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 08, 2019, 11:36:36 PM
Quote from: jamess on January 08, 2019, 04:13:59 PM
It makes some sense.

There are two left turn lanes AND a protected left - both rare in NJ.

Hence the use of a trillion signals to make the point. You have two red left turn arrows facing the lanes - one per lane, ok. You have a near side left turn red, also required.

You need two through green arrows, but theres no near side pole, so they stuck another one up there.


What would have made more sense in this instance (and would've been completely MUTCD compliant) would be a standard left turn signal head where the doghouse is, and adding a through signal on the far right mast pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kc8yqq on January 17, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
Here is an oddity for Michigan...an arrow for left on this type of traffic light fixture.  Normally it's a globe.  It's located in Leslie, Michigan, at the intersection of Bellevue Road and Hull Road.  The red arrow is for both directions of Bellevue Road and the standard globe is for both directions of Hull Road.  You can see both in this link and the traffic light is still like that today.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 03:03:26 PM
Quote from: kc8yqq on January 17, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
Here is an oddity for Michigan...an arrow for left on this type of traffic light fixture.  Normally it's a globe.  It's located in Leslie, Michigan, at the intersection of Bellevue Road and Hull Road.  The red arrow is for both directions of Bellevue Road and the standard globe is for both directions of Hull Road.  You can see both in this link and the traffic light is still like that today.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

As far as I know, even with a "LEFT" message above it, red orbs are no longer permitted for dedicated left turn signals. Places out west have been using red arrows for decades, so this seems like a fairly normal setup to me, minus the message above the signal (seems fairly obvious it's for left turns).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on January 17, 2019, 03:16:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 03:03:26 PM
Quote from: kc8yqq on January 17, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
Here is an oddity for Michigan...an arrow for left on this type of traffic light fixture.  Normally it's a globe.  It's located in Leslie, Michigan, at the intersection of Bellevue Road and Hull Road.  The red arrow is for both directions of Bellevue Road and the standard globe is for both directions of Hull Road.  You can see both in this link and the traffic light is still like that today.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

As far as I know, even with a "LEFT" message above it, red orbs are no longer permitted for dedicated left turn signals. Places out west have been using red arrows for decades, so this seems like a fairly normal setup to me, minus the message above the signal (seems fairly obvious it's for left turns).

Random question, but can anyone from Michigan tell me if they're still installing those internally lit case signs at their signal intersections? I've always been amazed by the sheer amount of them used around the state, but I'm curious if they're still being installed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 07:21:29 PM
Quote from: Ian on January 17, 2019, 03:16:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 03:03:26 PM
Quote from: kc8yqq on January 17, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
Here is an oddity for Michigan...an arrow for left on this type of traffic light fixture.  Normally it's a globe.  It's located in Leslie, Michigan, at the intersection of Bellevue Road and Hull Road.  The red arrow is for both directions of Bellevue Road and the standard globe is for both directions of Hull Road.  You can see both in this link and the traffic light is still like that today.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

As far as I know, even with a "LEFT" message above it, red orbs are no longer permitted for dedicated left turn signals. Places out west have been using red arrows for decades, so this seems like a fairly normal setup to me, minus the message above the signal (seems fairly obvious it's for left turns).

Random question, but can anyone from Michigan tell me if they're still installing those internally lit case signs at their signal intersections? I've always been amazed by the sheer amount of them used around the state, but I'm curious if they're still being installed.

Actually, I've wondered this myself on several occasions. Looking around street view, it would appear that individual cities kind of do their own thing in regards to signals; Lansing specifically no longer uses any case signs, but I don't think MDOT does either. The new I-96/Cascade Road DDI in Grand Rapids does not use any case signs. It wouldn't need to, since there's no specific need for case signs with a DDI, but they use backplates now, and I don't think those work well with case signs.

As for the "ONE WAY" or "DO NOT ENTER" case signs, I bet they still use them, but I cannot be sure. The I-96/Cascade DDI uses regular post-mounted signs like other states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:07:37 PM
Look at the doghouse, it's color configurated into a three color left turn signal, due to road work:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1621444,-75.1237667,3a,30y,339.45h,110.05t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D77.37656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:07:37 PM
Look at the doghouse, it's color configurated into a three color left turn signal, due to road work:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1621444,-75.1237667,3a,30y,339.45h,110.05t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D77.37656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100?hl=en&authuser=0
Very interesting, what I think PENNDOT could have done better is that they maybe should have thought about making the left lane a dedicated left turn lane for the time being, I would have either done that or prevent left turns and had signs instructing a U turn futher up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:07:37 PM
Look at the doghouse, it's color configurated into a three color left turn signal, due to road work:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1621444,-75.1237667,3a,30y,339.45h,110.05t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D77.37656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100?hl=en&authuser=0
Very interesting, what I think PENNDOT could have done better is that they maybe should have thought about making the left lane a dedicated left turn lane for the time being, I would have either done that or prevent left turns and had signs instructing a U turn futher up.

It is a weird setup. Zero reason for a protected left there, and as a result of installing it, they only have one through signal. :ded:

WSDOT modified a doghouse like this a few months ago (I'll post it again below), but they added another signal on the right as required by the MUTCD, and there was a dedicated left turn lane, which made it far less awkward:

Quote from: jakeroot on November 07, 2018, 07:11:59 PM
This temp signal in Alderton, WA (SR 162 (Orting Hwy) @ 96 St E) has a side-by-side style doghouse for the left turn signal, but it's being used in protected only mode. Where the arrow would normally be, the lenses are instead wrapped in black plastic.

If it were me, rather than jury-rigging a second overhead signal, I'd have just used a doghouse with the extra signal on the side, but whatever. Not my call.

As it relates to the above photo, things are in MD/DE/GA style with an all-black front and yellow back. Temp signals here are always an odd color scheme. Last one I saw had a completely yellow non-reflective backplate.

For the record, a truck hit old the signal: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article214721030.html

(https://i.imgur.com/6fH5C9s.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/oEQLwkM.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on January 18, 2019, 01:35:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 17, 2019, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:08:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:07:37 PM
Look at the doghouse, it's color configurated into a three color left turn signal, due to road work:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1621444,-75.1237667,3a,30y,339.45h,110.05t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5SfcJEmlSti6WGlFCFB3Jw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D77.37656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100?hl=en&authuser=0
Very interesting, what I think PENNDOT could have done better is that they maybe should have thought about making the left lane a dedicated left turn lane for the time being, I would have either done that or prevent left turns and had signs instructing a U turn futher up.

It is a weird setup. Zero reason for a protected left there, and as a result of installing it, they only have one through signal. :ded:

It is a left turn lane as indicated by signage further back, though it's not striped. It's certainly a weird signal setup. It seems they took the existing doghouse and just moved it over with wiring extensions, but must have rewired it somewhat as there'd be no reason to have a wire for a red arrow before. (Maybe they were planning ahead when they first installed it?) I find it odd that there was only one normal signal to begin with, since I thought PennDOT usually uses two "through" signals in addition to left-turn doghouses when there's more than one through lane, as seen at the next light up. Maybe that's just a newer practice that this signal installation predates?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 20, 2019, 09:32:48 PM
More of a beacon than a signal, but I'd rather post this here than start a new thread:  Does anywhere else use two doubled overhead flashing beacons beside Texas?  Example on US 82 near Gainesville (https://goo.gl/maps/1hLurWeqPTs)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 20, 2019, 10:38:46 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 20, 2019, 09:32:48 PM
More of a beacon than a signal, but I'd rather post this here than start a new thread:  Does anywhere else use two doubled overhead flashing beacons beside Texas?  Example on US 82 near Gainesville (https://goo.gl/maps/1hLurWeqPTs)

An example in NJ (the both blink red in this case):
https://goo.gl/maps/744EoNddQMm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2019, 06:44:00 PM
Spokane has installed another 8-inch arrow (sometime between 2016 and 2017). It's a lagging left movement, so no bi-modal operation.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2364465#msg2364465), this is not the first 8-inch arrow installed by Spokane. The other location (only one block away) has several 8-8-8 RYG arrows, instead of just two. But I think those were retrofits, whereas these are brand new signals (though they could be recycled signal heads from another intersection).

8-inch arrows have long been banned, so I have no idea how or why these popped up only now, especially since Spokane has been using 12-inch arrows elsewhere in the city for decades. Maybe these downtown signals don't have enough conduit or weight capacity to support larger signals?

http://bit.ly/2sE169i

(https://i.imgur.com/4QgwQ18.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 21, 2019, 07:34:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 21, 2019, 06:44:00 PM
Spokane has installed another 8-inch arrow (sometime between 2016 and 2017). It's a lagging left movement, so no bi-modal operation.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2364465#msg2364465), this is not the first 8-inch arrow installed by Spokane. The other location (only one block away) has several 8-8-8 RYG arrows, instead of just two. But I think those were retrofits, whereas these are brand new signals (though they could be recycled signal heads from another intersection).

8-inch arrows have long been banned, so I have no idea how or why these popped up only now, especially since Spokane has been using 12-inch arrows elsewhere in the city for decades. Maybe these downtown signals don't have enough conduit or weight capacity to support larger signals?

http://bit.ly/2sE169i

(https://i.imgur.com/4QgwQ18.png)
8-inch arrows are one of my traffic pet peeves. I really do not understand how hard it is to change out one signal. As one would expect, MA is loaded with them...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 21, 2019, 07:41:53 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 21, 2019, 07:34:43 PM
8-inch arrows are one of my traffic pet peeves. I really do not understand how hard it is to change out one signal. As one would expect, MA is loaded with them...

They don't really bother me; I'm used to seeing them in British Columbia (where they're still installed regularly for near-side left turn signals). But I prefer them to be supplemental to 12-inch arrows (which they usually are in BC).

I didn't know there were any 8-inch arrows in MA. Do you know of any offhand?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 23, 2019, 01:55:32 AM
Deleted -- moved to thread Right-turn arrow with simultaneous opposing left-turn arrow (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17829.msg2388221#msg2388221)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 23, 2019, 11:25:36 AM
Only one through light here (https://goo.gl/maps/TL37qtBkHy12), though "through" is an onramp.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 23, 2019, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 23, 2019, 01:55:32 AM
Found something that I think is in error. Kingston, WA.

Two one-way streets meeting a major one-way street, but both one-way streets have green arrows at the same time for the turn onto the major one-way street. Only way this can safely work is if both cars turn into the near lane. Which they should, of course, but I still don't think this is permitted.

http://bit.ly/2U8CPnz (spin camera around to see the other signal)

Thread topic here. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17829.0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 23, 2019, 05:01:34 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 23, 2019, 02:25:08 PM
Thread topic here. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17829.0)

Thanks...I reposted the link over there. Very nearly the same setup as the OP.



Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 23, 2019, 11:25:36 AM
Only one through light here (https://goo.gl/maps/TL37qtBkHy12), though "through" is an onramp.

Ugh. The setup predates WSDOT's adoption of the 2009 MUTCD (in 2011), which used to permit one through head, if the through movement was less important than another movement. But even before 2011, [I thought] two through heads were standard for all movements except straight-ahead movements at off-ramps, where it was decided that going straight-ahead was less important than the turns. As a result, many off-ramps signalized prior to Jan 2012 (see: example in Kent (http://bit.ly/2S24HMY)) usually had only one green orb.

Oddly enough, nearby Renton was the bigger offender, where until recently, there were more than a couple of installs with only one through signal. Though it was installed a long time ago, Houser Way @ N 8 St is having one added soon (thanks to yours truly), and (as mentioned previously) Puget Dr @ Talbot, and SW 7 St @ Rainier both previously lacked extra green orbs as well (despite installation after 2011); at least they're receptive to my emails when I locate issues.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 23, 2019, 08:57:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 21, 2019, 07:41:53 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 21, 2019, 07:34:43 PM
8-inch arrows are one of my traffic pet peeves. I really do not understand how hard it is to change out one signal. As one would expect, MA is loaded with them...

They don't really bother me; I'm used to seeing them in British Columbia (where they're still installed regularly for near-side left turn signals). But I prefer them to be supplemental to 12-inch arrows (which they usually are in BC).

I didn't know there were any 8-inch arrows in MA. Do you know of any offhand?
Yes, here are a few:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4300204,-71.0454847,3a,32.8y,107.48h,90.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slRGi7Fa5Kn5zfuyZDPkX6A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 and
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1069514,-72.6231577,3a,19.3y,59.17h,92.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc-SAIn8frJeJ0QOtiOrb1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 03:49:20 AM
What's with California's newer traffic signal installations?  Did Caltrans revise the standards for how thick the masts are built? 

Here's a photo I took in San Jose back in July:
(https://i.imgur.com/tbg22Ud.jpg)

The rest are just photos from Google Maps.
Fremont:
(https://i.imgur.com/8bQRpHF.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/HcPgKTX.jpg)
Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4899584,-121.9296469,3a,75y,151.13h,98.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5lQfgpFitixlLhIrOTnUBQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Temecula:
(https://i.imgur.com/49LQB8l.jpg)
Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4793243,-117.1377299,3a,75y,312.85h,100.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srSxvDP5tB93TPMtsiYm8rQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

These are pretty recent -- I'd say between late 2017 and now.  I saw some more when I was down in California in Carmel-by-the-Sea, Anaheim, San Mateo and San Luis Obispo, but I couldn't find those intersections updated on Google Street View, and I didn't take pictures, unfortunately. 

These masts seem overengineered for the load, even for the long mast-arm length.  Perhaps the standard is a clever way to hide 5G cell transmission equipment within the mast?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on January 24, 2019, 10:05:21 AM
Those don't seem all that thick for what they are.

Here's a contrast:
Illinois typical (https://goo.gl/maps/qDCTTG3Q76H2)
Wisconsin typical (https://goo.gl/maps/mhGAnTD9JM72)

If you'll note, the Illinois one is about as thick as your new California ones above.  The Wisconsin one, on the other hand, is really a big mastarm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on January 24, 2019, 11:17:16 AM
It looks a lot bigger than what you'd usually see in Utah:

Classic curved mast-arm design (https://goo.gl/maps/5BQaJ8Mh2U92)
Old design for long mast-arms (rare) (https://goo.gl/maps/6c82f7Rw1L52)
New curved mast-arm design (shorter) (https://goo.gl/maps/zMQ72k7Xr6J2)
New straight mast-arm design (longer) (https://goo.gl/maps/vjhEPHmetFS2)

I don't know...to me, none of those looks as disproportionate as those California pictures. Maybe that's a Utah thing though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 01:55:13 PM
In those CA examples, the mast arm appears to be no thicker than normal, but the mast itself is definitely oversized for the arm. Other than the massive signal bridges with two masts, I haven't seen any mast that large here in WA.

Quote from: Brandon on January 24, 2019, 10:05:21 AM
If you'll note, the Illinois one is about as thick as your new California ones above.  The Wisconsin one, on the other hand, is really a big mastarm.

Kek is referring to the mast, not the arm. Both of your examples have pretty standard mast designs from my point of view.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 01:55:13 PM
I haven't seen any mast that large here in WA.
Everett has a myriad of different traffic light mast and mast-arm designs.  The stone masts are pretty thick, but that makes a little more sense. 

(https://i.imgur.com/zPdGPN2.png)
Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9361575,-122.2189604,3a,49.1y,17.05h,91.6t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRFoPSBJn4e6ZJpzuyz7yPg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DRFoPSBJn4e6ZJpzuyz7yPg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D314.92682%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)

Maybe Caltrans changed the wind loading specs?  😂
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 04:52:24 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 03:53:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 01:55:13 PM
I haven't seen any mast that large here in WA.
Everett has a myriad of different traffic light mast and mast-arm designs.  The stone masts are pretty thick, but that makes a little more sense. 

If you squint your eyes (and partly ignore the materials), you could almost confuse that Everett setup with those new CA setups.

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 03:53:42 PM
Maybe Caltrans changed the wind loading specs?  😂

Fat chance!
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 08:16:52 PM
I seem to recall unincorporated Pierce County signals from 2015 to look very Caltrans-inspired.  They're still following WSDOT's general signal per lane protocol as well as omitting backplates. 


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 24, 2019, 08:16:52 PM
I seem to recall unincorporated Pierce County signals from 2015 to look very Caltrans-inspired.  They're still following WSDOT's general signal per lane protocol as well as omitting backplates. 

They've actually changed to become very uhh...basic (http://bit.ly/2UhEcAC). Newer mast arms are now straight (again), and backplates basically just showed up overnight across the county about a year ago, complete with reflective tape.

Problem with Pierce County, compared to other agencies, is that, in many cases, the left turn signal is moved off-center towards the through lane, making the left turn signal and the left through signal closer together than the through signal is to the other through signal. Hard to describe, but you can see it in the above link.

The most Caltrans-looking signal in the county is undoubtedly this install: http://bit.ly/2CIDnJL -- curved mast arm with an auxiliary signal on the mast (Canyon Road recently received auxiliary signals along its entire length south of SR-512).

One odd thing that Pierce County is obsessed with is the three-head FYA. This four-head FYA (http://bit.ly/2UcIVn1) from several years ago was recently swapped out with a three-head FYA. Apparently this is so all FYA's in the county look the same. Because they've been modifying a lot of the existing protected-only lefts, there's a whole bunch of three-head FYA's that only exist because it was cheaper than adding an extra signal face.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
They've actually changed to become very uhh...basic (http://bit.ly/2UhEcAC). Newer mast arms are now straight (again), and backplates basically just showed up overnight across the county about a year ago, complete with reflective tape.

Well, it's interesting because there's a new signal on a municipal Tacoma street that doesn't fit the standard Tacoma design, but rather a typical WSDOT mast setup for the luminaire.   (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2230723,-122.4433422,3a,51.4y,88.87h,98.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s14j5LCUMcKGz8vAqPx7UJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
Problem with Pierce County, compared to other agencies, is that, in many cases, the left turn signal is moved off-center towards the through lane, making the left turn signal and the left through signal closer together than the through signal is to the other through signal. Hard to describe, but you can see it in the above link.
Seems like they cheaped out on the mast-arm and are improvising? 


Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
The most Caltrans-looking signal in the county is undoubtedly this install: http://bit.ly/2CIDnJL -- curved mast arm with an auxiliary signal on the mast (Canyon Road recently received auxiliary signals along its entire length south of SR-512).
Looks good.  I wish the mast-arm for the luminaire matched the same curve as the mast-arm for the signals.   Caltrans would only have one signal on the mast-arm too. 

Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
One odd thing that Pierce County is obsessed with is the three-head FYA. This four-head FYA (http://bit.ly/2UcIVn1) from several years ago was recently swapped out with a three-head FYA. Apparently this is so all FYA's in the county look the same. Because they've been modifying a lot of the existing protected-only lefts, there's a whole bunch of three-head FYA's that only exist because it was cheaper than adding an extra signal face.
So is the bottom signal yellow or green?  I've seen 3-head FYA in Beaverton, OR, where the bottom signal is (flashing) yellow implying that there is never a protected phase.  It's a common practice now for right-turns into pedestrian crosswalks. 


Slight side-note:  Here's an intriguing 3-head FYA in Los Angeles for both right and left turns.
(https://i.imgur.com/srNBM23.png)

Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0534922,-118.2408338,3a,72y,226.29h,82.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr38c4ydECyVYkwHXI65auA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 25, 2019, 01:53:24 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
They've actually changed to become very uhh...basic (http://bit.ly/2UhEcAC). Newer mast arms are now straight (again), and backplates basically just showed up overnight across the county about a year ago, complete with reflective tape.
Well, it's interesting because there's a new signal on a municipal Tacoma street that doesn't fit the standard Tacoma design, but rather a typical WSDOT mast setup for the luminaire.   (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2230723,-122.4433422,3a,51.4y,88.87h,98.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s14j5LCUMcKGz8vAqPx7UJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Tacoma seems to have moved away from the so-called "Tacoma Tower" in favor of the flashing yellow arrow. The last install I know was at Pacific & South Tacoma Way (http://bit.ly/2Hul9RN).

As for the mast, backplates, etc, those installs along 38th are similar in design to the new signals along Port of Tacoma Road (http://bit.ly/2S6A09b), although those (except the new curved mast arm (http://bit.ly/2FY3Mql) at Marshall Ave) have 8-sided(?) mast arms. It's possible that the city has adopted WSDOT guidelines for signals, although the city still seems to use its own pavement marking scheme, similar to Seattle.

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
Problem with Pierce County, compared to other agencies, is that, in many cases, the left turn signal is moved off-center towards the through lane, making the left turn signal and the left through signal closer together than the through signal is to the other through signal. Hard to describe, but you can see it in the above link.
Seems like they cheaped out on the mast-arm and are improvising? 

Possible, although it happens so often, I wonder if it's intentional. It's almost like the mast arms were designed for 5-section pro/per signals.

Nearby Puyallup, when switching to FYA's from 5-section signals, installed several mast-arm extensions (http://bit.ly/2S2Ctld) to get the FYA to the center of the left turn lane (note in that link, the extension is not yet installed, but the new through signals are installed to give you some idea of where the FYA was placed).

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
The most Caltrans-looking signal in the county is undoubtedly this install: http://bit.ly/2CIDnJL -- curved mast arm with an auxiliary signal on the mast (Canyon Road recently received auxiliary signals along its entire length south of SR-512).
Looks good.  I wish the mast-arm for the luminaire matched the same curve as the mast-arm for the signals.   Caltrans would only have one signal on the mast-arm too. 

That would have been cool, but too much to ask of Pierce County :-D. Most of Canyon has through-minus-one for the number of signal heads (at least in the three lane sections), but it's a sea of straight mast arms in those areas. Except for two at 176th (http://bit.ly/2G1l5qD), which have a slight curve plus auxiliary signals for the both the left and through movements. Very CA-esque, minus the use of two overhead left turn signals.

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
One odd thing that Pierce County is obsessed with is the three-head FYA. This four-head FYA (http://bit.ly/2UcIVn1) from several years ago was recently swapped out with a three-head FYA. Apparently this is so all FYA's in the county look the same. Because they've been modifying a lot of the existing protected-only lefts, there's a whole bunch of three-head FYA's that only exist because it was cheaper than adding an extra signal face.
So is the bottom signal yellow or green?  I've seen 3-head FYA in Beaverton, OR, where the bottom signal is (flashing) yellow implying that there is never a protected phase.  It's a common practice now for right-turns into pedestrian crosswalks. 

Pierce County's have a flashing yellow in the central lens position, unlike Lakewood which uses a flashing yellow/solid green combo.

Auburn seems to have a ton of those FYA's for right turns, though most are four-section FYA's.

Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Slight side-note:  Here's an intriguing 3-head FYA in Los Angeles for both right and left turns.
(https://i.imgur.com/srNBM23.png)
Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0534922,-118.2408338,3a,72y,226.29h,82.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr38c4ydECyVYkwHXI65auA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

That may be the first signal in the history of California not to feature any sort of pole- or mast-mounted green signal. The other direction also has some very crowded signals (http://bit.ly/2MyeQMf), unlike anything I've really seen in CA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 02:19:49 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Slight side-note:  Here's an intriguing 3-head FYA in Los Angeles for both right and left turns.
(https://i.imgur.com/srNBM23.png)

Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0534922,-118.2408338,3a,72y,226.29h,82.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr38c4ydECyVYkwHXI65auA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The only one I've seen in person is on westbound US 422 at Locust Street near Myerstown, PA. The other direction has a normal one with a green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 25, 2019, 10:04:09 PM
Looking on streetview those FYAs look like theyre used for a leading pedestrian/bike interval.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on January 29, 2019, 02:19:00 AM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 09:55:03 PM
One odd thing that Pierce County is obsessed with is the three-head FYA. This four-head FYA (http://bit.ly/2UcIVn1) from several years ago was recently swapped out with a three-head FYA. Apparently this is so all FYA's in the county look the same. Because they've been modifying a lot of the existing protected-only lefts, there's a whole bunch of three-head FYA's that only exist because it was cheaper than adding an extra signal face.
So is the bottom signal yellow or green?  I've seen 3-head FYA in Beaverton, OR, where the bottom signal is (flashing) yellow implying that there is never a protected phase.  It's a common practice now for right-turns into pedestrian crosswalks. 

The vast majority of 3-head FYAs in Beaverton (and Washington County in general) are bimodal, meaning the bottom head can display both a solid green arrow and FYA (obviously not at the same time). It's rare but a few signals in Oregon have the FYA use the same head as the solid yellow arrow. Most however have the FYA use the same face that displays the solid green arrow.

Some signals in the Portland area do have a bottom head that shows only a FYA, not a solid green arrow. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is a pair of right turn signals on SE Gideon St and SE 12th Ave. I don't know why a green arrow isn't shown, though it might be due to the fact that opposing left turns into the same street may be made on a red arrow. https://goo.gl/maps/9ovehzJXH652
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 05:29:50 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on January 29, 2019, 02:19:00 AM
Some signals in the Portland area do have a bottom head that shows only a FYA, not a solid green arrow. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is a pair of right turn signals on SE Gideon St and SE 12th Ave. I don't know why a green arrow isn't shown, though it might be due to the fact that opposing left turns into the same street may be made on a red arrow. https://goo.gl/maps/9ovehzJXH652

Seattle has several right-facing FYA's that have no protected phase. The point is mostly to give priority to the direction that normally wouldn't have priority, such as here: http://bit.ly/2sSEodG
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 29, 2019, 08:24:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 05:29:50 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on January 29, 2019, 02:19:00 AM
Some signals in the Portland area do have a bottom head that shows only a FYA, not a solid green arrow. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is a pair of right turn signals on SE Gideon St and SE 12th Ave. I don't know why a green arrow isn't shown, though it might be due to the fact that opposing left turns into the same street may be made on a red arrow. https://goo.gl/maps/9ovehzJXH652

Seattle has several right-facing FYA's that have no protected phase. The point is mostly to give priority to the direction that normally wouldn't have priority, such as here: http://bit.ly/2sSEodG

That looks more like a NYC style FYA implementation that calls attention to the crosswalk for right turning traffic. The left turning traffic with the green ball on the opposite side still has to yield also.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 10:55:51 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 29, 2019, 08:24:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 05:29:50 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on January 29, 2019, 02:19:00 AM
Some signals in the Portland area do have a bottom head that shows only a FYA, not a solid green arrow. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is a pair of right turn signals on SE Gideon St and SE 12th Ave. I don't know why a green arrow isn't shown, though it might be due to the fact that opposing left turns into the same street may be made on a red arrow. https://goo.gl/maps/9ovehzJXH652

Seattle has several right-facing FYA's that have no protected phase. The point is mostly to give priority to the direction that normally wouldn't have priority, such as here: http://bit.ly/2sSEodG

That looks more like a NYC style FYA implementation that calls attention to the crosswalk for right turning traffic. The left turning traffic with the green ball on the opposite side still has to yield also.

True. The old light was a flashing yellow orb. I'm guessing they just don't want to use a green orb to avoid A) traffic assuming straight-ahead was OK, and B) traffic turning right without yielding. In practice, very few cars approach the FYA so my instinct has always been that the double left had priority, but that wouldn't make much sense.

Here's a better example (http://bit.ly/2RV0Imb). Another double left. Formerly, both sides had green orbs, but the single-lane approach was changed to right-only and FYA-control, so that the double left could proceed without yielding (which was very awkward, with oncoming traffic having to jog right (http://bit.ly/2TlM9Vb) to avoid a head-on crash). As there is no pedestrian crossing to the right, the FYA must mean "right turn yield to left turn".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on January 30, 2019, 04:50:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 10:55:51 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 29, 2019, 08:24:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 05:29:50 AM
Quote from: Ace10 on January 29, 2019, 02:19:00 AM
Some signals in the Portland area do have a bottom head that shows only a FYA, not a solid green arrow. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is a pair of right turn signals on SE Gideon St and SE 12th Ave. I don't know why a green arrow isn't shown, though it might be due to the fact that opposing left turns into the same street may be made on a red arrow. https://goo.gl/maps/9ovehzJXH652

Seattle has several right-facing FYA's that have no protected phase. The point is mostly to give priority to the direction that normally wouldn't have priority, such as here: http://bit.ly/2sSEodG

That looks more like a NYC style FYA implementation that calls attention to the crosswalk for right turning traffic. The left turning traffic with the green ball on the opposite side still has to yield also.

True. The old light was a flashing yellow orb. I'm guessing they just don't want to use a green orb to avoid A) traffic assuming straight-ahead was OK, and B) traffic turning right without yielding. In practice, very few cars approach the FYA so my instinct has always been that the double left had priority, but that wouldn't make much sense.

Here's a better example (http://bit.ly/2RV0Imb). Another double left. Formerly, both sides had green orbs, but the single-lane approach was changed to right-only and FYA-control, so that the double left could proceed without yielding (which was very awkward, with oncoming traffic having to jog right (http://bit.ly/2TlM9Vb) to avoid a head-on crash). As there is no pedestrian crossing to the right, the FYA must mean "right turn yield to left turn".

What's with the akward signal placement on the side street, they just have a small bracket attached to the bottom sections
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2019, 05:44:34 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 30, 2019, 04:50:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 29, 2019, 10:55:51 PM
Here's a better example (http://bit.ly/2RV0Imb). Another double left. Formerly, both sides had green orbs, but the single-lane approach was changed to right-only and FYA-control, so that the double left could proceed without yielding (which was very awkward, with oncoming traffic having to jog right (http://bit.ly/2TlM9Vb) to avoid a head-on crash). As there is no pedestrian crossing to the right, the FYA must mean "right turn yield to left turn".

What's with the akward signal placement on the side street, they just have a small bracket attached to the bottom sections

It appears to be a signal that was hung upwards! I think it was done to avoid the trolley wire, which probably came after the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 01, 2019, 11:10:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)

Could you provide some more explanation on the first part? I'm not following.

But yeah, that signal head at far left should be replaced with an FYA display.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on February 01, 2019, 12:11:37 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 25, 2019, 02:19:49 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on January 25, 2019, 04:33:20 AM
Slight side-note:  Here's an intriguing 3-head FYA in Los Angeles for both right and left turns.
(https://i.imgur.com/srNBM23.png)

Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0534922,-118.2408338,3a,72y,226.29h,82.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr38c4ydECyVYkwHXI65auA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The only one I've seen in person is on westbound US 422 at Locust Street near Myerstown, PA. The other direction has a normal one with a green arrow.

It seems that the signal in LA does not even have protected green.  FYA used to indicate a left turn yield situation, that possibly does not allow left turns at all at the beginning of the cycle.  But given the 2-way traffic, high number of peds, and the bike lanes, this should be a protected only left here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 12:32:07 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 01, 2019, 11:10:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)

Could you provide some more explanation on the first part? I'm not following.

But yeah, that signal head at far left should be replaced with an FYA display.

Yes, sorry. The original left turn signal was a bi-modal "yield on green". The signal on the left mast originally had a fourth lens for this bi-modal arrow, but it was removed when the FYA was installed. Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow to not confuse anyone over having two different left turn signals, they could have retrofit the four original heads for an all-arrow FYA setup.

Green orbs on the left side of intersections aren't particularly common in Western Washington, so it doesn't surprise me that engineers get a little confused by proper usage (unless they come from CA, as is the case for numerous cities that already use left-side aux signals on the regular, like Auburn or Federal Way).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 01, 2019, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)

In the technical sense, there's nothing wrong with it per se.  But, if you want to reduce confusion, along with having 2 signals for each movement, it should be a FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on February 01, 2019, 02:19:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)

The bend to the right is the reason for that signal head on the left.  People probably can't anticipate that mast arm assembly on the right from very far down the road, due to the curve.  That signal head on the left is probably the only thing you can see from 500ft in advance.  Still, a more responsible design would include signal heads for turning and thru traffic at the left side of the intersection, like on a dual mast arm.  I'm pretty sure you're right in that this type of setup isn't allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on February 01, 2019, 02:44:59 PM
Here's a fun one that I remembered while looking for one similar to Jakeroot's Kent, WA example.
North Aurora, IL, IL-56 at IL-25: https://goo.gl/maps/miSUcjYFLm42
Count them, four three-light signals and five PPLT towers (making nine through signals).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 08:11:50 PM
That configuration in Kent, Wa. is permitted in that there is no rule against it in the Federal Manual. But I agree it's a bad practice. Interestingly, when New York State had their own Manual years ago, they did have a rule prohibiting a green-ball being displayed to the left of a left-turn arrow, which I agreed with. Not sure if that rule exists in the current state supplement, but it does still seem to be the practice in New York.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 09:31:24 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 01, 2019, 02:19:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2019, 01:41:45 AM
Instead of removing the bi-modal arrow, they could have just swapped the four heads for arrows ... pretty sure this isn't allowed: Kent, WA (http://bit.ly/2Rsp9lz).

(https://i.imgur.com/5NaYRHl.png)

The bend to the right is the reason for that signal head on the left.  People probably can't anticipate that mast arm assembly on the right from very far down the road, due to the curve.  That signal head on the left is probably the only thing you can see from 500ft in advance.  Still, a more responsible design would include signal heads for turning and thru traffic at the left side of the intersection, like on a dual mast arm.  I'm pretty sure you're right in that this type of setup isn't allowed.

I certainly understand the reason for the extra signal on the left. I'm glad it's there. Typically on these approaches, however, the far left signal is an extra flashing yellow arrow, and the extra green orb is on the near-left mast or mast arm. This style.of setup can be seen here (http://bit.ly/2BicmwO) (pan up if looking at the ground).

Quote from: Brandon on February 01, 2019, 02:44:59 PM
Here's a fun one that I remembered while looking for one similar to Jakeroot's Kent, WA example.
North Aurora, IL, IL-56 at IL-25: https://goo.gl/maps/miSUcjYFLm42
Count them, four three-light signals and five PPLT towers (making nine through signals).

No excuse for missing that light! Credit to whichever IL agency installed that.

Quote from: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 08:11:50 PM
That configuration in Kent, Wa. is permitted in that there is no rule against it in the Federal Manual. But I agree it's a bad practice. Interestingly, when New York State had their own Manual years ago, they did have a rule prohibiting a green-ball being displayed to the left of a left-turn arrow, which I agreed with. Not sure if that rule exists in the current state supplement, but it does still seem to be the practice in New York.

I assume there would be an exemption for when the signal on the left was identical to the one on the right? For example, an extra 4-section or 5-section PPLT signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on February 01, 2019, 10:26:41 PM
While playing GeoGuessr this afternoon, I got a location on Long Island on NY 27A that had a few Caltrans-like signals, which was weird to see in NY.

1 (most Caltrans-like) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6734555,-73.3754672,3a,75y,224.38h,89.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-7SHwNmpUKePjuwNqwgBPw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D-7SHwNmpUKePjuwNqwgBPw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D324.71902%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6722765,-73.3784114,3a,75y,236.96h,92.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRYlI6E9jINXGSm1vD3SkxQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6713679,-73.3812097,3a,75y,13.37h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf4Jbw7ROGeWDVXlECR0crg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 10:40:09 PM
In the last few years NYS DOT Region-10 has begun using backplates again after a failed project in the early 1990's. I say "failed" because over the years they almost all broke off and disappeared and the same thing is already happening on their recent installations.

To their credit they have gotten a lot more into using mast arms in a diagonal span, replacing old span-wire installations. Those curved California-like mast-arms have long been used by Nassau County DPW, but are relatively new to NYS DOT.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on February 02, 2019, 12:00:54 AM
Quote from: Michael on February 01, 2019, 10:26:41 PM
1 (most Caltrans-like) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6734555,-73.3754672,3a,75y,224.38h,89.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-7SHwNmpUKePjuwNqwgBPw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D-7SHwNmpUKePjuwNqwgBPw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D324.71902%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

Is it normal for Region 10 to not install pedheads & APS for all crosswalks at new signals? It seems especially weird to add FYA signals but not bother to add a pedhead for the conflicting crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 02, 2019, 12:20:38 AM
Speaking of Kent, there's this (https://goo.gl/maps/KFhhqXXKve42) intersection.  The supplemental signal left of center isn't controlling the intersection it is placed on.  Traffic from the left has a stop sign.  No, it's giving you a preview of coming attractions for the traffic light around the corner to the right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2019, 06:26:41 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 10:40:09 PM
In the last few years NYS DOT Region-10 has begun using backplates again after a failed project in the early 1990's. I say "failed" because over the years they almost all broke off and disappeared and the same thing is already happening on their recent installations.

To their credit they have gotten a lot more into using mast arms in a diagonal span, replacing old span-wire installations. Those curved California-like mast-arms have long been used by Nassau County DPW, but are relatively new to NYS DOT.

Nassau's mast arm installations are orders of magnitude better than NYSDOT's.

Often times the state ones are so sloppy. Heck in example 2 you can see the support brackets sticking up! Same with this one: bent signals and sloppy mounting

2036 New York Ave
https://goo.gl/maps/qbu5tqoEc9Q2

Compared to a new span wire installation

Nesconset Hwy
https://goo.gl/maps/d23QFnhZX122

Or a new Nassau DPW installation

160 Old Country Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/tNkUPdTFMCN2

The state should go back to using spanwire, much cleaner IMO
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 08:19:08 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 02, 2019, 12:20:38 AM
Speaking of Kent, there's this (https://goo.gl/maps/KFhhqXXKve42) intersection.  The supplemental signal left of center isn't controlling the intersection it is placed on.  Traffic from the left has a stop sign.  No, it's giving you a preview of coming attractions for the traffic light around the corner to the right.
They should use this sign: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5518406,-71.4357178,3a,23.1y,280.32h,89.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdusohWJXrbWoXx_tjL86lQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 02, 2019, 02:04:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2019, 06:26:41 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 10:40:09 PM
In the last few years NYS DOT Region-10 has begun using backplates again after a failed project in the early 1990's. I say "failed" because over the years they almost all broke off and disappeared and the same thing is already happening on their recent installations.

To their credit they have gotten a lot more into using mast arms in a diagonal span, replacing old span-wire installations. Those curved California-like mast-arms have long been used by Nassau County DPW, but are relatively new to NYS DOT.

Nassau's mast arm installations are orders of magnitude better than NYSDOT's.

Often times the state ones are so sloppy. Heck in example 2 you can see the support brackets sticking up! Same with this one: bent signals and sloppy mounting

2036 New York Ave
https://goo.gl/maps/qbu5tqoEc9Q2

Compared to a new span wire installation

Nesconset Hwy
https://goo.gl/maps/d23QFnhZX122

Or a new Nassau DPW installation

160 Old Country Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/tNkUPdTFMCN2

The state should go back to using spanwire, much cleaner IMO

I find these mast arm installations interesting. Particularly that the mast arm curves down to the top of the mast, looking like one solid mast and arm combined (even though I'm pretty sure the arm slips on over the top of the mast). Most places I've seen where mast arms are used (Nevada, California, Utah, etc.), the mast arm is a distinctly separate piece bolted on to a connection to the mast.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
Look at this traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2757676,-122.4652544,3a,75y,353.28h,84.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPLJbbZSG6rU3-rppps2Dkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 02, 2019, 08:02:28 PM
Re: the NYS DOT, and Nassau County mast-arm installations pictured above, Nassau County has certain advantages. They include fifty years of experience using this style mounting and I believe they build the heads in their own shop using non-standard mounting hardware (threaded pipe and elbow connectors). NYS DOT on the other hand is new to the mast-arm game and uses standard brackets which I agree sometimes look sloppy when mounted on a curved arm. And yes it looks ridiculous when they stick up too high.

However, NYS DOT's jobs lately seem to be better engineered in some cases than Nassau County's. The County sometimes uses an inadequate number of heads, etc. I get the idea they try to get away as cheaply as possible. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on February 02, 2019, 08:06:21 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2019, 06:26:41 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 01, 2019, 10:40:09 PM
In the last few years NYS DOT Region-10 has begun using backplates again after a failed project in the early 1990's. I say "failed" because over the years they almost all broke off and disappeared and the same thing is already happening on their recent installations.

To their credit they have gotten a lot more into using mast arms in a diagonal span, replacing old span-wire installations. Those curved California-like mast-arms have long been used by Nassau County DPW, but are relatively new to NYS DOT.

Nassau's mast arm installations are orders of magnitude better than NYSDOT's.

Often times the state ones are so sloppy. Heck in example 2 you can see the support brackets sticking up! Same with this one: bent signals and sloppy mounting

2036 New York Ave
https://goo.gl/maps/qbu5tqoEc9Q2

Compared to a new span wire installation

Nesconset Hwy
https://goo.gl/maps/d23QFnhZX122

Or a new Nassau DPW installation

160 Old Country Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/tNkUPdTFMCN2

The state should go back to using spanwire, much cleaner IMO

For as long as I can remember, the intersection of NY 414 and NY 318 had backplates for NY 318 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9610123,-76.8460259,3a,15y,277.66h,97.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1CZ8FDljdJ3dNjlv-w_VnA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) until the signal was replaced.  The new signal has backplates with reflective outlines for all directions.

Around 2013, NYSDOT replaced several signals in Auburn, and many of them have the support brackets sticking up.  Washington St and the Arterial (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9310118,-76.5763133,3a,26.8y,47h,105.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr2a_O-cWlxUL7gcwCI6xKw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) has the worst ones from NYSDOT that I can think of.  Newer NYSDOT installs have gotten better, but there's two new Auburn city installs from last fall that are pretty bad.

As an aside, several span wire installations have been replaced with mast arms, but new span wires are still being installed.  I wonder why they're moving to mast arms.  A couple examples are Seymour St and the Arterial/Grant Ave in Auburn (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9379125,-76.5560299,3a,75y,29.8h,91.45t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1skRx1ZiIXRYF_mQ-q4rrbhw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DkRx1ZiIXRYF_mQ-q4rrbhw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D52.16735%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100) and NY 5 at NY 635 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0556902,-76.0827956,3a,75y,257.1h,90.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYcMV_YWeM7dNGa3ntGmnLw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  A couple span wires that have been replaced with new span wires are at US 20/NY 5 and NY 90 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9629321,-76.7336138,3a,75y,286.95h,96.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAEBTAIcneDOU3uBDj9MVdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and I-81 and Hiawatha Blvd (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0703831,-76.1671779,3a,75y,33.16h,89.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sppNXGgprd7ie6V8TEkIlSg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DppNXGgprd7ie6V8TEkIlSg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D98.22857%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656).  My guess is that it's to put up the new overhead street signs on the mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 02, 2019, 10:02:12 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
Look at this traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2757676,-122.4652544,3a,75y,353.28h,84.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPLJbbZSG6rU3-rppps2Dkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This installation has two red balls at the top of each light.  That's because of the hill and the train tracks on the approach to the light.  It's 3M directional because you don't want to give a green light to traffic on the other side of the tracks when the crossing arms are down.  And then so the red light can be seen from on the hill and lower down in front of the light, they put on two reds.  They could have just made the red and yellow non-focused.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 10:04:11 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 02, 2019, 10:02:12 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
Look at this traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2757676,-122.4652544,3a,75y,353.28h,84.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPLJbbZSG6rU3-rppps2Dkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This installation has two red balls at the top of each light.  That's because of the hill and the train tracks on the approach to the light.  It's 3M directional because you don't want to give a green light to traffic on the other side of the tracks when the crossing arms are down.  And then so the red light can be seen from on the hill and lower down in front of the light, they put on two reds.  They could have just made the red and yellow non-focused.
so what if someone sees a red and a green when a train is coming, just install another light before like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395767,-77.7087036,3a,61.8y,169.26h,93.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Dd6nBliqG7rI4AZNoEqWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 03, 2019, 01:37:31 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 02, 2019, 10:04:11 PM
so what if someone sees a red and a green when a train is coming, just install another light before like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1395767,-77.7087036,3a,61.8y,169.26h,93.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Dd6nBliqG7rI4AZNoEqWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I think there are numerous ways Tacoma's install could have been better. But it seems to work in practice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 03, 2019, 03:03:25 AM
Why make it complicated in the first place? Here's a train crossing just before a light. In each lane 2 or 3 cars can fit between the crossing and the light. No fancy signals. When the RR lights activate, the cross street gets the green. No gates either.

https://goo.gl/maps/znbjbGSzHFB2 (unfortunately the GSV angle isn't the best).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2019, 08:31:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 03, 2019, 03:03:25 AM
Why make it complicated in the first place? Here's a train crossing just before a light. In each lane 2 or 3 cars can fit between the crossing and the light. No fancy signals. When the RR lights activate, the cross street gets the green. No gates either.

https://goo.gl/maps/znbjbGSzHFB2 (unfortunately the GSV angle isn't the best).
Well, they need the fancy signals for the QZ, but yeah I think that if the crossing goes down first then its fine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 03, 2019, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 03, 2019, 03:03:25 AM
Why make it complicated in the first place? Here's a train crossing just before a light. In each lane 2 or 3 cars can fit between the crossing and the light. No fancy signals. When the RR lights activate, the cross street gets the green. No gates either.

https://goo.gl/maps/znbjbGSzHFB2 (unfortunately the GSV angle isn't the best).

You want the light just down from the railroad to turn green to clear out possible backups on the tracks, preferably before the railroad signal activates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2019, 02:14:00 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 03, 2019, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 03, 2019, 03:03:25 AM
Why make it complicated in the first place? Here's a train crossing just before a light. In each lane 2 or 3 cars can fit between the crossing and the light. No fancy signals. When the RR lights activate, the cross street gets the green. No gates either.

https://goo.gl/maps/znbjbGSzHFB2 (unfortunately the GSV angle isn't the best).

You want the light just down from the railroad to turn green to clear out possible backups on the tracks, preferably before the railroad signal activates.
No because then cars will be going across the tracks while the lights turn on
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on February 10, 2019, 07:13:50 PM
Last weekend, I was turning left at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0391589,-76.3041429,3a,75y,121.07h,87.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-5ivPQcL4Ld7e21RGkI0lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and I had a thought: is the stop legally enforceable?  I've been through this intersection (usually going straight) many times through my entire life, and I never thought of this until last weekend.  Would a colorblind person know that it's a red flashing light instead of a yellow?  If not, they wouldn't know it's a stop if the word STOP on the pavement was covered by snow.  The left turn lane used to extend to Newport Rd, and a block before the light, "STOP AHEAD" was painted on the pavement, and there were one or two "STOP AHEAD" signs with "LEFT LANE" plaques.  The lane was shortened and the signs were removed sometime between 2006 and 2008 based on looking at old aerial imagery and Street View.

A potential solution to the red flashing light could be having a two segment signal with the bottom segment always being dark.  Before the new exit from the Farimount Wegmans aligned with the onramp to the Camilus Bypass was added, this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0480647,-76.2242915,3a,37y,97.94h,94.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so9DZvPC6oN0x3UuT9w61xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) had two segment signals for the through movement with only a green arrow ever showing.  At the time, I wondered why they had two segments but only ever used one of them, but now I realize that it may have been for colorblind people.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 10, 2019, 08:15:12 PM
Quote from: Michael on February 10, 2019, 07:13:50 PM
Last weekend, I was turning left at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0391589,-76.3041429,3a,75y,121.07h,87.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-5ivPQcL4Ld7e21RGkI0lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and I had a thought: is the stop legally enforceable?  I've been through this intersection (usually going straight) many times through my entire life, and I never thought of this until last weekend.  Would a colorblind person know that it's a red flashing light instead of a yellow?  If not, they wouldn't know it's a stop if the word STOP on the pavement was covered by snow.  The left turn lane used to extend to Newport Rd, and a block before the light, "STOP AHEAD" was painted on the pavement, and there were one or two "STOP AHEAD" signs with "LEFT LANE" plaques.  The lane was shortened and the signs were removed sometime between 2006 and 2008 based on looking at old aerial imagery and Street View.

Though I've seen more than a few left turns across divided highways that were posted with stop signs, I have definitely never seen such a thing on a single-carriageway road. Rather than debate its enforceability (I'm sure it is), the debate should be whether or not its even needed. I can imagine regular conflicts between cars on the side street and those turning left off Genesee. The cars on Genesee stop to grant ROW to those turning left off Bingham, for example, but end up going anyway since traffic continuing straight along Genesee block the left turners.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on February 10, 2019, 08:44:04 PM
I don't think the stop is even necessary, but it's been that way for my entire life.  This is the only intersection on a non-divided highway I've ever seen that requires a stop for a left turn.  I wonder if it was the same way when this was NY 5.  Before the Camillus Bypass, this would have been a much busier intersection.  I don't think I've ever seen a car turning onto or off of Bingham Place.

When I was turning, I think I ended up waiting for the pickup truck that was approaching from the other direction.  If I didn't have to come to a compete stop, I would have had enough time to turn in front of the truck.

As I was writing this post, I thought of another factor I forgot about: Bingham Place used to do a weird jog through the intersection, but I don't remember seeing any cars use either half of it.  Here's (https://historicaerials.com/location/43.039097008954315/-76.30392998456955/2003/19) an old aerial image from Historic Aerials.

For reference, the NYSDOT Traffic Data Viewer shows an AADT of 9,746 cars per day on Genesee St., and 2,320 cars per day on Milton Ave.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 10, 2019, 09:42:42 PM
Isn't there a guideline that says there have to be physical stop signs accompanying a flashing beacon? Or does that not apply to left turns?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 10, 2019, 09:59:29 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 10, 2019, 09:42:42 PM
Isn't there a guideline that says there have to be physical stop signs accompanying a flashing beacon? Or does that not apply to left turns?

Left turns have nothing to do with it. The idea is that you still have to stop if the power goes out and the light no longer flashes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on February 10, 2019, 11:49:31 PM
Quote from: Michael on February 10, 2019, 07:13:50 PM
Last weekend, I was turning left at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0391589,-76.3041429,3a,75y,121.07h,87.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-5ivPQcL4Ld7e21RGkI0lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and I had a thought: is the stop legally enforceable?  I've been through this intersection (usually going straight) many times through my entire life, and I never thought of this until last weekend.  Would a colorblind person know that it's a red flashing light instead of a yellow?  If not, they wouldn't know it's a stop if the word STOP on the pavement was covered by snow.  The left turn lane used to extend to Newport Rd, and a block before the light, "STOP AHEAD" was painted on the pavement, and there were one or two "STOP AHEAD" signs with "LEFT LANE" plaques.  The lane was shortened and the signs were removed sometime between 2006 and 2008 based on looking at old aerial imagery and Street View.

A potential solution to the red flashing light could be having a two segment signal with the bottom segment always being dark.  Before the new exit from the Farimount Wegmans aligned with the onramp to the Camilus Bypass was added, this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0480647,-76.2242915,3a,37y,97.94h,94.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so9DZvPC6oN0x3UuT9w61xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) had two segment signals for the through movement with only a green arrow ever showing.  At the time, I wondered why they had two segments but only ever used one of them, but now I realize that it may have been for colorblind people.

I think the goal of painting "Stop" and a stop bar in the left turn is to discourage people in the left turn lane from creeping forward, because oncoming traffic will clip your front left end if you do so.  If such an accident occurs, however, I'm not sure who would be deemed at fault (which is what I think you guys are discussing).  My point is, though--they did this because of this road's bend to the right, so oncoming cars don't collide with left-turners that poke their noses forward.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 11, 2019, 01:54:59 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 10, 2019, 11:49:31 PM
I think the goal of painting "Stop" and a stop bar in the left turn is to discourage people in the left turn lane from creeping forward, because oncoming traffic will clip your front left end if you do so.  If such an accident occurs, however, I'm not sure who would be deemed at fault (which is what I think you guys are discussing).  My point is, though--they did this because of this road's bend to the right, so oncoming cars don't collide with left-turners that poke their noses forward.

They could always just paint some sharks teeth on the ground, like this (http://bit.ly/2Srd4CI) (which were placed way back so cars would yield to wide-turning trucks).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 11, 2019, 12:00:18 PM
Quote from: Michael on February 10, 2019, 07:13:50 PM
Last weekend, I was turning left at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0391589,-76.3041429,3a,75y,121.07h,87.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-5ivPQcL4Ld7e21RGkI0lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and I had a thought: is the stop legally enforceable?  I've been through this intersection (usually going straight) many times through my entire life, and I never thought of this until last weekend.  Would a colorblind person know that it's a red flashing light instead of a yellow?  If not, they wouldn't know it's a stop if the word STOP on the pavement was covered by snow.  The left turn lane used to extend to Newport Rd, and a block before the light, "STOP AHEAD" was painted on the pavement, and there were one or two "STOP AHEAD" signs with "LEFT LANE" plaques.  The lane was shortened and the signs were removed sometime between 2006 and 2008 based on looking at old aerial imagery and Street View.

A potential solution to the red flashing light could be having a two segment signal with the bottom segment always being dark.  Before the new exit from the Farimount Wegmans aligned with the onramp to the Camilus Bypass was added, this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0480647,-76.2242915,3a,37y,97.94h,94.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so9DZvPC6oN0x3UuT9w61xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) had two segment signals for the through movement with only a green arrow ever showing.  At the time, I wondered why they had two segments but only ever used one of them, but now I realize that it may have been for colorblind people.
Here's a fix, change the red balls to arrows, then add a sign like this: <img src="https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-8715e/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/46321/70991/FRR489__11265.1482886473.jpg?c=2?imbypass=on" alt="Image result for left turn yield on flashing red arrow after stop"/>
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2019, 12:13:59 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 10, 2019, 09:59:29 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 10, 2019, 09:42:42 PM
Isn't there a guideline that says there have to be physical stop signs accompanying a flashing beacon? Or does that not apply to left turns?

Left turns have nothing to do with it. The idea is that you still have to stop if the power goes out and the light no longer flashes.

Saw this recently: red flasher with yellow reflective trim, (https://goo.gl/maps/CYkAPYnrhj12) so that when the power goes out you know to treat this four way stop as a four way stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 11, 2019, 09:04:27 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2019, 12:13:59 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 10, 2019, 09:59:29 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 10, 2019, 09:42:42 PM
Isn't there a guideline that says there have to be physical stop signs accompanying a flashing beacon? Or does that not apply to left turns?

Left turns have nothing to do with it. The idea is that you still have to stop if the power goes out and the light no longer flashes.

Saw this recently: red flasher with yellow reflective trim, (https://goo.gl/maps/CYkAPYnrhj12) so that when the power goes out you know to treat this four way stop as a four way stop.
um, that's not the point of the reflective border, it's so drivers at night can identify it better.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on February 11, 2019, 09:11:41 PM
Here are a couple of YouTube videos of mine of traffic signals in Michigan that I've seen
https://youtu.be/0PWU_cesNRs

Eagle Durasig/3M PV clusters:
https://youtu.be/uW4irf46QMk

Delayed LFE Doghouse left turn arrow:
https://youtu.be/gD_iQ0MeVp4
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 12, 2019, 11:45:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 10, 2019, 08:15:12 PM
Quote from: Michael on February 10, 2019, 07:13:50 PM
Last weekend, I was turning left at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0391589,-76.3041429,3a,75y,121.07h,87.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-5ivPQcL4Ld7e21RGkI0lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and I had a thought: is the stop legally enforceable?  I've been through this intersection (usually going straight) many times through my entire life, and I never thought of this until last weekend.  Would a colorblind person know that it's a red flashing light instead of a yellow?  If not, they wouldn't know it's a stop if the word STOP on the pavement was covered by snow.  The left turn lane used to extend to Newport Rd, and a block before the light, "STOP AHEAD" was painted on the pavement, and there were one or two "STOP AHEAD" signs with "LEFT LANE" plaques.  The lane was shortened and the signs were removed sometime between 2006 and 2008 based on looking at old aerial imagery and Street View.

Though I've seen more than a few left turns across divided highways that were posted with stop signs, I have definitely never seen such a thing on a single-carriageway road. Rather than debate its enforceability (I'm sure it is), the debate should be whether or not its even needed. I can imagine regular conflicts between cars on the side street and those turning left off Genesee. The cars on Genesee stop to grant ROW to those turning left off Bingham, for example, but end up going anyway since traffic continuing straight along Genesee block the left turners.

Yeah, I'm not sure that a full stop is even warranted for the left turn.



Quote from: US 89 on February 10, 2019, 09:42:42 PM
Isn't there a guideline that says there have to be physical stop signs accompanying a flashing beacon? Or does that not apply to left turns?

Yes, there is:
Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Chapter 4L
Section 4L.02 Intersection Control Beacon

Standard:
01 An Intersection Control Beacon shall consist of one or more signal faces directed toward each approach to an intersection. Each signal face shall consist of one or more signal sections of a standard traffic signal face, with flashing CIRCULAR YELLOW or CIRCULAR RED signal indications in each signal face. They shall be installed and used only at an intersection to control two or more directions of travel.

02 Application of Intersection Control Beacon signal indications shall be limited to the following:

    Yellow on one route (normally the major street) and red for the remaining approaches, and
    Red for all approaches (if the warrant described in Section 2B.07 for a multi-way stop is satisfied).

03 Flashing yellow signal indications shall not face conflicting vehicular approaches.

04 A STOP sign shall be used on approaches to which a flashing red signal indication is displayed on an Intersection Control Beacon (see Section 2B.04).

By my read, this intersection violates paragraph four of this section due to the lack of stop sign. It also seems to run afoul of paragraph two, because there are both red and yellow flashers facing this approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2019, 08:49:50 PM
I'm sure David has sent this one but I have to share it again! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbdtcnFyP8c&t=97s

These old GE Streamlines are amazing, located: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9969037,-74.0595279,3a,77.7y,4.92h,86.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIkWrfuTuGkwLgRDpdPPo_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
Look at the reflective border on these signals!(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190223/c9beb707b0c4aab96b208f9dd320b55c.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190223/8f0313907601c8a4623c1e400095e9d7.jpg)
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 22, 2019, 09:46:17 PM
^^ They look like florescent yellow-green as seen on some signs such as school crossings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 10:22:19 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 22, 2019, 09:46:17 PM
^^ They look like florescent yellow-green as seen on some signs such as school crossings.
Yes


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 02:04:07 AM
I guess as far as negative-contrast background go, we've now officially seen them all. Yellow borders in most states, a few white borders in PA, and now FYG in Mass.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on February 23, 2019, 03:06:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 02:04:07 AM
I guess as far as negative-contrast background go, we've now officially seen them all. Yellow borders in most states, a few white borders in PA, and now FYG in Mass.

Orange?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
[snipped images]



Look at the reflective border on these signals!
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone


I've got a few more of those saved on Google Maps, here's two examples in Sioux Falls, SD:


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)


An example in Florida:


https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:


https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)

The pink outline seems to only be used on signals that control the flow of traffic across the light rail tracks nearby.



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 23, 2019, 09:31:27 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
[snipped images]



Look at the reflective border on these signals!
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone


I've got a few more of those saved on Google Maps, here's two examples in Sioux Falls, SD:


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)


An example in Florida:


https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:


https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)

The pink outline seems to only be used on signals that control the flow of traffic across the light rail tracks nearby.
I'm pretty sure those only light up pinkish when the light is red


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on February 23, 2019, 12:59:57 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 23, 2019, 09:31:27 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
[snipped images]



Look at the reflective border on these signals!
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone


I've got a few more of those saved on Google Maps, here's two examples in Sioux Falls, SD:


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)


An example in Florida:


https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:


https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)

The pink outline seems to only be used on signals that control the flow of traffic across the light rail tracks nearby.
I'm pretty sure those only light up pinkish when the light is red


iPhone


I did not notice that. That's even more strange come to think of it, I've never seen or heard of this, has anyone else?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on February 23, 2019, 03:06:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 02:04:07 AM
I guess as far as negative-contrast background go, we've now officially seen them all. Yellow borders in most states, a few white borders in PA, and now FYG in Mass.

Orange?

I knew I was missing one. I'm sure it'll pop up soon enough.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 02:21:44 PM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:


https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)

The pink outline seems to only be used on signals that control the flow of traffic across the light rail tracks nearby.

That's the most amount of supplemental signals that I've ever seen at an intersection in Texas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on February 23, 2019, 03:41:58 PM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 12:59:57 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 23, 2019, 09:31:27 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
[snipped images]



Look at the reflective border on these signals!
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone


I've got a few more of those saved on Google Maps, here's two examples in Sioux Falls, SD:


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5620984,-96.7113932,3a,18.3y,106.07h,102.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soMWLEpH9TumV_LHEFt6RHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5875874,-96.7115972,3a,15.2y,204.12h,110.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJrgw8pwKU4DWM8vjudibOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D157.5747%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)


An example in Florida:


https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.7641194,-82.5532254,3a,22.4y,258.98h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sohha-Pypgn77uEqnPbTURg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)


And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:


https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)

The pink outline seems to only be used on signals that control the flow of traffic across the light rail tracks nearby.
I'm pretty sure those only light up pinkish when the light is red


iPhone


I did not notice that. That's even more strange come to think of it, I've never seen or heard of this, has anyone else?


https://trid.trb.org/view/1439708


Found a publication about them after some googling. Also got this along with that page, but it's 404'd.


http://itstexas.org/sites/itstexas.org/files/presentations/4-LED_Backplates_ITS-Texas.pdf


Also found this, as well:


https://tti.tamu.edu/researcher/pay-attention/


I'd like to see these used nationwide, they seem like an effective tool and could supplement existing safety features at other road-rail locations as well, such as where you see "NO LEFT/RIGHT TURN - TRAIN" illuminated signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 23, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
Just saw this today: supplemental right turn arrow that flashes yellow when the main signal is green. (https://goo.gl/maps/6YRUANwuwVN2)  Why?  If the main signal is green and the pedestrian signal is not activated, why does it have to flash yellow?  Maybe they want to mimic right turn yields, or add extra safety for jaywalkers.  I think they thought that left turn signals flash yellow, so the right turns should flash yellow too.

Edit: They appear to use the same phasing as the left turning lights going the opposite direction.  It's simpler to just use the same phasing, but it's still wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on February 23, 2019, 05:22:41 PM
This is a fairly new installation for NYSDOT. For some reason they used mast arms for three of the four legs of the intersection and use span wire for the fourth leg. Doesn't look right.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0928539,-77.653575,3a,75y,74.92h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN_USY3UNwFWnLP8P-jojLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 23, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
Just saw this today: supplemental right turn arrow that flashes yellow when the main signal is green. (https://goo.gl/maps/6YRUANwuwVN2)  Why?  If the main signal is green and the pedestrian signal is not activated, why does it have to flash yellow?  Maybe they want to mimic right turn yields, or add extra safety for jaywalkers.  I think they thought that left turn signals flash yellow, so the right turns should flash yellow too.

Edit: They appear to use the same phasing as the left turning lights going the opposite direction.  It's simpler to just use the same phasing, but it's still wrong.
The signal I posted also has right turn FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 23, 2019, 06:26:50 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 23, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
Just saw this today: supplemental right turn arrow that flashes yellow when the main signal is green. (https://goo.gl/maps/6YRUANwuwVN2)  Why?  If the main signal is green and the pedestrian signal is not activated, why does it have to flash yellow?  Maybe they want to mimic right turn yields, or add extra safety for jaywalkers.  I think they thought that left turn signals flash yellow, so the right turns should flash yellow too.

Edit: They appear to use the same phasing as the left turning lights going the opposite direction.  It's simpler to just use the same phasing, but it's still wrong.

This can give more flexibility in the protection of pedestrians across that leg of the intersection. The pedestrian phase can be activated concurrent with the adjacent through green, but turning traffic can be held red during the WALK phase. Such operation allows the pedestrians a protected start, which gives the turning drivers greater visibility of pedestrians crossing. Jakeroot has previously posted a few examples of this from Washington state (Federal Way, WA?) in other threads. You'd be hard pressed to achieve a similar isolated operation of a turn lane using a green ball while also maintaining compliance with the current MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 23, 2019, 09:06:24 PM
New York City is using FYA's to protect crosswalks and bicycle lanes. It's not what FYA was originally created for, but it might be an additional effective use of FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 23, 2019, 09:59:35 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2019, 09:40:44 PM
Look at the reflective border on these signals!(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190223/c9beb707b0c4aab96b208f9dd320b55c.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190223/8f0313907601c8a4623c1e400095e9d7.jpg)
I'm not sure if you can tell but the reflective border is GREEN!


iPhone

These yellow bordered new backpaltes are everywhere, even PA is using them:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1187582,-74.8642696,3a,34y,18.73h,96.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ9x8jIaBBTJYDleYuzCE1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 23, 2019, 10:04:14 PM
In the photos above, the borders look lime-yellow, the same color that some fire trucks used to be.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 23, 2019, 11:31:10 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 23, 2019, 09:06:24 PM
New York City is using FYA's to protect crosswalks and bicycle lanes. It's not what FYA was originally created for, but it might be an additional effective use of FYA.

NYC is also starting using FYA (the full 4 section) at for some lagging turns onto highway service roads where yielding on the initial circular green is problematic.

Example of such intersection, but the latest setup hasnt been updated on streetview

6166 108th St
https://goo.gl/maps/nC1wAaCt3Tz
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2019, 11:43:21 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 23, 2019, 06:26:50 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 23, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
Just saw this today: supplemental right turn arrow that flashes yellow when the main signal is green. (https://goo.gl/maps/6YRUANwuwVN2)  Why?  If the main signal is green and the pedestrian signal is not activated, why does it have to flash yellow?  Maybe they want to mimic right turn yields, or add extra safety for jaywalkers.  I think they thought that left turn signals flash yellow, so the right turns should flash yellow too.

Edit: They appear to use the same phasing as the left turning lights going the opposite direction.  It's simpler to just use the same phasing, but it's still wrong.

This can give more flexibility in the protection of pedestrians across that leg of the intersection. The pedestrian phase can be activated concurrent with the adjacent through green, but turning traffic can be held red during the WALK phase. Such operation allows the pedestrians a protected start, which gives the turning drivers greater visibility of pedestrians crossing. Jakeroot has previously posted a few examples of this from Washington state (Federal Way, WA?) in other threads. You'd be hard pressed to achieve a similar isolated operation of a turn lane using a green ball while also maintaining compliance with the current MUTCD.

Yeah, Federal Way has quite a few. Auburn, WA (same city as ErmineNotyours's example) has quite a few as well.

Here's some videos I've made over the years (first from Federal Way, second from Auburn, third from Bellevue) (all WA):

https://youtu.be/Yk4m574Bi-o

https://youtu.be/zYO_UTFHzwk

https://youtu.be/UPhOC9G8s88
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 24, 2019, 03:06:12 PM
Look at this Mccain PV adapters for 8-inch signals. https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2499941,-74.7424174,3a,15y,188.76h,99.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8czZp4zLuTELUpAQ2zPhFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Here's a flickr photo: https://flic.kr/p/bNXDnM
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ace10 on February 26, 2019, 08:03:32 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 23, 2019, 06:26:50 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 23, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
Just saw this today: supplemental right turn arrow that flashes yellow when the main signal is green. (https://goo.gl/maps/6YRUANwuwVN2)  Why?  If the main signal is green and the pedestrian signal is not activated, why does it have to flash yellow?  Maybe they want to mimic right turn yields, or add extra safety for jaywalkers.  I think they thought that left turn signals flash yellow, so the right turns should flash yellow too.

Edit: They appear to use the same phasing as the left turning lights going the opposite direction.  It's simpler to just use the same phasing, but it's still wrong.

This can give more flexibility in the protection of pedestrians across that leg of the intersection. The pedestrian phase can be activated concurrent with the adjacent through green, but turning traffic can be held red during the WALK phase. Such operation allows the pedestrians a protected start, which gives the turning drivers greater visibility of pedestrians crossing. Jakeroot has previously posted a few examples of this from Washington state (Federal Way, WA?) in other threads. You'd be hard pressed to achieve a similar isolated operation of a turn lane using a green ball while also maintaining compliance with the current MUTCD.

There's a right-turn signal that was installed on Cornelius Pass Rd in Hillsboro, Oregon with its intersection with Evergreen Pkwy. The signal faces northbound traffic on Cornelius Pass Rd. (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.54627,-122.8995965,3a,75y,1.27h,87.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skTW20AEW-pOUKetlC3DaAw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). The signal flashes yellow when through traffic has green except when either the crosswalk or bike signal is activated. The only time it shows a green arrow is when left-turning westbound traffic on Evergreen Pkwy have a green arrow.

Oregon allows bicyclists to proceed through a red light if it uses vehicle detection and fails to detect their bicycle and display a green light after one full cycle of the traffic lights at the intersection (ORS 811.360 (2)). Because of this, a FYA appears to be the correct indication so right-turning traffic knows it may have to potentially yield to bicyclists legally proceeding on the red bicycle signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on February 26, 2019, 11:43:36 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 24, 2019, 03:06:12 PM
Look at this Mccain PV adapters for 8-inch signals. https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2499941,-74.7424174,3a,15y,188.76h,99.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8czZp4zLuTELUpAQ2zPhFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Here's a flickr photo: https://flic.kr/p/bNXDnM

Not to be nitpicky, but those adapters are actually made by 3M. McCain has never produced 8-inch PV adapters as far as I know.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on March 03, 2019, 02:11:53 PM
Yesterday, I made a right turn on red at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0528089,-76.26561,3a,75y,174.11h,84.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQ43PpsrlldwSKa9YqlNevg!2e0!5s20161101T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  I had just come out of the gas station RIRO you can see a bit of on the bottom-right of the screen.  I was surprised that there wasn't a "NO TURN ON RED" sign because of how awkward the turn was.  I noticed that oncoming traffic was stopped and Milton Ave had opposing leading lefts.  I looked for approaching trains, and when I saw it was clear, I crept past the tracks and saw the green arrow for Milton Ave eastbound, so I made the turn.  Looking at the Street View now, it looks like I may have not cleared the tracks like I thought I did after all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 03, 2019, 03:28:44 PM
Quote from: Michael on March 03, 2019, 02:11:53 PM
Yesterday, I made a right turn on red at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0528089,-76.26561,3a,75y,174.11h,84.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQ43PpsrlldwSKa9YqlNevg!2e0!5s20161101T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  I had just come out of the gas station RIRO you can see a bit of on the bottom-right of the screen.  I was surprised that there wasn't a "NO TURN ON RED" sign because of how awkward the turn was.  I noticed that oncoming traffic was stopped and Milton Ave had opposing leading lefts.  I looked for approaching trains, and when I saw it was clear, I crept past the tracks and saw the green arrow for Milton Ave eastbound, so I made the turn.  Looking at the Street View now, it looks like I may have not cleared the tracks like I thought I did after all.

Many similar situations near me do have "NTOR" signs, though there's quite a few (such asthis one (http://bit.ly/2EI2K0L)) that have no such signs, and appear very similar to your example (though sometimes with two tracks). Major difference being, no "do not stop on tracks" signage at my example. It is almost certainly one of the newest crossings built in my area.

I suspect the "do not stop on tracks" message is mostly for those who are going straight, to keep people from stopping too late. For people turning right (or left), there's some expectation that you might stop on the tracks a hair, especially if yielding to cars or pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 04, 2019, 05:53:13 PM
I found this extremely rare 12-inch Marbelite model L signal in Philadelphia, PA. Anyone know the history behind this, I only know what the model is, because a few collectors on Youtube told me about it's brief history after I gave them Google Maps SV links. They say that this type L head was a predecessor to Marbelite's last-gen 12" head, most collectors nickname this the prototype signal:

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7895/33251183418_010f4aae6a_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SEi1nQ)12-inch Marbelite type L (https://flic.kr/p/SEi1nQ) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7870/46412509074_7552310e61_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dHjeXG)12-inch Marbelite type L (frontal shot) (https://flic.kr/p/2dHjeXG) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 04, 2019, 06:15:39 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 04, 2019, 05:53:13 PM
I found this extremely rare 12-inch Marbelite model L signal in Philadelphia, PA. Anyone know the history behind this, I only know what the model is, because a few collectors on Youtube told me about it's brief history after I gave them Google Maps SV links. They say that this type L head was a predecessor to Marbelite's last-gen 12" head, most collectors nickname this the prototype signal:

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7895/33251183418_010f4aae6a_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SEi1nQ)12-inch Marbelite type L (https://flic.kr/p/SEi1nQ) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7870/46412509074_7552310e61_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dHjeXG)12-inch Marbelite type L (frontal shot) (https://flic.kr/p/2dHjeXG) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Very interesting, but please do not post the same topic twice, you've already sent this
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 04, 2019, 06:26:09 PM
I only posted it twice, because there was some weird glitch where the frontal view photo of the signal was not shown
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 05, 2019, 06:12:14 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)


And definitely only when the light is red:

https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2 (https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2)

https://goo.gl/maps/1G4h5pZ1rsK2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on March 05, 2019, 08:40:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 05, 2019, 06:12:14 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)


And definitely only when the light is red:

https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2 (https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2)

https://goo.gl/maps/1G4h5pZ1rsK2 (https://goo.gl/maps/1G4h5pZ1rsK2)


Mentioned earlier on this page of the thread.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on March 05, 2019, 06:15:14 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 05, 2019, 06:12:14 AM
Quote from: index on February 23, 2019, 05:52:39 AM
And something really interesting looking in Houston, these backplates appear to use the shade of pink reserved for incident management signs:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8031801,-95.3681823,3a,51.2y,91.01h,96.99t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DuiIzDBceSmtrfae-sgQ5yg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D284.2561%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)


And definitely only when the light is red:

https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2 (https://goo.gl/maps/37goNvA2VqB2)

https://goo.gl/maps/1G4h5pZ1rsK2


The light up backplates are experimental, see https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/reqdetails.asp?id=824 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/reqdetails.asp?id=824)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 08, 2019, 07:30:05 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8935182,-77.0121945,3a,15y,123.71h,97.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_4gbBJtMzB73KYx-r-zJtQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
WHY DC, JUST WHY!!!! :pan:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 08, 2019, 08:15:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 08, 2019, 07:30:05 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8935182,-77.0121945,3a,15y,123.71h,97.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_4gbBJtMzB73KYx-r-zJtQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
WHY DC, JUST WHY!!!! :pan:

If it's the mismatched signal visor, that's oddly common in some parts of the country. I don't see it very much in Seattle, although I can think of a few examples.

That said, I'm not sure I've seen a mismatched visor on a 3M signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 09, 2019, 11:01:55 AM
Apparently, Philly had a Marbelite doghouse. I belive the image was taken in 1986. I found it on a SEPTA website. The signal itself was installed in the mid-70's. Guess Doghouses were more common back then than I think. I have an odd fascination with old Doghouses.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190309/79916abc06e44ac9ddb44b0f717f0c88.jpg)

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:36:55 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 09, 2019, 09:15:44 PM
This is an extremely rare sight to see in Michigan anymore: https://goo.gl/maps/W2TtQcjYDmC2

That's great signal placement, right there.

Though I must ask: what's the rare sight?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 10, 2019, 08:22:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:36:55 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 09, 2019, 09:15:44 PM
This is an extremely rare sight to see in Michigan anymore: https://goo.gl/maps/W2TtQcjYDmC2

That's great signal placement, right there.

Though I must ask: what's the rare sight?
Yes, I'm confused as well


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2019, 08:36:14 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 10, 2019, 08:22:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:36:55 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 09, 2019, 09:15:44 PM
This is an extremely rare sight to see in Michigan anymore: https://goo.gl/maps/W2TtQcjYDmC2

That's great signal placement, right there.

Though I must ask: what's the rare sight?
Yes, I'm confused as well


iPhone

If I were to guess, there's 2 possible reasons: At least one direction only has a single traffic light to look at; not a minimum of 2. Or, a signalized intersection with a lot more traffic lights is just 2 car lengths away, behind the GSV camera. I could understand motorists being confused at what lights they should be looking at approaching these intersections, especially if the lights aren't coordinated.
https://goo.gl/maps/phJ7Euveyis
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 10, 2019, 10:51:31 AM
An extremely rare and old traffic signal setup in Detroit, Michigan. (Marbelites and Eagle Durasigs): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3661447,-83.0805183,3a,44.2y,62.22h,88.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYBRBnlKvYgWLan6ALsQQcg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Sorry for any confusion
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:22:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2019, 08:36:14 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 10, 2019, 08:22:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:36:55 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 09, 2019, 09:15:44 PM
This is an extremely rare sight to see in Michigan anymore: https://goo.gl/maps/W2TtQcjYDmC2

That's great signal placement, right there.

Though I must ask: what's the rare sight?
Yes, I'm confused as well

If I were to guess, there's 2 possible reasons: At least one direction only has a single traffic light to look at; not a minimum of 2. Or, a signalized intersection with a lot more traffic lights is just 2 car lengths away, behind the GSV camera. I could understand motorists being confused at what lights they should be looking at approaching these intersections, especially if the lights aren't coordinated.
https://goo.gl/maps/phJ7Euveyis

I would have thought that approach was coordinated for both to end at the same time, allowing the two farther signals to act as a second and third signal head for that first stop line. But as we can see from your GSV link (and this one (http://bit.ly/2HrL8rp) from further down the road), that approach is coordinated to end at different times which does make for an annoying single-display approach.

Though I can see now ^^^^ that it was actually the signals themselves, not their placement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 10, 2019, 07:45:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:22:52 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 10, 2019, 08:36:14 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 10, 2019, 08:22:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2019, 03:36:55 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 09, 2019, 09:15:44 PM
This is an extremely rare sight to see in Michigan anymore: https://goo.gl/maps/W2TtQcjYDmC2

That's great signal placement, right there.

Though I must ask: what's the rare sight?
Yes, I'm confused as well

If I were to guess, there's 2 possible reasons: At least one direction only has a single traffic light to look at; not a minimum of 2. Or, a signalized intersection with a lot more traffic lights is just 2 car lengths away, behind the GSV camera. I could understand motorists being confused at what lights they should be looking at approaching these intersections, especially if the lights aren't coordinated.
https://goo.gl/maps/phJ7Euveyis

I would have thought that approach was coordinated for both to end at the same time, allowing the two farther signals to act as a second and third signal head for that first stop line. But as we can see from your GSV link (and this one (http://bit.ly/2HrL8rp) from further down the road), that approach is coordinated to end at different times which does make for an annoying single-display approach.

Though I can see now ^^^^ that it was actually the signals themselves, not their placement.
Yeah, sorry about the confusion, I just wasn't really awake at the time XD
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 05:34:16 PM
Look at this FYA doghouse: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0046412,-105.2695378,3a,35.9y,224.27h,91.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smTHj2txWn7Ril5E1jQ0kpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 15, 2019, 06:32:25 PM
snazzy
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on March 16, 2019, 05:17:50 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)


Seeing old signals retrofitted like that for modern use to preserve the historic character of an area's also done in other places. There's a city in Mississippi that has a bunch of them but I can't remember exactly what it is.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 16, 2019, 07:38:59 AM
Quote from: index on March 16, 2019, 05:17:50 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)


Seeing old signals retrofitted like that for modern use to preserve the historic character of an area's also done in other places. There's a city in Mississippi that has a bunch of them but I can't remember exactly what it is.

That looks more like a modern signal painted black with cutaway visors to fit into the vision of the area.

But...it's also 2019. Where's the 2nd signal per direction??
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on March 16, 2019, 07:45:19 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 16, 2019, 07:38:59 AM
But...it's also 2019. Where's the 2nd signal per direction??

On the other corner–move away from the intersection and you'll easily see it. I didn't notice it at first either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 16, 2019, 07:59:16 AM
Quote from: index on March 16, 2019, 05:17:50 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)


Seeing old signals retrofitted like that for modern use to preserve the historic character of an area's also done in other places. There's a city in Mississippi that has a bunch of them but I can't remember exactly what it is.
I believe that's Greenwood?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 16, 2019, 08:00:25 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 16, 2019, 07:38:59 AM
Quote from: index on March 16, 2019, 05:17:50 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)


Seeing old signals retrofitted like that for modern use to preserve the historic character of an area's also done in other places. There's a city in Mississippi that has a bunch of them but I can't remember exactly what it is.

That looks more like a modern signal painted black with cutaway visors to fit into the vision of the area.

But...it's also 2019. Where's the 2nd signal per direction??
There is a second signal. Btw I'm most interested in the pedestrian signals having green walk and orange wait in words


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 02:59:22 PM
I've seen those Winter Park ped signals before. If they were symbols, I'd absolutely love them. But I only "really like" them for the time being. Still very cool and very "Vienna". Particularly that they're round and not square.

Not sure which engineer was responsible for them, but props for sticking it to the MUTCD and doing something unique.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on March 16, 2019, 03:12:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 02:59:22 PM
I've seen those Winter Park ped signals before. If they were symbols, I'd absolutely love them. But I only "really like" them for the time being. Still very cool and very "Vienna". Particularly that they're round and not square.

Not sure which engineer was responsible for them, but props for sticking it to the MUTCD and doing something unique.
I second this! Plus the blue (round) parking signs pointing to the parking.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 05:37:33 PM
Quote from: riiga on March 16, 2019, 03:12:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 02:59:22 PM
I've seen those Winter Park ped signals before. If they were symbols, I'd absolutely love them. But I only "really like" them for the time being. Still very cool and very "Vienna". Particularly that they're round and not square.

Not sure which engineer was responsible for them, but props for sticking it to the MUTCD and doing something unique.
I second this! Plus the blue (round) parking signs pointing to the parking.

Oddly, those round blue parking signs are actually standard design. Not sure how they ended up as blue. Note these in my area: http://bit.ly/2HoJBmY

The only other round, blue signs are evacuation signs: http://bit.ly/2W5JNuB

EDIT: also sometimes seen on pedestrian paths for "keep right" or "keep left" signs. Probably pulled from Europe alongside the rest of the design of the path:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnewfranklinblvd.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F05%2Fbike-ped-sign.jpeg&hash=aa9b365c621d8e40e1859d7b8b9cdf5ad7896fc4)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 16, 2019, 07:50:42 PM
Peek/TCT and McCain traffic signals - Leslie, Michigan: https://goo.gl/maps/WQkonqtmS1p

Peek/TCT is an extremely rare brand to see in Michigan. There used to be 2 4-way clusters in the town of Elsie, but the intersection was downgraded to a four-way stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 08:13:45 PM
^^
Peek/TCT is considered, alongside whoever makes those bubbleback (http://bit.ly/2F7lh5q) signals, and McCain's, to be the most modern of traffic lights here in the PNW.

Unfortunately, it has been several years since I've seen a Peek/TCT installed, though a ton were installed from about 2007-2013.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 16, 2019, 08:41:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2019, 08:13:45 PM
^^
Peek/TCT is considered, alongside whoever makes those bubbleback (http://bit.ly/2F7lh5q) signals, and McCain's, to be the most modern of traffic lights here in the PNW.

Unfortunately, it has been several years since I've seen a Peek/TCT installed, though a ton were installed from about 2007-2013.
The "bubbleback"  signals are made by Siemens
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on March 21, 2019, 12:20:16 AM
A collection of old signals and signs from the Seattle Municipal Archives. Taken in 1931.

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7921/33334492688_5ce78c7212_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SMDZjy)
Traffic control devices, 1931 (https://flic.kr/p/SMDZjy) by Seattle Municipal Archives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/seattlemunicipalarchives/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 22, 2019, 08:05:16 PM
I love the basic advice..."this signal was installed after a study"..."the gap after green is for traffic to clear"... Things that you'd never see on a sign now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 23, 2019, 03:10:49 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 07:49:40 PM
Look at this Winter Park FL classic signals: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5978565,-81.3509918,3a,79.5y,224.37h,100.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOvcG51yKojN7kPEJNhR1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Very nice find! They appear to be TSI's with Eagle top plates
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 23, 2019, 03:17:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 15, 2019, 05:34:16 PM
Look at this FYA doghouse: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0046412,-105.2695378,3a,35.9y,224.27h,91.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smTHj2txWn7Ril5E1jQ0kpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Very nice. I've seen that Minnesota and Wisconsin have some FYA doghouses too.
Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the first of its kind in the US): https://youtu.be/onyZQcgkMOw
Eau Claire, Wisconsin: https://youtu.be/A_L0EMMptRg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 23, 2019, 08:38:42 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.

The red traffic light has only the left half lit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:40:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2019, 08:38:42 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.

The red traffic light has only the left half lit.
There's louvers in the red section.  If he's wondering why the red is illuminated in conjunction with the green arrow, then I don't have an answer.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 09:15:35 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:40:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2019, 08:38:42 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.

The red traffic light has only the left half lit.
There's louvers in the red section.  If he's wondering why the red is illuminated in conjunction with the green arrow, then I don't have an answer.

That was my question, what's the point of the red on top of the green arrow, and is that even MUTCD compliant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on March 23, 2019, 10:02:14 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.

Once in a while GSV does have odd blurring/warping effects, and it does not always catch flashing indications.

As to the setup in the link, I don't see why both the red and green arrow are lit at the same time in the rightmost head on the mast arm.  If that head is trying to be a separate, protected-only head for the right turn lane, it is violating Section 4D.23, Paragraph 03, Item A-2 ("Only one of three indications shall be displayed at any given time.").  Since the opposing left appears to be protected only, that head should be using a flashing yellow arrow anyway if a separate head for the right turn is desired.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on March 24, 2019, 08:06:44 PM
Based on the other GSV pictures around it, I'd guess the red was actually off but took some time to de-energize, and the green literally just went on. I've seen it happen from time to time, even frequently if the red is incandescent and the green is LED.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 24, 2019, 08:08:11 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on March 24, 2019, 08:06:44 PM
Based on the other GSV pictures around it, I'd guess the red was actually off but took some time to de-energize, and the green literally just went on. I've seen it happen from time to time, even frequently if the red is incandescent and the green is LED.

I drove by this intersection a few days ago which is why I posted it. The red ball and green arrow were both permanently on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0) 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on March 31, 2019, 07:39:42 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (http://"https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0") 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that
Broken link, but I think I found the intersection that you're referring to.  Is the signal that you're referencing at the exit from a shopping plaza; more specifically, for the right turn from the exit?  If so, I've never seen one in use in NY either.  It looks like they took a page out of DelDOT's book.  Delaware occasionally uses these at right turn signals.  The left red section is circular, the right is an arrow.  The red arrow only illuminates when the opposite direction has a protected left, denoting that a right on red is not permitted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2019, 08:01:14 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 23, 2019, 10:02:14 PM
Quote from: signalman on March 23, 2019, 08:36:10 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 23, 2019, 08:22:02 PM
What's happening with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3960731,-73.4506129,3a,59.5y,157.81h,83.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB77kwLVz2iDjhc4OLDULYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) setup? It looks the same in real life as it does on GSV.
Why wouldn't it?  GSV is photographing real places as the car moves along real streets.

In all seriousness, what are you referring to?  Nothing looks particularly bizarre.

Once in a while GSV does have odd blurring/warping effects, and it does not always catch flashing indications.

As to the setup in the link, I don't see why both the red and green arrow are lit at the same time in the rightmost head on the mast arm.  If that head is trying to be a separate, protected-only head for the right turn lane, it is violating Section 4D.23, Paragraph 03, Item A-2 ("Only one of three indications shall be displayed at any given time.").  Since the opposing left appears to be protected only, that head should be using a flashing yellow arrow anyway if a separate head for the right turn is desired.

Always Red on top of a green arrow used to be a fairly common feature at some lights in some states, but as noted it now violates the MUTCD. So, either the light was set up this way to violate the MUTCD, or the red light is broken. Being the GSV reflects what the person saw on their trip, the light must be set up that way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 31, 2019, 10:16:12 AM
Quote from: signalman on March 31, 2019, 07:39:42 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (http://"https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0") 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that
Broken link, but I think I found the intersection that you're referring to.  Is the signal that you're referencing at the exit from a shopping plaza; more specifically, for the right turn from the exit?  If so, I've never seen one in use in NY either.  It looks like they took a page out of DelDOT's book.  Delaware occasionally uses these at right turn signals.  The left red section is circular, the right is an arrow.  The red arrow only illuminates when the opposite direction has a protected left, denoting that a right on red is not permitted.

Thanks! I edited the link, should be working now
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2019, 01:43:41 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0) 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that

I believe the red -> is to indicate no turns on red permitted, probably when the ped signal is on the Wall phase or a delayed green due to a green left arrow from the opposing direction.

Clarifying signage helps though.

Delaware is well know for these signals. I've seen a few similar ones pop up in NJ as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 03, 2019, 04:46:30 PM
Petersburg, Michigan: https://youtu.be/KeiJoQgwFiw
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on April 03, 2019, 05:47:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2019, 01:43:41 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0) 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that

I believe the red -> is to indicate no turns on red permitted, probably when the ped signal is on the Wall phase or a delayed green due to a green left arrow from the opposing direction.

Clarifying signage helps though.

Delaware is well know for these signals. I've seen a few similar ones pop up in NJ as well.
That looks similar to this signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227278,-77.2816389,3a,15y,294.54h,98.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so0aAI2gZKa1UEKsU_iuA-g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0) on NY 104 at Furnace Rd. That one features a flashing red left turn arrow and steady red left turn arrow. When flashing red arrow is on you may turn left after a stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 03, 2019, 11:05:15 PM
Quote from: kc8yqq on January 17, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
Here is an oddity for Michigan...an arrow for left on this type of traffic light fixture.  Normally it's a globe.  It's located in Leslie, Michigan, at the intersection of Bellevue Road and Hull Road.  The red arrow is for both directions of Bellevue Road and the standard globe is for both directions of Hull Road.  You can see both in this link and the traffic light is still like that today.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4511344,-84.4404173,3a,25.1y,77.33h,97.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss5nVcifsTnuxLymy-GAaGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
That's actually becoming somewhat more common in Michigan. Some towns/cities have been replacing the red ball in left signals with a red arrow, or just replacing the signal with an all arrow left turn signal. If you look around East Lansing on M-43, there are some left turn signals with all arrows. In Ann Arbor, the traffic lights along Fuller Road have been replaced and with all arrow 3-section left turn signals at the left turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 01:27:47 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 31, 2019, 01:43:41 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 30, 2019, 09:25:12 PM
Anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.741814,-74.067215,3a,90y,197.8h,104.14t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5CIrssuLZJCTMzjok93t7w!2e0) 2 red-head signal operates? Passed it while on NY299 in New Paltz on the way back to the NYS thruway on a roadtrip.

Never seen one in NY like that

I believe the red -> is to indicate no turns on red permitted, probably when the ped signal is on the Wall phase or a delayed green due to a green left arrow from the opposing direction.

Clarifying signage helps though.

Delaware is well know for these signals. I've seen a few similar ones pop up in NJ as well.

A sign along the lines of "No turn on solid red arrow" would be helpful, even though this rule is generally true in most states.

I've seen other areas where a VMS is lit that says "no turn on red" but only lit during the time frame when they don't want you to turn on red (pedestrian ROW or opposing left has green arrow) and the normal turn on red rules apply at other times (when cross traffic has green).  The VMSes are easier to decipher.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on April 07, 2019, 05:03:48 PM
NY 5 west in Chittenango (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0425816,-75.8685075,3a,26y,224.56h,97.98t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s99TBAa2hZTNEO_SdU5uJ2g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D99TBAa2hZTNEO_SdU5uJ2g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D53.88456%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100) has a light up no right turn sign (the black square on the right in the Street View link).  The sign was added sometime between October 2015 and August 2018 based on historic Street View.  I assume that it's triggered when oncoming traffic has a left arrow, and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0425286,-75.8683974,3a,45.2y,253.62h,94.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRUBUnJNxBpQk11ai-QI9AQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) Street View image seems to confirm that (note the oncoming truck on the left, red lights, and lit up no right turn sign).  Since NY 5 turns here, the most common movement is the turn to stay on NY 5, so it's fairly common for the approach I linked to to have a red ball and a green right arrow while the approach from the right has a green ball and green left arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on April 11, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Take a look at this traffic signal, presumably installed by Lake County, IL.  This might be the stupidest signal head placement I've ever seen--look at the post-mounted signal at the far right corner of the intersection, facing the camera.  Northbound traffic can't even see it around the corner!  https://goo.gl/maps/2VvtPwjwjvx

It's this one.  You can't see it from the northbound stop bar at all! https://goo.gl/maps/R7uC5QKphH12
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 11, 2019, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 01:27:47 PM
A sign along the lines of "No turn on solid red arrow" would be helpful, even though this rule is generally true in most states.

At one point, I started making a map of where certain red-light movements are allowed and prohibited, but I didn't get very far before running out of steam.  But I wonder how many states is "most states" w/r/t turning right on a red arrow.  I suppose it's possible that most states actually allow it–you know, not having actually tallied them up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2019, 05:10:12 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 11, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Take a look at this traffic signal, presumably installed by Lake County, IL.  This might be the stupidest signal head placement I've ever seen--look at the post-mounted signal at the far right corner of the intersection, facing the camera.  Northbound traffic can't even see it around the corner!  https://goo.gl/maps/2VvtPwjwjvx

It's this one.  You can't see it from the northbound stop bar at all! https://goo.gl/maps/R7uC5QKphH12
That's very dumb, but what really bothers me is the dual 4 sections both with left arrows. The left one should be a 3 second all left arrow and the right one should be a 3 section straight


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 11, 2019, 05:18:10 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 11, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Take a look at this traffic signal, presumably installed by Lake County, IL.  This might be the stupidest signal head placement I've ever seen--look at the post-mounted signal at the far right corner of the intersection, facing the camera.  Northbound traffic can't even see it around the corner!  https://goo.gl/maps/2VvtPwjwjvx

It's this one.  You can't see it from the northbound stop bar at all! https://goo.gl/maps/R7uC5QKphH12

Placement of signals on the far right corner is typically required by many jurisdictions. At the very least, it reminds drivers to yield to pedestrians.

I have not driven through that intersection, but streetview seems to indicate that if you were looking right while positioned at the stop line, you would be able to see the signal. Many drivers may be looking right, at traffic from the right, to avoid collisions with vehicles running red lights; that signal would be very nearly in their line of sight. That way, if the light turns green, they'll notice (since the overhead lights are way off to the left).

tl;dr ... It's not stupid. There are uses for that signal.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2019, 05:10:12 PM
That's very dumb, but what really bothers me is the dual 4 sections both with left arrows. The left one should be a 3 second all left arrow and the right one should be a 3 section straight

It's a split-phased intersection with left, right, and straight through movements. The green orbs are a requirement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 11, 2019, 08:36:09 PM
I like near-right corner supplemental signals. They are found at many intersections in California and I believe are standard in Wisconsin. I'd like to see them everywhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 12, 2019, 03:08:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 11, 2019, 05:18:10 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 11, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Take a look at this traffic signal, presumably installed by Lake County, IL.  This might be the stupidest signal head placement I've ever seen--look at the post-mounted signal at the far right corner of the intersection, facing the camera.  Northbound traffic can't even see it around the corner!  https://goo.gl/maps/2VvtPwjwjvx

It's this one.  You can't see it from the northbound stop bar at all! https://goo.gl/maps/R7uC5QKphH12

Placement of signals on the far right corner is typically required by many jurisdictions. At the very least, it reminds drivers to yield to pedestrians.

I have not driven through that intersection, but streetview seems to indicate that if you were looking right while positioned at the stop line, you would be able to see the signal. Many drivers may be looking right, at traffic from the right, to avoid collisions with vehicles running red lights; that signal would be very nearly in their line of sight. That way, if the light turns green, they'll notice (since the overhead lights are way off to the left).

tl;dr ... It's not stupid. There are uses for that signal.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2019, 05:10:12 PM
That's very dumb, but what really bothers me is the dual 4 sections both with left arrows. The left one should be a 3 second all left arrow and the right one should be a 3 section straight

It's a split-phased intersection with left, right, and straight through movements. The green orbs are a requirement.
I understand it's split phased, that doesn't change the fact of what I said. There are still green orbs, just matching the signals to the lane markings, which should be a requirement


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 11, 2019, 08:36:09 PM
I like near-right corner supplemental signals. They are found at many intersections in California and I believe are standard in Wisconsin. I'd like to see them everywhere.

Oddly enough, I believe they're a requirement in Illinois as well.

According to an engineer friend, there was once a plan for the 2009 MUTCD to require near-side signals at all locations with 40-MPH approach speeds, but this was dropped. I would love to see this requirement considered again.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 12, 2019, 03:08:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 11, 2019, 05:18:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2019, 05:10:12 PM
That's very dumb, but what really bothers me is the dual 4 sections both with left arrows. The left one should be a 3 second all left arrow and the right one should be a 3 section straight
It's a split-phased intersection with left, right, and straight through movements. The green orbs are a requirement.
I understand it's split phased, that doesn't change the fact of what I said. There are still green orbs, just matching the signals to the lane markings, which should be a requirement

I see. I interpreted your comment as wanting a three-section left arrow on the left, and a three section right arrow on the right...no idea why, since you clearly said nothing like that.

A three-section left turn arrow would work on the left, although ideally, there would be a second left-turn head on the mast to its immediate left. At least the current setup has a significant amount of redundancy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 14, 2019, 01:33:15 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 11, 2019, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 01:27:47 PM
A sign along the lines of "No turn on solid red arrow" would be helpful, even though this rule is generally true in most states.

At one point, I started making a map of where certain red-light movements are allowed and prohibited, but I didn't get very far before running out of steam.  But I wonder how many states is "most states" w/r/t turning right on a red arrow.  I suppose it's possible that most states actually allow it–you know, not having actually tallied them up.

Not only that but in some states the law is ambiguous of whether you can turn or not on a red arrow.  In my mind, it seems like turning on red arrow is something that would only be allowed in states that are generally liberal on turning like WA and OR.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 11, 2019, 08:36:09 PM
I like near-right corner supplemental signals. They are found at many intersections in California and I believe are standard in Wisconsin. I'd like to see them everywhere.

Oddly enough, I believe they're a requirement in Illinois as well.

Depends on the IDOT District and the roadway.  District 1 (Chicagoland) usually frowns on them for IDOT roadways if the roadway has less than three through lanes and no dedicated right turn lane.  Cook County though uses them all the time.  District 3 (Ottawa) will sometimes use a supplemental head on the mast arm shaft rather than a near right.

Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 12, 2019, 03:08:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 11, 2019, 05:18:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2019, 05:10:12 PM
That's very dumb, but what really bothers me is the dual 4 sections both with left arrows. The left one should be a 3 second all left arrow and the right one should be a 3 section straight
It's a split-phased intersection with left, right, and straight through movements. The green orbs are a requirement.
I understand it's split phased, that doesn't change the fact of what I said. There are still green orbs, just matching the signals to the lane markings, which should be a requirement

I see. I interpreted your comment as wanting a three-section left arrow on the left, and a three section right arrow on the right...no idea why, since you clearly said nothing like that.

A three-section left turn arrow would work on the left, although ideally, there would be a second left-turn head on the mast to its immediate left. At least the current setup has a significant amount of redundancy.

There's a few of these types of setups in Lake County where split phased heads are used for dedicated left turn lanes instead of all arrow heads:
* SB Fairfield Road at Old McHenry Road (https://goo.gl/maps/mc67MHKScAF2)
* NB Quentin Road at Old McHenry Road (https://goo.gl/maps/imqw9eypeiH2)
* SB Delany Road at US 41 (https://goo.gl/maps/y1xYV7KUDj92)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 03:50:01 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 11, 2019, 08:36:09 PM
I like near-right corner supplemental signals. They are found at many intersections in California and I believe are standard in Wisconsin. I'd like to see them everywhere.

Oddly enough, I believe they're a requirement in Illinois as well.

Depends on the IDOT District and the roadway.  District 1 (Chicagoland) usually frowns on them for IDOT roadways if the roadway has less than three through lanes and no dedicated right turn lane.  Cook County though uses them all the time.  District 3 (Ottawa) will sometimes use a supplemental head on the mast arm shaft rather than a near right.

Oh, that's right. I spend so much time looking around Chicago on Street View, I forget that not all parts of Illinois use the same setup (with near-side signals). IIRC, there's at least one district that doesn't use any supplemental signals...does that sound right?

Quote from: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
A three-section left turn arrow would work on the left, although ideally, there would be a second left-turn head on the mast to its immediate left. At least the current setup has a significant amount of redundancy.

There's a few of these types of setups in Lake County where split phased heads are used for dedicated left turn lanes instead of all arrow heads:
* SB Fairfield Road at Old McHenry Road (https://goo.gl/maps/mc67MHKScAF2)
* NB Quentin Road at Old McHenry Road (https://goo.gl/maps/imqw9eypeiH2)
* SB Delany Road at US 41 (https://goo.gl/maps/y1xYV7KUDj92)

I would say that, in both British Columbia and Washington State, the vast majority of split-phased intersections (regardless if there's a dedicated left turn lane) use the 4-section signal with a green orb and green arrow. Seattle even has a variation with a bi-modal green+yellow arrow (even though the yellow orb does that job at split-phased lights). If I see a dedicated left turn signal (all-arrow display, or "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" in BC), it's pretty much guaranteed to be a regular-phased intersection.

What I also see in BC, where far-left supplemental signals are required (unlike WA), is that at split-phased intersections, there will be a single overhead 4-section display (with green arrow and green orb), a repeat of that signal on the far right pole (sometimes with a green left arrow, sometimes not), and a three-section all-arrow display on the far left pole. EDIT: here's one example in Mission: http://bit.ly/2v62z9P
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on April 14, 2019, 04:59:25 PM
The base IDOT requirement is one signal head per lane, and at least two signal heads per movement (e.g. left turn, right turn, or straight).  Each district may have different stylings that they typically follow, adhering to that general basic requirement, but none of those stylings are officially mandated anywhere, to my knowledge.  Thus, there's nothing requiring a signal head placed in any specific position at an intersection.  All IDOT cares is those two basic requirements.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 06:25:15 PM
There's a requirement for "one signal head per lane" in Illinois? I seem to recall seeing quite a few intersections, with permissive phasing, that had one signal fewer than the number of lanes. I also seem to remember quite a lot of signals that were like this (http://bit.ly/2Gq65RN).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 10:08:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 03:50:01 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2019, 06:30:39 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 11, 2019, 08:36:09 PM
I like near-right corner supplemental signals. They are found at many intersections in California and I believe are standard in Wisconsin. I'd like to see them everywhere.

Oddly enough, I believe they're a requirement in Illinois as well.

Depends on the IDOT District and the roadway.  District 1 (Chicagoland) usually frowns on them for IDOT roadways if the roadway has less than three through lanes and no dedicated right turn lane.  Cook County though uses them all the time.  District 3 (Ottawa) will sometimes use a supplemental head on the mast arm shaft rather than a near right.

Oh, that's right. I spend so much time looking around Chicago on Street View, I forget that not all parts of Illinois use the same setup (with near-side signals). IIRC, there's at least one district that doesn't use any supplemental signals...does that sound right?

District 8 (Collinsville) did not use to use supplemental heads for left turns.  Based on the few intersections I've checked, they did use supplemental near rights.

Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 06:25:15 PM
There's a requirement for "one signal head per lane" in Illinois? I seem to recall seeing quite a few intersections, with permissive phasing, that had one signal fewer than the number of lanes. I also seem to remember quite a lot of signals that were like this (http://bit.ly/2Gq65RN).

Some of the IDOT Districts, such as District 1 (Schaumburg) and District 4 (Peoria), possibly 5 (Paris) for older signals, seem to count supplemental heads towards meeting the ""one signal head per lane" requirement since for dual lefts there is only one left turn head on the mast arm and a supplement far left head.

The linked example on Dempster Street in Niles is an older installation that has not been updated yet - the use of the trussed ("trombone") arms is the best indication.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on April 14, 2019, 11:31:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 06:25:15 PM
There's a requirement for "one signal head per lane" in Illinois? I seem to recall seeing quite a few intersections, with permissive phasing, that had one signal fewer than the number of lanes. I also seem to remember quite a lot of signals that were like this (http://bit.ly/2Gq65RN).

When I say one signal head per lane, I mean it literally.  At the intersection you gave as an example, there were two thru lanes and one left turn lane.  That's a total of three lanes, mandating a minimum of 3 signal heads for that approach.  I do not mean that each lane has to have a signal head directly ahead of each lane.  The requirement is more general than that- x lanes require a minimum of x signals, pure and simple.  No specifications on where exactly they are placed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2019, 12:16:38 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 14, 2019, 10:08:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2019, 06:25:15 PM
There's a requirement for "one signal head per lane" in Illinois? I seem to recall seeing quite a few intersections, with permissive phasing, that had one signal fewer than the number of lanes. I also seem to remember quite a lot of signals that were like this (http://bit.ly/2Gq65RN).

Some of the IDOT Districts, such as District 1 (Schaumburg) and District 4 (Peoria), possibly 5 (Paris) for older signals, seem to count supplemental heads towards meeting the ""one signal head per lane" requirement since for dual lefts there is only one left turn head on the mast arm and a supplement far left head.

The linked example on Dempster Street in Niles is an older installation that has not been updated yet - the use of the trussed ("trombone") arms is the best indication.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 14, 2019, 11:31:32 PM
When I say one signal head per lane, I mean it literally.  At the intersection you gave as an example, there were two thru lanes and one left turn lane.  That's a total of three lanes, mandating a minimum of 3 signal heads for that approach.  I do not mean that each lane has to have a signal head directly ahead of each lane.  The requirement is more general than that- x lanes require a minimum of x signals, pure and simple.  No specifications on where exactly they are placed.

Thanks. That would explain why the example I linked to in Niles (above) was recently updated with new signals, but did not gain any new overhead signals.

I'm guessing IDOT's actual message is that there must be the same number of primary signals as lanes; "one signal per lane" is generally used to describe overhead signals. Though to be clear, I much prefer the Illinois rule. I don't understand the fascination with overhead signals. The Niles intersection I linked to above is excellent signal placement, IMO.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on April 15, 2019, 10:22:43 AM
I dont know if this is where I should ask, but here goes!

I was wondering who to ask (and what to ask) to get a traffic light that is going to be retired. I have E-mailed several places (the city, the dot, a contractor in Denver) just asking about how to get a retired light. I haven't gotten any responses. Any suggestions?

*** Also I dont want to go on E-bay, I want a traffic light that just came out of a scrap heap, or off the pole. Not a $500 light that has been in a closet for 5 years. ***
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on April 15, 2019, 05:19:09 PM
Quote from: MCRoads on April 15, 2019, 10:22:43 AM
I dont know if this is where I should ask, but here goes!

I was wondering who to ask (and what to ask) to get a traffic light that is going to be retired. I have E-mailed several places (the city, the dot, a contractor in Denver) just asking about how to get a retired light. I haven't gotten any responses. Any suggestions?

*** Also I dont want to go on E-bay, I want a traffic light that just came out of a scrap heap, or off the pole. Not a $500 light that has been in a closet for 5 years. ***

What kind of signal is it
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on April 16, 2019, 12:05:01 AM
Any signal. Any type, make, model, doghouse, tower, regular old traffic light. Hell! Even a 4-way beacon would satisfy me!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 16, 2019, 07:42:02 PM
An unusual sight on CT 32 in New London.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3782795,-72.1034484,3a,26.1y,347.98h,95.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snxDpOQpoxAKxQ0a8lXLvPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3782795,-72.1034484,3a,26.1y,347.98h,95.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snxDpOQpoxAKxQ0a8lXLvPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 16, 2019, 08:16:18 PM
T-Con 4-way beacon cluster in Bay City, Michigan. I think this is the only T-Con signal in the state of Michigan. (not my video): https://youtu.be/RHARNXlfp6c
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 18, 2019, 09:57:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2019, 12:16:38 AM
I'm guessing IDOT's actual message is that there must be the same number of primary signals as lanes; "one signal per lane" is generally used to describe overhead signals. Though to be clear, I much prefer the Illinois rule. I don't understand the fascination with overhead signals. The Niles intersection I linked to above is excellent signal placement, IMO.

IMHO, it's better when the left turn head is at least on the edge of the left turn lane.  When it's on the lane line between the two through lanes or further to the right it becomes easier to loose site of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 18, 2019, 11:39:41 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 18, 2019, 09:57:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2019, 12:16:38 AM
I'm guessing IDOT's actual message is that there must be the same number of primary signals as lanes; "one signal per lane" is generally used to describe overhead signals. Though to be clear, I much prefer the Illinois rule. I don't understand the fascination with overhead signals. The Niles intersection I linked to above is excellent signal placement, IMO.

IMHO, it's better when the left turn head is at least on the edge of the left turn lane.  When it's on the lane line between the two through lanes or further to the right it becomes easier to loose site of.

But isn't there always a signal on the far left corner? At least in most IDOT districts. The overhead signal may not be as obvious, but there's always that pole-mounted signal on the left.

I am by no means opposed to having that 5-section tower be between the left and through lanes, though with the second left turn head on the left, I don't know how necessary it is to get it that far out. I think it might be better if it were centered over the arriving carriageway/roadway (so in the case of Dempster/Greenwood, centered over the center lane (aka the left through lane)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on April 19, 2019, 12:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 18, 2019, 11:39:41 PM
But isn't there always a signal on the far left corner? At least in most IDOT districts. The overhead signal may not be as obvious, but there's always that pole-mounted signal on the left.

I am by no means opposed to having that 5-section tower be between the left and through lanes, though with the second left turn head on the left, I don't know how necessary it is to get it that far out. I think it might be better if it were centered over the arriving carriageway/roadway (so in the case of Dempster/Greenwood, centered over the center lane (aka the left through lane)).

IDOT will almost always have that signal on the far left corner, especially if there's a left turn indication.  In cases with left turn arrows, IDOT requires two separate signal heads to include them; one of them will almost always be a post-mounted signal on the far left corner.  On truck routes (note: pretty much every marked state highway is one of these), signal assemblies will include a signal head on the far left corner, whether there's a left turn phase of not, in case vehicles have to see around a truck that obscures the sight of mast-arm mounted signals.

Signal heads on mast arms that show left turn arrows will almost always be above the rightmost edge of the left turn lane.  There are two reasons for this:  saving a bit on materials because you don't need the mast arm to be quite as long, and refraining from obstructing the view the oncoming traffic needs to have, in order to see THEIR overhead signals.  I like having my signals directly in front of me as much as the next guy, but I get the reasons why they do this.

NOTE:  When I speak of IDOT's requirements, I'm speaking of requirements that apply to EVERY signal in the state, whether on a state-maintained road or not.  The infrastructure found on IDOT's marked roadways may be more robust, or adhere to a slightly different modus operandae than the stuff found on county or local roads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 19, 2019, 10:55:43 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 19, 2019, 12:28:30 PM
Signal heads on mast arms that show left turn arrows will almost always be above the rightmost edge of the left turn lane.  There are two reasons for this:  saving a bit on materials because you don't need the mast arm to be quite as long, and refraining from obstructing the view the oncoming traffic needs to have, in order to see THEIR overhead signals.  I like having my signals directly in front of me as much as the next guy, but I get the reasons why they do this.

This only applies to IDOT signals in D-1 and most of the local agencies with the exceptions of Kane County, formerly McHenry County, and sometimes Naperville, which mount (or had been mounting) the left turn heads in front of the left turn lane.  The other IDOT Districts, with the possible exception of District 9 (Carbondale), usually mount the left turn head in front of the turn lane.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 23skidoo on April 25, 2019, 01:58:35 PM
Here's something I found on YouTube recently that I thought might be interesting to you fellow signalheads. It's a video of Lansing, Michigan from the 1960s. Most of the signals in the video look to be then-new 8-8-8 clusters hanging on diagonal wire span (typical of Michigan at the time, even as recently as the 2000s). But then I saw something weird. From about 4:50-5:00, you'll see a pair of 8-8-8-8 4-way clusters on a wirespan somewhere near downtown Lansing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Uns7ajf8Sc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Uns7ajf8Sc)

I don't know what to make of these signals. I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like that in Michigan, except for some recently-installed left-turn signals. My guess is that second light turns yellow before it turns green. As evidence of this, the light appears to be yellow at about 4:55 before turning green at 4:59. Presumably the third light turns yellow after the green, but I suppose it could be a green arrow (but unlikely considering that arrows usually go under the solid green, see 5:31).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on April 27, 2019, 09:46:48 AM


Quote from: 23skidoo on April 25, 2019, 01:58:35 PM
From about 4:50-5:00, you'll see a pair of 8-8-8-8 4-way clusters...

The topmost section could be for a flashing red for four-way stop. Sand Springs, Oklahoma used to have 12-8-8-8 signals downtown with the 8-inch sections for R-Y-G and the upper 12-inch for flashing red. They had to get the idea somewhere.

SM-T580

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on May 04, 2019, 10:26:57 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6937919,-80.0867966,3a,32.5y,63.51h,103.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0fUmM6QtfeWnPURZCYwEbg!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6937919,-80.0867966,3a,32.5y,63.51h,103.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0fUmM6QtfeWnPURZCYwEbg!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


Found this bizarre five section inverted T in Florida.


https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6938977,-80.0866671,3a,17.5y,205.01h,107.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxzPLesbrjEHoBufGXzb0Fw!2e0!5s20181101T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6938977,-80.0866671,3a,17.5y,205.01h,107.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxzPLesbrjEHoBufGXzb0Fw!2e0!5s20181101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


They seem to just have taken another signal, and mounted it sideways on the bottom of the top two sections...Can't say I've seen anything like this before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 05, 2019, 12:44:33 AM
Quote from: index on May 04, 2019, 10:26:57 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6937919,-80.0867966,3a,32.5y,63.51h,103.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0fUmM6QtfeWnPURZCYwEbg!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6937919,-80.0867966,3a,32.5y,63.51h,103.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0fUmM6QtfeWnPURZCYwEbg!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


Found this bizarre five section inverted T in Florida.


https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6938977,-80.0866671,3a,17.5y,205.01h,107.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxzPLesbrjEHoBufGXzb0Fw!2e0!5s20181101T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@26.6938977,-80.0866671,3a,17.5y,205.01h,107.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxzPLesbrjEHoBufGXzb0Fw!2e0!5s20181101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)


They seem to just have taken another signal, and mounted it sideways on the bottom of the top two sections...Can't say I've seen anything like this before.

I'm guessing all three lights on the bottom are green arrows (left/straight/right) and yeah I'm with you on this.. I've never seen anything like that either, in regards to both the layout and it's assembly.

EDIT: I have seen the bottom aspect mounted separately from the rest of the signal but with 2 lights, not 3.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on May 07, 2019, 06:07:04 PM
^ The MUTCD used to show such a configuration - see Page 11/54 of https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1988%20MUTCD/4.Part_IV.Signals.pdf (https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1988%20MUTCD/4.Part_IV.Signals.pdf)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on May 18, 2019, 09:19:04 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 19, 2019, 10:55:43 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 19, 2019, 12:28:30 PM
Signal heads on mast arms that show left turn arrows will almost always be above the rightmost edge of the left turn lane.  There are two reasons for this:  saving a bit on materials because you don't need the mast arm to be quite as long, and refraining from obstructing the view the oncoming traffic needs to have, in order to see THEIR overhead signals.  I like having my signals directly in front of me as much as the next guy, but I get the reasons why they do this.

This only applies to IDOT signals in D-1 and most of the local agencies with the exceptions of Kane County, formerly McHenry County, and sometimes Naperville, which mount (or had been mounting) the left turn heads in front of the left turn lane.  The other IDOT Districts, with the possible exception of District 9 (Carbondale), usually mount the left turn head in front of the turn lane.

And apparently D-1 didn't follow this rule for the WB I-88 Exit to 22nd Street/Cermak in Oak Brook.  Streetview NB (https://goo.gl/maps/xDcRs2C6Rm7N7C1b7)

SB also has only one far side head for the through movement.  Streetview (https://goo.gl/maps/Jpw8JjhNcguoM2An9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 18, 2019, 10:05:03 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 18, 2019, 09:19:04 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 19, 2019, 10:55:43 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 19, 2019, 12:28:30 PM
Signal heads on mast arms that show left turn arrows will almost always be above the rightmost edge of the left turn lane.  There are two reasons for this:  saving a bit on materials because you don't need the mast arm to be quite as long, and refraining from obstructing the view the oncoming traffic needs to have, in order to see THEIR overhead signals.  I like having my signals directly in front of me as much as the next guy, but I get the reasons why they do this.

This only applies to IDOT signals in D-1 and most of the local agencies with the exceptions of Kane County, formerly McHenry County, and sometimes Naperville, which mount (or had been mounting) the left turn heads in front of the left turn lane.  The other IDOT Districts, with the possible exception of District 9 (Carbondale), usually mount the left turn head in front of the turn lane.

And apparently D-1 didn't follow this rule for the WB I-88 Exit to 22nd Street/Cermak in Oak Brook.  Streetview NB (https://goo.gl/maps/xDcRs2C6Rm7N7C1b7)

SB also has only one far side head for the through movement.  Streetview (https://goo.gl/maps/Jpw8JjhNcguoM2An9)
Um I think that should be allowed, im for a signal directing the lane


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: index on May 19, 2019, 12:55:03 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 07, 2019, 06:07:04 PM
^ The MUTCD used to show such a configuration - see Page 11/54 of https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1988%20MUTCD/4.Part_IV.Signals.pdf (https://ceprofs.civil.tamu.edu/ghawkins/MUTCD-History_files/1988%20MUTCD/4.Part_IV.Signals.pdf)


Very interesting, wonder what other odd things can be found that were both uncommon, and previously permitted by the MUTCD but later removed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 24, 2019, 09:39:14 PM
I was driving eastbound on NY 5 in Elbridge yesterday afternoon, and I noticed something weird.  At Hamilton Road, the opposing traffic had a green ball, and what I'm assuming was a leading left.  While the eastbound ball was still red, the left turn FYA started flashing.  I thought it was weird to see something other than all red lights with oncoming traffic.  How common is this?  This was my first time ever seeing this phasing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 24, 2019, 09:53:49 PM
Ah yes.........this is what FYA is all about and why it came into existence, for just this type of situation. In some Southern states like Texas there had been a practice of using a green ball in that configuration over the left-turn lane, while the thru lanes had all reds. It was called Dallas Phasing and the FYA now replaces the green ball in that situation.

Since the introduction of the FYA, many traffic agencies have found other creative applications for the FYA, but the signal you referred to illustrates the original concept.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 24, 2019, 09:59:04 PM
So a green arrow would be shown with an opposing green ball?!  I never quite understood Dallas Phasing, but a quick Google search shows pictures with conflicting arrows and balls.  NY has always used doghouses and most often uses leading lefts, although you sometimes see mid-phase or lagging lefts.  Green arrows are always "safe" to go through.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the intersection used to have a two-phase signal with no turn lanes until a couple years ago.  When they added the turn lanes on NY 5, they used FYAs.  FYAs are becoming more common in NY.  The first one I saw in NY (and anywhere) was this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0980032,-75.9707542,3a,51y,78.73h,98.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXrMvwUJzYcqUU_rixQjclA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXrMvwUJzYcqUU_rixQjclA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D130.33218%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) in 2014 or 2015.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 24, 2019, 10:14:55 PM
Michael, read my post again. A green ball would be over the left-turn lane with parallel thru lanes being red. The opposing direction would have green-ball and left-turn arrow.

There were no actual conflicts in Dallas Phasing but the green-ball specifically over the left-turn lanes was misleading. People thought it meant the same as a green-arrow when it was over the turning lane while the thru lanes were red and many accidents resulted.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 24, 2019, 10:55:48 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 24, 2019, 09:59:04 PM
I never quite understood Dallas Phasing

Hmm, I guess it's time to break out this video again.  When is this going to be a sticky in the Welcome forum?

Quote from: roadfro on January 22, 2010, 12:33:16 AM
This took me a little while to finish up, but I hope you all will find it helpful.  I've created a short video that explains in a graphic format the differences between the various forms of protected/permitted left turn controls, including Dallas Phasing.

By no means am I a whiz with video capture and online videos, so I hope it works okay. Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPKjcPI5Sko
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 25, 2019, 10:21:42 AM
FYAs doing that do there job. It seems strange but that's how they work. I think that if drivers are going left then they should look at only their left turn signal. That avoids all confusion. That's why some states use louvers at complex intersections and of course for preventing traffic from an odd signal to see a wrong light


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 25, 2019, 01:05:16 PM
Quote from: Michael on May 24, 2019, 09:39:14 PM
I was driving eastbound on NY 5 in Elbridge yesterday afternoon, and I noticed something weird.  At Hamilton Road, the opposing traffic had a green ball, and what I'm assuming was a leading left.  While the eastbound ball was still red, the left turn FYA started flashing.  I thought it was weird to see something other than all red lights with oncoming traffic.  How common is this?  This was my first time ever seeing this phasing.

How many FYA's are there in that area? Interesting that you've never seen it before, unless your jurisdiction bans the practice (as tradephoric seems to think is a thing).

This occurs at FYA's for two reasons: (1) no vehicle in turn lane, so the FYA signal defaults to flashing, or (2) the signal is set to lead/lag (green arrow in advance for one direction, at the end for the other direction).

I feel like I've posted this video a thousand times, but I guess as long as people haven't seen it...here's an example of situation #2. My direction has a lagging green arrow, so it comes on at the end of the cycle, instead of in advance. As a result, my left turn begins with a flashing yellow arrow, but the through traffic remains red while the oncoming left has a green arrow (as you would expect).

https://youtu.be/_idz1QzWQtg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on May 25, 2019, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 24, 2019, 10:14:55 PM
Michael, read my post again. A green ball would be over the left-turn lane with parallel thru lanes being red. The opposing direction would have green-ball and left-turn arrow.

There were no actual conflicts in Dallas Phasing but the green-ball specifically over the left-turn lanes was misleading. People thought it meant the same as a green-arrow when it was over the turning lane while the thru lanes were red and many accidents resulted.
Ok, gotcha.  The Google Images results showed conflicting balls and arrows.  For as long as I remember, NY has always used arrows for dedicated signal heads.

@kphoger: Thanks for the video.  I watched it several years ago to understand yellow trap, but never watched the part about Dallas Phasing.

@jakeroot: That one is the closest to me, and the only other ones I've personally seen are the one I mentioned near Binghamton in my previous post, and a pair in Oneida that were installed in the past year or two.  I drove through the ones in Oneida, but nothing seemed weird about those to me.  NYSDOT seems to be replacing doghouses with FYAs, and uses the flashing yellow to reinforce that you have to yield if you're turning left during the permitted phase.  Your video is the exact phasing I saw, but the light uses leading lefts.  It may use mid-phase or lagging lefts, but I haven't seen it use them.  For the most part, NY uses leading lefts.

In the Elbridge example, there were no cars waiting to turn left next to me, and a couple waiting in the opposite direction.  With a traditional doghouse, the opposing direction would get a green ball/left arrow, and the arrow on my side would have done nothing.  I haven't paid close attention to how often it happens, but I have seen cases where there weren't any cars going straight from the opposite direction or left from my direction, and the light gave two opposing green arrows anyway instead of through/left greens for the opposing direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
At this intersection in unincorporated Spokane County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/FxVbgD2oc2HgDLet7), each approach has two near-side signals. However, the near-side signals for the left-side of the intersection are on the near-side mast poles. Good for visibility when way back in a line of cars, but not so great when nearer the stop line.

Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/zmaH9VfZsAd6PqKk8 (fixed link)
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

Supplemental signals are either normal or very common in this part of WA (note the Flint Rd intersection just east), unlike some western areas of the state, but this placement is rather unusual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:04:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
At this intersection in unincorporated Spokane County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/FxVbgD2oc2HgDLet7), each approach has two near-side signals. However, the near-side signals for the left-side of the intersection are on the near-side mast poles. Good for visibility when way back in a line of cars, but not so great when nearer the stop line.

Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/hHTyHHaiMJk6bNV88
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

Supplemental signals are either normal or very common in this part of WA (note the Flint Rd intersection just east), unlike some western areas of the state, but this placement is rather unusual.


This is sort of weird.  IMO, the whole point of the left side supplemental signal is for the drivers who are turning left and need to make an uprotected left so they can focus their attention on looking at the signal while still having their eye on opposing traffic and pedestrians.  This doesn't do that.  I don't know what this accomplishes.

The right side supplemental signal's purpose is both for visibility in case you are behind a big truck and for making right turns so that you can look at the signal while watching for pedestrians.  Since your focus is not as far for right turns as it is for left turns, it is not a problem for the right signal to be on the near side.

From what I understand of typical signal placement in Wisconsin, the right side supplemental signal is on the near side and the left side supplemental signal is on the far side.  This acknowledges

[EDITED TO ADD: that the cones of vision for both turns are different.  For left turns you look for gaps in opposing traffic and are also looking at the far corner for peds.  For right turns, the focus should be on peds on the near side.  Your focus does not need to be on the far corner as much.]

As a native Californian, though, I have a bias for having both the left and right supplemental signal on the far side.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:24:42 AM
Quote from: Michael on May 24, 2019, 09:59:04 PM
So a green arrow would be shown with an opposing green ball?!  I never quite understood Dallas Phasing, but a quick Google search shows pictures with conflicting arrows and balls.  NY has always used doghouses and most often uses leading lefts, although you sometimes see mid-phase or lagging lefts.  Green arrows are always "safe" to go through.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the intersection used to have a two-phase signal with no turn lanes until a couple years ago.  When they added the turn lanes on NY 5, they used FYAs.  FYAs are becoming more common in NY.  The first one I saw in NY (and anywhere) was this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0980032,-75.9707542,3a,51y,78.73h,98.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXrMvwUJzYcqUU_rixQjclA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXrMvwUJzYcqUU_rixQjclA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D130.33218%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) in 2014 or 2015.


With FYAs, when the opposing side has a leading protected green, you can program the signal to allow for a permitted left turn at the same time in your direction.  Thru traffic in your direction has a red (giving the opposing left a protected turn), but the operation of the left in your direction is not affected by that.  It is a bit unusual to see this, but IMO this signaling is perfectlyl safe.  And even for those (like tradephoric) who believe in the "perceived" yellow trap situation as being a possible concern, I don't believe that exists on this side, since at teh beginning of the signal (after cross traffic's green) you see a flashing yellow arrow at the same time as red.  (I.e. no yellow trap here since you never see a yellow.)

The perceived yellow trap is only a problem for lagging protected green with permitted opposing lefts at the same time.  There, the side with the lagging protected green sees green thru and green arrow starts at the end of the signal cycle.  The opposing side will have the thru traffic see yellow orb and then red orb, while the lefts on that opposing side maintain a flashing yellow arrow.  The theory behind perceived yellow trap is that drivers turning left in the opposing direction are so used to focusing on the signaling of the orbs is that they will assume that traffic  that is opposing them (i.e. the side with the lagging left) will come to a slow and then a stop because the traffic that is next to them is doing the same thing [even though the left turners are only supposed to focus on their signal alone, the FYA]. 

I am not sure if perceived yellow trap is really significant, especially now as FYAs are becoming more common, but FWIW, it's only present on the lagging left phase, not the leading left phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on May 27, 2019, 08:25:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/hHTyHHaiMJk6bNV88
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

I think your first link is the wrong link, because it's at a different place entirely from the second, and it's not at an intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 27, 2019, 01:57:55 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on May 27, 2019, 08:25:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/hHTyHHaiMJk6bNV88
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

I think your first link is the wrong link, because it's at a different place entirely from the second, and it's not at an intersection.

No idea how that happened. Guess I was working with too many links yesterday.

If you didn't already pan around using that second link, here's the correct link: https://goo.gl/maps/zmaH9VfZsAd6PqKk8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 27, 2019, 02:11:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:04:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
At this intersection in unincorporated Spokane County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/FxVbgD2oc2HgDLet7), each approach has two near-side signals. However, the near-side signals for the left-side of the intersection are on the near-side mast poles. Good for visibility when way back in a line of cars, but not so great when nearer the stop line.

Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/hHTyHHaiMJk6bNV88 https://goo.gl/maps/zmaH9VfZsAd6PqKk8
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

Supplemental signals are either normal or very common in this part of WA (note the Flint Rd intersection just east), unlike some western areas of the state, but this placement is rather unusual.

This is sort of weird.  IMO, the whole point of the left side supplemental signal is for the drivers who are turning left and need to make an uprotected left so they can focus their attention on looking at the signal while still having their eye on opposing traffic and pedestrians.  This doesn't do that.  I don't know what this accomplishes.

The right side supplemental signal's purpose is both for visibility in case you are behind a big truck and for making right turns so that you can look at the signal while watching for pedestrians.  Since your focus is not as far for right turns as it is for left turns, it is not a problem for the right signal to be on the near side.

From what I understand of typical signal placement in Wisconsin, the right side supplemental signal is on the near side and the left side supplemental signal is on the far side.  This acknowledges

As a native Californian, though, I have a bias for having both the left and right supplemental signal on the far side.

I think the entire point of near-side signals is to provide supplemental displays that may assist drivers in identifying the state of a traffic light, when the far-side displays are simply too far from the stop line to be the only acceptable set of signals (this is particularly problematic on parts of the Las Vegas strip, IIRC). In this sense, I think the near-side displays in my links actually do a good job, even if the far-side displays are well within an easy-to-see distance. But they are also good in assisting drivers in identifying the state of traffic lights when the far-side signals are not visible, or when yielding to pedestrians, as you indicate. Certainly there are many uses; I wish the FHWA required them more often.

This signal may have been the result of the WSDOT team using the proposed 150-foot rule for near-side displays. Apparently, the FHWA was considering a change to the near-side signal policy requirements, moving the maximum allowable distance without a near-side display, from 180 feet, to 150 feet. In both cases at this approach, the signals are more than 150 feet from the stop line, but less than 180 feet. I believe the rule was being considered in the late 2000s, for the 2009 MUTCD, but was not implemented (this signal was installed around 2008). They obviously misinterpreted the ruling as requiring near-side displays for all movements, but I think I'll give them a pass! I still like the setup, and it's far better than using only far-side displays, even if it isn't kosher.

This sort of situation has occurred at several other locations in Washington, particularly in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/UgyQUJArqxWedRGW7) and Federal Way (https://goo.gl/maps/7UkeHJx9ZSuHxQoq7). On both instances, when I contacted the appropriate public works departments, I was informed that the near-side displays at several intersections were used for future compliance with the 150-foot ruling. But that ruling was dropped, so those signals stand today as a testament to a proposed change that was never implemented.

edit: fixed links (again...ugh).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:30:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2019, 02:11:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:04:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2019, 11:50:41 PM
At this intersection in unincorporated Spokane County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/FxVbgD2oc2HgDLet7), each approach has two near-side signals. However, the near-side signals for the left-side of the intersection are on the near-side mast poles. Good for visibility when way back in a line of cars, but not so great when nearer the stop line.

Approach from US-2: https://goo.gl/maps/hHTyHHaiMJk6bNV88 https://goo.gl/maps/zmaH9VfZsAd6PqKk8
Approach from side-street: https://goo.gl/maps/B8BVse8Jzkyxcm7Q7

Supplemental signals are either normal or very common in this part of WA (note the Flint Rd intersection just east), unlike some western areas of the state, but this placement is rather unusual.

This is sort of weird.  IMO, the whole point of the left side supplemental signal is for the drivers who are turning left and need to make an uprotected left so they can focus their attention on looking at the signal while still having their eye on opposing traffic and pedestrians.  This doesn't do that.  I don't know what this accomplishes.

The right side supplemental signal's purpose is both for visibility in case you are behind a big truck and for making right turns so that you can look at the signal while watching for pedestrians.  Since your focus is not as far for right turns as it is for left turns, it is not a problem for the right signal to be on the near side.

From what I understand of typical signal placement in Wisconsin, the right side supplemental signal is on the near side and the left side supplemental signal is on the far side.  This acknowledges

As a native Californian, though, I have a bias for having both the left and right supplemental signal on the far side.

I think the entire point of near-side signals is to provide supplemental displays that may assist drivers in identifying the state of a traffic light, when the far-side displays are simply too far from the stop line to be the only acceptable set of signals (this is particularly problematic on parts of the Las Vegas strip, IIRC). In this sense, I think the near-side displays in my links actually do a good job, even if the far-side displays are well within an easy-to-see distance. But they are also good in assisting drivers in identifying the state of traffic lights when the far-side signals are not visible, or when yielding to pedestrians, as you indicate. Certainly there are many uses; I wish the FHWA required them more often.

This signal may have been the result of the WSDOT team using the proposed 150-foot rule for near-side displays. Apparently, the FHWA was considering a change to the near-side signal policy requirements, moving the maximum allowable distance without a near-side display, from 180 feet, to 150 feet. In both cases at this approach, the signals are more than 150 feet from the stop line, but less than 180 feet. I believe the rule was being considered in the late 2000s, for the 2009 MUTCD, but was not implemented (this signal was installed around 2008). They obviously misinterpreted the ruling as requiring near-side displays for all movements, but I think I'll give them a pass! I still like the setup, and it's far better than using only far-side displays, even if it isn't kosher.

This sort of situation has occurred at several other locations in Washington, particularly in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/7UkeHJx9ZSuHxQoq7) and Federal Way (https://goo.gl/maps/UgyQUJArqxWedRGW7). On both instances, when I contacted the appropriate public works departments, I was informed that the near-side displays at several intersections were used for future compliance with the 150-foot ruling. But that ruling was dropped, so those signals stand today as a testament to a proposed change that was never implemented.

The signal in Vancouver (which BTW you've switched the links, so please correct) with both near and far right side signals (with right turn arrows).  No left side signals on the corner, but these aren't really necessary since it is a protected only left turn.  There should be no need to watch for both the signal and peds while turning.

IIRC from my days in L.A., right turn arrow signals in L.A. frequently (but not universally) occur at both near and far side on the right.  I believe part of the reason is visibility and part of the reason is following the state's rule that every signal must be shown on at least two signal faces.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 27, 2019, 10:16:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:30:50 PM
The signal in Vancouver (which BTW you've switched the links, so please correct) with both near and far right side signals (with right turn arrows).  No left side signals on the corner, but these aren't really necessary since it is a protected only left turn.  There should be no need to watch for both the signal and peds while turning.

IIRC from my days in L.A., right turn arrow signals in L.A. frequently (but not universally) occur at both near and far side on the right.  I believe part of the reason is visibility and part of the reason is following the state's rule that every signal must be shown on at least two signal faces.

(fixed...I'm a mess today!)

I would appreciate a left-side repeater at all approaches, even those without yielding, as it helps in identifying the state of a traffic signal. This is mostly helpful when you cannot see the overhead signals.

California is one of the few states that I've seen that religiously uses those near and far right-side signals at all approaches. Some get close, like IL or WI, but both sometimes lack a far-side repeater (Except IL, where they are common all over Springfield (https://goo.gl/maps/ebJBfZRkQ8RFwtoK8)). Older signals don't use them as often, but even newer signals along relatively narrow corridors have near and far right-side signals (see here in Sacramento (https://goo.gl/maps/rx5NfKrjKuVJbyNB9), for example).

(for the record, I've verified both links in my post...if they still end up getting screwed up, something is wrong with Google's link-sharing service).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 28, 2019, 04:34:02 PM
Look at this bike signal: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9800944,-93.264005,3a,18.3y,290.55h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGohdyAHz_1ORjgrlrN1hNQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It's a FYA Bike signal!!! https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9808745,-93.2663046,3a,16.8y,125.37h,87.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWDpPpm84Hsq9tPO_7oa9Xw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 28, 2019, 04:39:30 PM
I was noticing that in San Francisco that their signals are different from the rest of the state.  Many have green (not black as other CA places use) and lack back plates (which I thought was a California requirement) and many are side mounted rather than overhead.

SF is like NYC to NY and Chicago is to IL doing their own thing different from the rest of the states they are in as far as signals go.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 28, 2019, 07:00:07 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 28, 2019, 04:34:02 PM
Look at this bike signal: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9800944,-93.264005,3a,18.3y,290.55h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGohdyAHz_1ORjgrlrN1hNQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It's a FYA Bike signal!!! https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9808745,-93.2663046,3a,16.8y,125.37h,87.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWDpPpm84Hsq9tPO_7oa9Xw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
A yellow backplate outside Canada
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 28, 2019, 08:12:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 27, 2019, 10:16:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 27, 2019, 08:30:50 PM
The signal in Vancouver (which BTW you've switched the links, so please correct) with both near and far right side signals (with right turn arrows).  No left side signals on the corner, but these aren't really necessary since it is a protected only left turn.  There should be no need to watch for both the signal and peds while turning.

IIRC from my days in L.A., right turn arrow signals in L.A. frequently (but not universally) occur at both near and far side on the right.  I believe part of the reason is visibility and part of the reason is following the state's rule that every signal must be shown on at least two signal faces.

(fixed...I'm a mess today!)

I would appreciate a left-side repeater at all approaches, even those without yielding, as it helps in identifying the state of a traffic signal. This is mostly helpful when you cannot see the overhead signals.

California is one of the few states that I've seen that religiously uses those near and far right-side signals at all approaches. Some get close, like IL or WI, but both sometimes lack a far-side repeater (Except IL, where they are common all over Springfield (https://goo.gl/maps/ebJBfZRkQ8RFwtoK8)). Older signals don't use them as often, but even newer signals along relatively narrow corridors have near and far right-side signals (see here in Sacramento (https://goo.gl/maps/rx5NfKrjKuVJbyNB9), for example).

(for the record, I've verified both links in my post...if they still end up getting screwed up, something is wrong with Google's link-sharing service).


Historically, in California, many streets with medians had the far left side light on the median instead of on the far left corner.  I know that many have been removed and replaced with left corner signals because they were getting struck down by cars.  They still exist on some of the wider medians, though.

Here's an example on Sunset Blvd in SF:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7515473,-122.495195,3a,75y,179.42h,77.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stWjK1K8HQGSUdfNosAbO6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192




Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 28, 2019, 09:11:24 PM
I agree with Jakeroot's point that California is among the most consistent when it comes to signal configuration. Except for those near-right corner supplemental heads that he mentioned. I like them and I am puzzled by California's inconsistent use of them. Some places have them and some don't and it doesn't seem to depend on the width of the cross street either. Or on any other factor that I can identify.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 28, 2019, 11:39:25 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 28, 2019, 04:39:30 PM
I was noticing that in San Francisco that their signals are different from the rest of the state.  Many have green (not black as other CA places use) and lack back plates (which I thought was a California requirement) and many are side mounted rather than overhead.

Couple things to consider:

* [dark] green signals are/were relatively common along the West Coast (from WA to CA). They are still installed with shrinking frequency in WA.
* CA requires 'side-mounted' signals at all intersections, with very few exceptions. Overhead signals became normal only later on. In many downtown areas, there is aesthetic preference for not using overhead signals. Sometimes to reduce clutter. Other times, because of conflicts with trolley wire, power lines, etc.

Quote from: mrsman on May 28, 2019, 08:12:36 PM
Historically, in California, many streets with medians had the far left side light on the median instead of on the far left corner.  I know that many have been removed and replaced with left corner signals because they were getting struck down by cars.  They still exist on some of the wider medians, though.

It is rather interesting how many US states have shied away from median-mounted signals. They are still the norm in British Columbia; the standard setup for a dedicated left turn signal (https://goo.gl/maps/Qv2QikKtnyDcB4c79) is very similar to the older CA style, except that an additional (third) signal is also mounted on the far left corner (three are required for all left turns).

Quote from: SignBridge on May 28, 2019, 09:11:24 PM
I agree with Jakeroot's point that California is among the most consistent when it comes to signal configuration. Except for those near-right corner supplemental heads that he mentioned. I like them and I am puzzled by California's inconsistent use of them. Some places have them and some don't and it doesn't seem to depend on the width of the cross street either. Or on any other factor that I can identify.

It seems that newer signals always include that near-right signal. I can't immediately think of any newer signals that don't have them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 02:17:14 AM
Ran into a few interesting signals during a roadtrip out west.

This (http://maps.app.goo.gl/AxtEjfD7iQ1aMv1n9) FYA in Utah stays red for 1 to 2 seconds after the opposing thru turns green before going to flashing yellow. I dont think I saw a green arrow operational while I was there.

Side note - Utah has the best signal setups I have seen.

Meanwhile this FYA (http://maps.app.goo.gl/i7GwUgXBUbB8iYG26) in Arizona has green in the middle.

Finally, a lot of Arizona intersections seem to have both bimodal and 5 stack turn signals (http://maps.app.goo.gl/1seNJrUt6WYWbn3GA) mixed in the same intersection. Wonder why that is/was

Fixed links -Ian
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 31, 2019, 02:02:34 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 02:17:14 AM
Ran into a few interesting signals during a roadtrip out west.

This (https://maps.app.goo.gl/AxtEjfD7iQ1aMv1n9) FYA in Utah stays red for 1 to 2 seconds after the opposing thru turns green before going to flashing yellow. I dont think I saw a green arrow operational while I was there.

Side note - Utah has the best signal setups I have seen.

Meanwhile this FYA (https://maps.app.goo.gl/i7GwUgXBUbB8iYG26) in Arizona has green in the middle.

Finally, a lot of Arizona intersections seem to have both bimodal and 5 stack turn signals (https://maps.app.goo.gl/1seNJrUt6WYWbn3GA) mixed in the same intersection. Wonder why that is/was

Fixed your links for you.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 08:07:44 PM
Thanks. What was wrong with them?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 31, 2019, 09:06:06 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 08:07:44 PM
Thanks. What was wrong with them?

They had quotation marks in the links. Not sure how you did that.

Thanks kphoger.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on May 31, 2019, 11:18:22 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 02:17:14 AM
Finally, a lot of Arizona intersections seem to have both bimodal and 5 stack turn signals (http://maps.app.goo.gl/1seNJrUt6WYWbn3GA) mixed in the same intersection. Wonder why that is/was

There's a similar situation here at the intersection of US 2/US 2A/ME 43 (Center and Main Streets) (https://goo.gl/maps/XB3SrLPX6kc1VUL86) in downtown Old Town, Maine, except the position of the inline-4 bimodal and inline-5 heads are switched. In this case, the inline-5 on the far left side of the intersection was here first, and the inline-4 bimodal was added later on. You can see the original set-up if you look at the September 2007 GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/myfi4yu16D4EGPZY8).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 01, 2019, 11:20:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 31, 2019, 09:06:06 PM

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 08:07:44 PM
Thanks. What was wrong with them?

They had quotation marks in the links. Not sure how you did that.

Thanks kphoger.

I see they've now been fixed in the actual post by a mod, so I can't look back specifically, but I recall they had more than just quotation marks.  There was some sort of tag at the beginning too that I had to delete.  Something like https=" at the beginning, can't quite remember exactly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on June 01, 2019, 12:00:34 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 01, 2019, 11:20:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 31, 2019, 09:06:06 PM

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 31, 2019, 08:07:44 PM
Thanks. What was wrong with them?

They had quotation marks in the links. Not sure how you did that.

Thanks kphoger.

I see they've now been fixed in the actual post by a mod, so I can't look back specifically, but I recall they had more than just quotation marks.  There was some sort of tag at the beginning too that I had to delete.  Something like https=" at the beginning, can't quite remember exactly.

I remember it being <br>.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 02, 2019, 12:30:02 AM
I’m fairly sure the original text was this, but I could be wrong:

Code Select
[url=https://http://maps.app.goo.gl/AxtEjfD7iQ1aMv1n9”]This[/url]
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 06, 2019, 10:39:05 PM
I saw a Flashing Right Turn Arrow in San Antonio at the SA Airport.  Odd that a right turn needs a yellow flasher, but its north of I-410 on Airport Blvd. 

BTW, I thought I posted this before but I can't find it in my post history, so I guess I did not or I forgot to hit enter or some other issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 06, 2019, 11:33:07 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 06, 2019, 10:39:05 PM
I saw a Flashing Right Turn Arrow in San Antonio at the SA Airport.  Odd that a right turn needs a yellow flasher, but its north of I-410 on Airport Blvd. 

BTW, I thought I posted this before but I can't find it in my post history, so I guess I did not or I forgot to hit enter or some other issue.

Very common now, at least in Washington.

They are particularly useful when the city wants to draw attention to a particularly busy crossing, or when using a red-arrow phase during the "walk" phase, but a flashing yellow during the flashing "don't walk" phase. The key is really "flexibility".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 07, 2019, 08:23:43 PM
New York City uses right-turn FYA's to protect crosswalks and bike lanes at some locations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 17, 2019, 09:14:40 AM
Two interesting traffic signal issues out of Los Angeles:

New traffic signal at La Brea/Rosewood.  With this signal there is now a signal at every intersection along La Brea between Fountain and Olympic, a distance of 2.5 miles.  But the interesting thing is the phasing.  The signal was designed to allow Rosewood Ave to become a bicycle route.  All car traffic on Rosewood must turn right on La Brea.  It seems that rights are permitted on red, even during the pedestrian phase.  Pedestrians and bikes may cross La Brea.  There are separate phases for La Brea traffic (major phase), bikes and peds crossing La Brea along Rosewood, and traffic from Rosewood turning right on La Brea.

More info:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La5i7G_OOM0

https://beverlypress.com/2019/05/l-a-puts-pedal-to-the-metal-on-la-brea/

One criticism is that they designed the intersection to force separate phases for the right turns and the bikes/peds.  This obviously will increase delay along La Brea even further.  A far better design to accommodate bikes, while discouraging through traffic by forcing right turns can be found in Tucson, AZ:

https://nacto.org/case-study/toucan-bicycle-signal-at-third-street-and-country-club-road-tucson-az/

The second issue is not that new, but it has to do with warrants.  Normally, we know that it is usually difficult to get a new signal installed because of expense and the lack of meeting the technical warrants, even when there is enough traffic at issue to seem warranted.  At the same time, who hasn't gotten stopped at red signals at intersections where the side street has so little traffic that it doesn't seem warranted.  I have to hand it to the L.A. Dept. of Transportation, who I have criticized before about certain signals not being warranted (Arden/Rosewood) who have been on top of the ball at another intersection.

Wilshire/Ogden sits 2 blocks east of Fairfax, right near the LA County Museum of Art.   For many years, Ogden connected Wilshire to 6th Street and connected into the Park La Brea private housing development (gated community).  There was a signal at Wilshire/Ogden and enough side street traffic to justify it.  There's been a lot of construction in the area for the last few years.  Museum expansion caused the block between 6th and Wilshire to be closed to traffic.  For a time, they were forcing all traffic coming on Ogden to turn right and prohibit pedestrian crossing Wilshire.  At this time, they removed the signal completely.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0628217,-118.3594284,3a,75y,195.54h,79.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLYOztPJE3Guws8t6SbAT2A!2e0!5s20090501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

With the street work done, in later years, they reinstalled the traffic signal.  More construction is happening there as there is further museum expansion as well as work on the Wilshire/Fairfax subway station construction.

So hand it to LADOT for turning off a signal when it wasn't warranted.





Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 17, 2019, 03:29:10 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 17, 2019, 09:14:40 AM
Two interesting traffic signal issues out of Los Angeles:

The new traffic signal at La Brea/Rosewood.  With this signal, there is now a signal at every intersection along La Brea between Fountain and Olympic, a distance of 2.5 miles.  But the interesting thing is phasing.  The signal was designed to allow Rosewood Ave to become a bicycle route.  All car traffic on Rosewood must turn right on La Brea.  It seems that rights are permitted on red, even during the pedestrian phase.  Pedestrians and bikes may cross La Brea.  There are separate phases for La Brea traffic (major phase), bikes and peds crossing La Brea along Rosewood, and traffic from Rosewood turning right on La Brea.

More info:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La5i7G_OOM0

https://beverlypress.com/2019/05/l-a-puts-pedal-to-the-metal-on-la-brea/

One criticism is that they designed the intersection to force separate phases for the right turns and the bikes/peds.  This obviously will increase delay along La Brea even further.  A far better design to accommodate bikes, while discouraging through traffic by forcing right turns can be found in Tucson, AZ:

https://nacto.org/case-study/toucan-bicycle-signal-at-third-street-and-country-club-road-tucson-az/

The second issue is not that new, but it has to do with warrants.  Normally, we know that it is usually difficult to get a new signal installed because of expense and the lack of meeting the technical warrants, even when there is enough traffic at issue to seem warranted.  At the same time, who hasn't gotten stopped at red signals at intersections where the side street has so little traffic that it doesn't seem warranted.  I have to hand it to the L.A. Dept. of Transportation, who I have criticized before about certain signals not being warranted (Arden/Rosewood) who have been on top of the ball at another intersection.

Wilshire/Ogden sits 2 blocks east of Fairfax, right near the LA County Museum of Art.   For many years, Ogden connected Wilshire to 6th Street and connected into the Park La Brea private housing development (gated community).  There was a signal at Wilshire/Ogden and enough side street traffic to justify it.  There's been a lot of construction in the area for the last few years.  Museum expansion caused the block between 6th and Wilshire to be closed to traffic.  For a time, they were forcing all traffic coming on Ogden to turn right and prohibit pedestrian crossing Wilshire.  At this time, they removed the signal completely.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0628217,-118.3594284,3a,75y,195.54h,79.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLYOztPJE3Guws8t6SbAT2A!2e0!5s20090501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

With the street work done, in later years, they reinstalled the traffic signal.  More construction is happening there as there is further museum expansion as well as work on the Wilshire/Fairfax subway station construction.

So hand it to LADOT for turning off a signal when it wasn't warranted.
That's nice but LADOT should have installed a Bike HAWK instead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZBRnm1I2iE
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 17, 2019, 10:56:30 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 17, 2019, 03:29:10 PM
That's nice but LADOT should have installed a Bike HAWK instead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZBRnm1I2iE

I don't know if we need to encourage any more HAWK signals. Compliance still seems abysmal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 17, 2019, 11:43:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 17, 2019, 10:56:30 PM
I don't know if we need to encourage any more HAWK signals. Compliance still seems abysmal.

From what I've seen, the problem with HAWKs tends to be overcompliance, but it seems to vary quite a bit by region. In Salt Lake City there are enough HAWKs around that most people seem to have a good handle on how to use them. Atlanta doesn't have that many of them, so at the ones that do exist, 99% of the time the drivers there will remain stopped even after the red lights have switched to flashing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 17, 2019, 11:52:29 PM
L.A. has a better version of HAWK based on RYG with a flashing red phase after a brief red while people crossing.  I  posted about it here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9135.msg2377006#msg2377006

Traditionally, not done at intersections but only mid-block.


The point that I was making wrt Rosewood/La Brea is that a well designed crossing (like Tuscon's) would have the peds and the right turns not be in conflict with each other so they can make use of the same time during main street red.  This minimizes main street red.  Of course, main street red can be further minimized with a flashing red phase.  If that were the case, side street traffic would face a stop sign instead of a R-Y-Green right arrow.  That will probably work well at Rosewood/La Brea. 


An example of that can be found at the US 101 exit to Spring Street in DTLA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0571268,-118.2406376,3a,75y,40.88h,78.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFBiWHdIdCAmrIczK_YRovg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Even though Spring Street traffic gets a flashing red to minimize delay on Spring Street, IMO it would be better here to have a full solid red so that the significant traffic coming from the off-ramp can get a green arrow during the times that pedestrians are crossing.  Right turn on red has basically the same throughput as right turn on stop sign at other times.  But at least, the right turns from the off-ramp are not in conflict with the peds crossing Spring.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 18, 2019, 09:09:18 PM
Here's a cool signal: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6017421,-122.3318305,3a,24y,315.61h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMYKUdjCUAV3NSaAMgBTKEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.



Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 18, 2019, 09:09:18 PM
Here's a cool signal: https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6017421,-122.3318305,3a,24y,315.61h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMYKUdjCUAV3NSaAMgBTKEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

EDIT from original message: I keep forgetting to take a photo of that signal. It's very unusual, as the signal head was placed there only very recently. Note this older street view imagery (https://goo.gl/maps/RCMgT8sBTYCXuWTF6). I'm assuming the signal that we see there today was taken from somewhere else, and then modified to have another display. Note in street view imagery from 2015 (https://goo.gl/maps/Laytx6rowNGfMGuJ7), the (then new) box-style signal did not have any displays pointing south. Bumping the imagery forward to at least 2017 shows what we see today, which is a much-cleaned-up version of what was installed between 2015 and 2016.

It's a very intriguing signal, and I have no idea why they'd go through the trouble of finding an old signal, and then modifying it for this purpose. Not that I'm against what they did...it's lovely! I wish they'd do it more often. But it's pretty unlike Seattle DOT, who are typically pretty lazy with their installs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 25, 2019, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

I wouldn't rule it out that there are some out there - IIRC there's a left turn signal in Coralville, Iowa that only has the green as an arrow and uses orbs for the yellow and red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 26, 2019, 12:44:59 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 25, 2019, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

I wouldn't rule it out that there are some out there - IIRC there's a left turn signal in Coralville, Iowa that only has the green as an arrow and uses orbs for the yellow and red.

Those I see quite often in Virginia, and less often in Washington (state). Saw quite a few in Pennsylvania last week as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 26, 2019, 11:13:32 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 26, 2019, 12:44:59 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 25, 2019, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

I wouldn't rule it out that there are some out there - IIRC there's a left turn signal in Coralville, Iowa that only has the green as an arrow and uses orbs for the yellow and red.

Those I see quite often in Virginia, and less often in Washington (state). Saw quite a few in Pennsylvania last week as well.

We still have a couple of these in Sparks, NV along McCarran Blvd (here's a SV example, that just happened to be from the turn lane and catch red ball with adjacent thru green (https://goo.gl/maps/WLV8fzRsitzJ9DDf7)). The overhead turn signal is a 3M programmable head with green arrow and red & yellow orbs, with our old standard "Left turn on Green Arrow Only" sign–the far left supplemental pole mount signal is a traditional all-arrow display.

As to the original question: I've never seen one in person, although I feel I've seen photo evidence of one that may have existed somewhere...but couldn't tell you where (and I could be wrong).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 26, 2019, 02:24:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 26, 2019, 12:44:59 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 25, 2019, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

I wouldn't rule it out that there are some out there - IIRC there's a left turn signal in Coralville, Iowa that only has the green as an arrow and uses orbs for the yellow and red.

Those I see quite often in Virginia, and less often in Washington (state). Saw quite a few in Pennsylvania last week as well.

They're being phased out in Virginia (at least VDOT-wise), though as you pointed out there are still many left, especially in Northern Virginia.

It's a very slow process in Pennsylvania. It might be another 25 years before even half of their protected lefts have red arrows.

I have never seen a green orb used in a protected left either. Some older signals in Richmond and Williamsburg still have yellow (and red of course) orbs though, and some of them retained this even after the switch to LEDs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on June 26, 2019, 04:03:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 26, 2019, 12:44:59 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 25, 2019, 10:08:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

I wouldn't rule it out that there are some out there - IIRC there's a left turn signal in Coralville, Iowa that only has the green as an arrow and uses orbs for the yellow and red.

Those I see quite often in Virginia, and less often in Washington (state). Saw quite a few in Pennsylvania last week as well.

Small nitpick, but most of the Pennsylvania and Virginia installs remaining only use an orb for the red indication, with standard arrows used for the yellow and green. I've come across older intersections that included a yellow orb as well, but those are uncommon now.

This brings up a question that I've had in the past. What states continued to use red orbs for their protected left-turn signals up until the recent MUTCD mandate requiring red arrows? Other than Virginia and Pennsylvania, I know this was standard operating procedure in Connecticut and Louisiana. You can still find examples throughout those states.

Sidebar: both PA and CT used to have an interesting way of shielding the visibility of the red orb on their left turn signals from thru traffic. If the intersection otherwise calls for cutaway visors on their heads, the LTS's will use them for the arrow indications, but the red orb will be masked by a tunnel visor with louvers on the inside. An example: https://goo.gl/maps/pmCt8PXrnwPHsKbaA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 26, 2019, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

The closest I've seen is this unprotected left (https://goo.gl/maps/CXQ1KWNQNQu5PUnr5) that really should be a flashing yellow arrow, now that they're widespread and everyone knows what they are.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 27, 2019, 02:54:53 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 26, 2019, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

The closest I've seen is this unprotected left (https://goo.gl/maps/CXQ1KWNQNQu5PUnr5) that really should be a flashing yellow arrow, now that they're widespread and everyone knows what they are.

I find that setup very confusing. I've not driven by there in a long time. What's the purpose of the 3M signal if the left turn is a yield? Especially since it appears to display a red orb (https://goo.gl/maps/JM3oLBWMPw2RdxqE8) during the through green phase. Unless the "yield" message is for left turns onto Langston Road?

Definitely should either be removed or replaced by an FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 27, 2019, 06:46:47 PM
NY used to use a red ball with a louver for protected left turn signals up until about 10 years ago when they refitted them all with red arrows. That process took 2 years or so IIRC
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 27, 2019, 06:52:31 PM
I found this mysterious signal in South Philly, it says "HS" on the back of the housing, written in a fancy letter font:


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48138361747_c469a4907e_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gkPFQg)Mysterious HS logo (https://flic.kr/p/2gkPFQg) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48135285891_081abaf10f_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gkxVug)Mysterious H&amp;S signal (https://flic.kr/p/2gkxVug) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 27, 2019, 09:26:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

So, is Dallas phasing ruled out because it also has turn signals next to the all-orb stack?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on June 27, 2019, 10:06:50 PM
Speaking of Pennsylvania red orb left turn signals, are there any other signals left that display the red orb on the left turn signal while the green arrow is active and through traffic is stopped? The only one I know remaining is the PA 72/Dillerville Road (https://goo.gl/maps/umEqWbsoJFJecTqh6) light in Lancaster, which has a left turn signal for all four directions. There was another left turn signal like this at the US 422/PA 501 intersection in Myerstown, but the intersection was just recently revamped and now features modern signals (including red arrows).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 27, 2019, 10:32:52 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on June 27, 2019, 10:06:50 PM
Speaking of Pennsylvania red orb left turn signals, are there any other signals left that display the red orb on the left turn signal while the green arrow is active and through traffic is stopped? The only one I know remaining is the PA 72/Dillerville Road (https://goo.gl/maps/umEqWbsoJFJecTqh6) light in Lancaster, which has a left turn signal for all four directions. There was another left turn signal like this at the US 422/PA 501 intersection in Myerstown, but the intersection was just recently revamped and now features modern signals (including red arrows).

There was one in Levittown that did the 24/7 red ball, but it got replaced
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 28, 2019, 12:44:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2019, 02:54:53 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 26, 2019, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

The closest I've seen is this unprotected left (https://goo.gl/maps/CXQ1KWNQNQu5PUnr5) that really should be a flashing yellow arrow, now that they're widespread and everyone knows what they are.

I find that setup very confusing. I've not driven by there in a long time. What's the purpose of the 3M signal if the left turn is a yield? Especially since it appears to display a red orb (https://goo.gl/maps/JM3oLBWMPw2RdxqE8) during the through green phase. Unless the "yield" message is for left turns onto Langston Road?

Definitely should either be removed or replaced by an FYA.

To be fair, it is part of a five way intersection, so there may be no easy solutions.  (Should the yellow arrow point hard left or soft left?  Or both?)

Here is a green orb protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/dez2mZX16TnLvoDV8), but you'll have to trust me because it's hard to see.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: basilicon89 on June 28, 2019, 07:06:48 AM
Horni Signal. Precursor to Marbelite. Marbelite bought Horni's tooling. You'll notice the design is Marbelite with a different logo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on June 28, 2019, 09:41:08 AM
Quote from: basilicon89 on June 28, 2019, 07:06:48 AM
Horni Signal. Precursor to Marbelite. Marbelite bought Horni's tooling. You'll notice the design is Marbelite with a different logo.
No way. Hornis are supre rare

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TonyTrafficLight on June 28, 2019, 11:40:10 AM
Only other Horni I've seen is one some collector friends fixed up after it came down in Hoboken, NJ
and is now in their museum.

https://www.hobokenmuseum.org/hhmblog/the-hoboken-horni-finds-a-new-home/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 28, 2019, 03:17:07 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 28, 2019, 12:44:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2019, 02:54:53 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 26, 2019, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

The closest I've seen is this unprotected left (https://goo.gl/maps/CXQ1KWNQNQu5PUnr5) that really should be a flashing yellow arrow, now that they're widespread and everyone knows what they are.

I find that setup very confusing. I've not driven by there in a long time. What's the purpose of the 3M signal if the left turn is a yield? Especially since it appears to display a red orb (https://goo.gl/maps/JM3oLBWMPw2RdxqE8) during the through green phase. Unless the "yield" message is for left turns onto Langston Road?

Definitely should either be removed or replaced by an FYA.

To be fair, it is part of a five way intersection, so there may be no easy solutions.  (Should the yellow arrow point hard left or soft left?  Or both?)

Here is a green orb protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/dez2mZX16TnLvoDV8), but you'll have to trust me because it's hard to see.

I can't imagine that any regular intersection ever had a protected left movement marked by anything other than a green arrow.  The only exception that I'm familiar with are for certain partially protected intersections with split-phasing, yet pedestrians may still cross the path.  So it is protected from cross-traffic, but not pedestrians so it should not get a green arrow.

That might explain what is going on in the link as well.  In any event, I don't think of this as being a protected left, more like a special case of a T-intersection.  If you are at the stem of a T-intersection, a left on green is essentially a protected left since there is no opposing traffic anyway.  In this case, due to the channeling, it is akin to a T-intersection where most traffic is turning right, and the left will have a signal that is distinct from the more dominant right turn traffic. 

Here's another interesting signal at Sunset/Beverly Glen in Los Angeles.  I regard the turn from Sunset to Beverly Glen as being a protected left, but due to the angle of the street, it is signaled as the straight through movement, and the traffic to stay on Sunset is a right turn.  In any event, the green is still shown as green arrow to avoid confusion.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0822539,-118.4349104,3a,75y,57.37h,83.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snybbT0BEi-jrKTaKFOGoLQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656





Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 29, 2019, 11:55:58 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 28, 2019, 12:44:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 27, 2019, 02:54:53 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 26, 2019, 11:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

I've personally never seen one, nor am I totally certain that they even existed to begin with. WA has been using arrows for a really long time.

The closest I've seen is this unprotected left (https://goo.gl/maps/CXQ1KWNQNQu5PUnr5) that really should be a flashing yellow arrow, now that they're widespread and everyone knows what they are.

I find that setup very confusing. I've not driven by there in a long time. What's the purpose of the 3M signal if the left turn is a yield? Especially since it appears to display a red orb (https://goo.gl/maps/JM3oLBWMPw2RdxqE8) during the through green phase. Unless the "yield" message is for left turns onto Langston Road?

Definitely should either be removed or replaced by an FYA.

To be fair, it is part of a five way intersection, so there may be no easy solutions.  (Should the yellow arrow point hard left or soft left?  Or both?)

It appears that the 3M signal head and protected left is for turns onto Sunset, and the "Left turn Yield on Green" is meant for left turns onto Langston (past the Sunset intersection). This is corroborated by the posting of another "Left turn Yield on Green" sign below the symbolic "keep right of median" sign at Hardie & Langston (visible when you zoom out). Moving and augmenting the "Left turn yield on green" sign adjacent to the through signals, and/or some modified lane use signs, would probably make this a bit clearer.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on June 30, 2019, 01:28:54 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 06, 2019, 10:39:05 PM
I saw a Flashing Right Turn Arrow in San Antonio at the SA Airport.  Odd that a right turn needs a yellow flasher, but its north of I-410 on Airport Blvd. 

BTW, I thought I posted this before but I can't find it in my post history, so I guess I did not or I forgot to hit enter or some other issue.

I don't know if it's happening in other areas or if there's anything in the federal or state MUTCDs to back it up, but there seems to be an idea in central Texas that right turns across active crosswalks should have FYAs instead of green arrows. Austin has been replacing green balls at T-intersections with all-arrow installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2448299,-97.7301885,3a,15y,244.27h,93.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKJMkVZwZVsmEns-9C3Dsg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that show a FYA and a walk light if the pedestrian button has been pushed and a green arrow otherwise.

Assuming that this is the intersection that you're referring to (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5217336,-98.4767114,3a,75y,1.9h,88.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNPBPEiflsRXk8vUxmAdu6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), I assume that the combination of a right arrow and a "no turn on red" sign is to allow right turns at some times when through traffic doesn't have a green, but apparently a green arrow should come with a flashing yellow arrow these days as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 30, 2019, 01:42:49 AM
Quote from: djlynch on June 30, 2019, 01:28:54 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 06, 2019, 10:39:05 PM
I saw a Flashing Right Turn Arrow in San Antonio at the SA Airport.  Odd that a right turn needs a yellow flasher, but its north of I-410 on Airport Blvd. 

BTW, I thought I posted this before but I can't find it in my post history, so I guess I did not or I forgot to hit enter or some other issue.

I don't know if it's happening in other areas or if there's anything in the federal or state MUTCDs to back it up, but there seems to be an idea in central Texas that right turns across active crosswalks should have FYAs instead of green arrows. Austin has been replacing green balls at T-intersections with all-arrow installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2448299,-97.7301885,3a,15y,244.27h,93.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKJMkVZwZVsmEns-9C3Dsg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that show a FYA and a walk light if the pedestrian button has been pushed and a green arrow otherwise.

Assuming that this is the intersection that you're referring to (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5217336,-98.4767114,3a,75y,1.9h,88.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNPBPEiflsRXk8vUxmAdu6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), I assume that the combination of a right arrow and a "no turn on red" sign is to allow right turns at some times when through traffic doesn't have a green, but apparently a green arrow should come with a flashing yellow arrow these days as well.

A green arrow indicates a protected turn. A green arrow isn't permitted with a walk sign.  Thus, the flashing yellow arrow is correct in this instance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 01:50:37 PM
More than a little confused about what I'm supposed to do here (https://goo.gl/maps/rpoenUfHS5GGRDRE9). Follow the signal or yield?

(https://i.imgur.com/PwA1JdM.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 30, 2019, 04:37:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 01:50:37 PM
More than a little confused about what I'm supposed to do here (https://goo.gl/maps/rpoenUfHS5GGRDRE9). Follow the signal or yield?

(https://i.imgur.com/PwA1JdM.png)

Yield.

This means you may have to watch for pedestrians, even if the light is green.

Right turn will be permitted, without the need to come to a complete stop, even if the light is red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 30, 2019, 08:02:44 PM
That's very odd. I have never seen a yield sign used that way. I thought a signal would normally supercede a sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 10:08:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 30, 2019, 04:37:54 PM
Yield.

This means you may have to watch for pedestrians, even if the light is green.

Right turn will be permitted, without the need to come to a complete stop, even if the light is red.

But there's a separate pedestrian crossing signal, which is active when the light is red.

Quote from: SignBridge on June 30, 2019, 08:02:44 PM
That's very odd. I have never seen a yield sign used that way. I thought a signal would normally supercede a sign.

My understanding was that you could not combine signal and sign control.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on June 30, 2019, 10:27:32 PM
^ That's what the MUTCD says as well.

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD Section 2B.04 Paragraph 10
Because the potential for conflicting commands could create driver confusion, YIELD or STOP signs shall not be used in conjunction with any traffic control signal operation, except in the following cases:
A. If the signal indication for an approach is a flashing red at all times;
B. If a minor street or driveway is located within or adjacent to the area controlled by the traffic control signal, but does not require separate traffic signal control because an extremely low
potential for conflict exists; or
C. If a channelized turn lane is separated from the adjacent travel lanes by an island and the channelized turn lane is not controlled by a traffic control signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 30, 2019, 10:34:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 10:08:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 30, 2019, 04:37:54 PM
Yield.

This means you may have to watch for pedestrians, even if the light is green.

Right turn will be permitted, without the need to come to a complete stop, even if the light is red.

But there's a separate pedestrian crossing signal, which is active when the light is red.

Quote from: SignBridge on June 30, 2019, 08:02:44 PM
That's very odd. I have never seen a yield sign used that way. I thought a signal would normally supercede a sign.

My understanding was that you could not combine signal and sign control.

There's no walk signal for that right lane crossing from what I can tell.

Also, the stop line should be triangles when a yield sign is present, and the yield sign should be close to the line, prior to the crosswalk.

It almost appears as if the yield sign is a recent addition to the lane, and may have historically been controlled by the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 11:43:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 30, 2019, 10:34:38 PM
There's no walk signal for that right lane crossing from what I can tell.

Hit the Google maps link in my post. There's a crossing signal on the pole and right behind the yield sign.

The solid line is because the crossing is signal controlled (aka a stop line).

(Thank you for the text, Revive 755).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: sprjus4 on July 01, 2019, 01:01:29 AM
Would one turning right still have to stop if the signal was green? This intersection was completely revamped in 2014 which constructed the turn lanes and installed a traffic signal. IMO, this movement should have at most a yield sign, or a dedicated signal with a right arrow.

(https://i.ibb.co/LppzqMz/centervilleblueridge.png)

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7002655,-76.1855966,224m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 01, 2019, 03:54:47 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 01, 2019, 01:01:29 AM
Would one turning right still have to stop if the signal was green? This intersection was completely revamped in 2014 which constructed the turn lanes and installed a traffic signal. IMO, this movement should have at most a yield sign, or a dedicated signal with a right arrow.

https://i.ibb.co/LppzqMz/centervilleblueridge.png

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7002655,-76.1855966,224m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1

Slip lanes are not really part of intersections, so other signs can be used to control their flow (usually yield signs, but stop signs are, strangely, not that uncommon). When near a signal, traffic can get some idea of whether they'll need to actually stop (with yield signs) based on the state of the adjacent signal, but this is technically a separate movement.

Compare this to my image upthread (from Hawaii), where the only approach to the intersection (from the pictured direction) is the lane on the right, which is a forced right turn. The signals in the photo are clearly meant to control this approach, but an errant YIELD sign is also trying to control the movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 01, 2019, 06:03:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2019, 11:43:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 30, 2019, 10:34:38 PM
There's no walk signal for that right lane crossing from what I can tell.

Hit the Google maps link in my post. There's a crossing signal on the pole and right behind the yield sign.

The solid line is because the crossing is signal controlled (aka a stop line).

(Thank you for the text, Revive 755).

Ah, I see it now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on July 01, 2019, 10:05:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.
I noticed one just a couple of days ago and was quite surprised.  There's some older installations in NJ that still use circular red and yellow, but this one even uses circular green:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9187613,-74.1308371,3a,87.8y,14.83h,82.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLhksoyZbDQpBCe5uQ5rLzg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Notice the left turn signal on the left side.  The right LT signal uses NJ's older style for protected lefts (circular 8 inch red and yellow, 12 inch green arrow)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on July 01, 2019, 10:29:52 AM
I found a 4-way pedestal in Toledo Iowa last week
(https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/65961574_10217097860631093_2588567117032849408_o.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_oc=AQk16QP7JNtvs7mVyFhVYrlQIYS665C9sUpNWKCMe4dw37lMf-ClgyIxmcQK0VJbACw&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=08baa818e2314bb6c0e08d209322d7f5&oe=5DB1A671)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 01, 2019, 08:04:41 PM
I remember one like that in downtown Dedham, Massachusetts some years back. Don't know if it's still there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 04, 2019, 03:29:50 AM
Curious what people think of this: https://goo.gl/maps/8WQEYeisRgDNc79Y9

In the link, there's a couple things to notice:

1) the right turn (from the linked approach) is a slip lane
2) there are two left turn lanes at the signal (right lane may go straight)
3) the overhead signals have one green left arrow, one green orb, and one green right arrow (latter two stacked upon each other).

Based on the information, I think the right-green arrow may have been installed facing the wrong direction (right instead of left). There is no indication that right turns are even permitted at the intersection, plus (more importantly) this sort of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/Fnyss7j6rYQQHonp6), with two green left arrows and a green orb were very common prior to the 2009 MUTCD for option lane approaches without a dedicated right turn lane, at least in states that don't require pole-mounted signals (such as VA). The signal in the original link was installed in 2013/2014, although the signal may have been designed prior to VDOT's adoption of the 2009 MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 04, 2019, 02:19:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2019, 03:29:50 AM
Curious what people think of this: https://goo.gl/maps/8WQEYeisRgDNc79Y9

In the link, there's a couple things to notice:

1) the right turn (from the linked approach) is a slip lane
2) there are two left turn lanes at the signal (right lane may go straight)
3) the overhead signals have one green left arrow, one green orb, and one green right arrow (latter two stacked upon each other).

Based on the information, I think the right-green arrow may have been installed facing the wrong direction (right instead of left). There is no indication that right turns are even permitted at the intersection, plus (more importantly) this sort of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/Fnyss7j6rYQQHonp6), with two green left arrows and a green orb were very common prior to the 2009 MUTCD for option lane approaches without a dedicated right turn lane, at least in states that don't require pole-mounted signals (such as VA). The signal in the original link was installed in 2013/2014, although the signal may have been designed prior to VDOT's adoption of the 2009 MUTCD.

Given the right turn movement is separated by a pork chop island, and the crosswalk across that right turn doesn't have a ped signal, a right turn arrow is not appropriate here. Also with the left turn being the apparent major movement, two left arrows are necessary. So I would agree with you that the right-facing arrow should probably be left-facing instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 04, 2019, 02:26:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2019, 03:29:50 AM
Curious what people think of this: https://goo.gl/maps/8WQEYeisRgDNc79Y9

In the link, there's a couple things to notice:

1) the right turn (from the linked approach) is a slip lane
2) there are two left turn lanes at the signal (right lane may go straight)
3) the overhead signals have one green left arrow, one green orb, and one green right arrow (latter two stacked upon each other).

Based on the information, I think the right-green arrow may have been installed facing the wrong direction (right instead of left). There is no indication that right turns are even permitted at the intersection, plus (more importantly) this sort of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/Fnyss7j6rYQQHonp6), with two green left arrows and a green orb were very common prior to the 2009 MUTCD for option lane approaches without a dedicated right turn lane, at least in states that don't require pole-mounted signals (such as VA). The signal in the original link was installed in 2013/2014, although the signal may have been designed prior to VDOT's adoption of the 2009 MUTCD.

I agree with your assessment that the right arrow should be a left arrow.  In fact, if it were a right arrow, it would be a violation since you aren't allowed to turn right from that lane (signal head does not face the slip lane).  Further, even if you were, it is unsafe since the right arrow is on at the same time when pedestrians are allowed to cross (notice the 12 seconds remaining on the flashing don't walk phase).  It is also not appropriate to give a signal to the slip lane, since the peds crossing the slip lane don't have a signal (and could legally cross at any time).

If the area gets more pedestrianized, which is a goal of a lot of Tysons planners, they would need to have a signal to control the crossing of the slip lane as well as the right turn itself.  The right turn should allow a green arrow for all times that the main signal is green and when Tysons one has a left green arrow onto Westpark.  There should be a no turn on red arrow when pedestrians are crossing the slip lane, and perhaps a permitted turn on red (maybe a flashing red arrow) at other times, like when Tysons One has green but no peds are crossing the slip lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 05, 2019, 06:17:53 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 04, 2019, 02:19:36 PM
Given the right turn movement is separated by a pork chop island, and the crosswalk across that right turn doesn't have a ped signal, a right turn arrow is not appropriate here. Also with the left turn being the apparent major movement, two left arrows are necessary. So I would agree with you that the right-facing arrow should probably be left-facing instead.

Definitely. I'm almost 100% certain it was placed in the wrong direction anyways...

Quote from: mrsman on July 04, 2019, 02:26:34 PM
I agree with your assessment that the right arrow should be a left arrow.  In fact, if it were a right arrow, it would be a violation since you aren't allowed to turn right from that lane (signal head does not face the slip lane).  Further, even if you were, it is unsafe since the right arrow is on at the same time when pedestrians are allowed to cross (notice the 12 seconds remaining on the flashing don't walk phase).  It is also not appropriate to give a signal to the slip lane, since the peds crossing the slip lane don't have a signal (and could legally cross at any time).

If the area gets more pedestrianized, which is a goal of a lot of Tysons planners, they would need to have a signal to control the crossing of the slip lane as well as the right turn itself.  The right turn should allow a green arrow for all times that the main signal is green and when Tysons one has a left green arrow onto Westpark.  There should be a no turn on red arrow when pedestrians are crossing the slip lane, and perhaps a permitted turn on red (maybe a flashing red arrow) at other times, like when Tysons One has green but no peds are crossing the slip lane.

(Bolded part) didn't see that before! With that in mind, we can almost be certain that the arrow was placed in the wrong direction. Plus, bi-modal right-turn overlap signals are very rare (unheard of?) in VA (99% are doghouses, if not all), so this sort of setup would be unlikely anyways.

I can see the intersection losing all but the north-to-north slip-lane in the near future, or yes, signalizing the crossing would be great too. Maybe even with a flashing yellow arrow? It could turn red when pedestrians hit the button. Or it could just be timed to flash red when the walk sign automatically activates. It's fine for now, but the way Tysons is growing, it'll be appropriate to pedestrianise it more in the future. Improving access across Chain Bridge and Leesburg Pike should be focused on too. Those are huge roads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on July 11, 2019, 11:02:23 AM
Stanwood, Michigan
https://youtu.be/xaYjo1G6sdk

Big Rapids, Michigan
https://youtu.be/rMrHs-pc3So
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 11, 2019, 12:59:59 PM
I couple of interesting, likely older installations near Bremerton, WA.


https://imgur.com/wGvp7yF
https://imgur.com/PmFKT4p


New installation at SR 525 and Alderwood Mall Parkway in Lynnwood, WA


https://imgur.com/jWtsxbx
https://imgur.com/jne7285
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 11, 2019, 01:37:06 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on July 11, 2019, 12:59:59 PM
I couple of interesting, likely older installations near Bremerton, WA.


https://imgur.com/wGvp7yF
https://imgur.com/PmFKT4p




Very interesting, a 12-8-12 (bottom is a left green arrow) and a 12-8-8-8.  If you passed by this intersection, can you tell me how this looks when green?  An 8" signal phase head for an arrow is rare and I don't know what else would justify 4 signal phase heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 11, 2019, 02:10:00 PM
The left one was just a green arrow.  The right one had a green ball and a green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 11, 2019, 07:44:51 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on July 11, 2019, 12:59:59 PM
I couple of interesting, likely older installations near Bremerton, WA.


https://imgur.com/wGvp7yF
https://imgur.com/PmFKT4p


New installation at SR 525 and Alderwood Mall Parkway in Lynnwood, WA


https://imgur.com/jWtsxbx
https://imgur.com/jne7285

In that first example, I can't remember seeing completely round signal heads like that, and mixed with traditional ones at that. Wow.

In the example with that new install, what exactly is the lane configuration there? That's a very strange signal setup (the green orbs is throwing me off).
EDIT: Nevermind, just saw it on Google Maps. The green orb on the right signal is completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 11, 2019, 08:35:23 PM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 07:44:51 PM
EDIT: Nevermind, just saw it on Google Maps. The green orb on the right signal is completely unnecessary.

Two green orbs are required for every approach with a through lane, regardless of lane setup. This is Washington's lazy attempt to satisfy this rule.

Quote from: TEG24601 on July 11, 2019, 12:59:59 PM
I couple of interesting, likely older installations near Bremerton, WA.

https://imgur.com/wGvp7yF
https://imgur.com/PmFKT4p

An 8-inch green arrow. Sweet find! These are rare in WA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 11, 2019, 09:26:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 11, 2019, 08:35:23 PM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 07:44:51 PM
EDIT: Nevermind, just saw it on Google Maps. The green orb on the right signal is completely unnecessary.

Two green orbs are required for every approach with a through lane, regardless of lane setup. This is Washington's lazy attempt to satisfy this rule.

It's safe to say VDOT and several other VA agencies habitually ignore this rule lmao
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 12, 2019, 12:42:57 AM
Those appear to be Econolte signals,nice find. 8-inch arrows are now an MUTCD violation

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:03:42 AM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 09:26:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 11, 2019, 08:35:23 PM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 07:44:51 PM
EDIT: Nevermind, just saw it on Google Maps. The green orb on the right signal is completely unnecessary.

Two green orbs are required for every approach with a through lane, regardless of lane setup. This is Washington's lazy attempt to satisfy this rule.

It's safe to say VDOT and several other VA agencies habitually ignore this rule lmao

Depending on when VDOT adopted the 2009 MUTCD (the version that included this requirement), signals that didn't follow this rule may have been installed as late as 2013 or 2014 (or even later).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 12, 2019, 12:09:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:03:42 AM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 09:26:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 11, 2019, 08:35:23 PM
Quote from: plain on July 11, 2019, 07:44:51 PM
EDIT: Nevermind, just saw it on Google Maps. The green orb on the right signal is completely unnecessary.

Two green orbs are required for every approach with a through lane, regardless of lane setup. This is Washington's lazy attempt to satisfy this rule.

It's safe to say VDOT and several other VA agencies habitually ignore this rule lmao

Depending on when VDOT adopted the 2009 MUTCD (the version that included this requirement), signals that didn't follow this rule may have been installed as late as 2013 or 2014 (or even later).


I would actually argue that the arrows are not needed.  There is no oncoming traffic, so no need to indicate a protected turn.  The right arrow does not activate when the cross traffic has the arrow activated to the opposite ramp.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:13:32 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on July 12, 2019, 12:09:36 PM
I would actually argue that the arrows are not needed.  There is no oncoming traffic, so no need to indicate a protected turn.  The right arrow does not activate when the cross traffic has the arrow activated to the opposite ramp.

I don't disagree. Off-ramps don't need arrows at all, unless there's a desire to use an FYA to protected pedestrians. WA seems to use them as a substitute for lane-use arrows (R3-5 and R3-6): left-only lanes have a left-only arrow; left-and-through lanes have a left arrow and a green orb; etc. Lanes that can go three directions usually get something like what we see in the street view image. There is a signal in Auburn, and another in Burien, that has the same setup as that off-ramp from 525, but they're in tower-form (https://goo.gl/maps/B7sEFGDJF8wSMkfK9).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 12, 2019, 04:30:27 PM
^^ The left green arrow should be above the green right arrow

MUTCD:
Section 4D.09 Positions of Signal Indications Within a Vertical Signal Face

03 The relative positions of signal sections in a vertically-arranged signal face, from top to bottom, shall be as follows:

    CIRCULAR RED
    Steady and/or flashing left-turn RED ARROW
    Steady and/or flashing right-turn RED ARROW
    CIRCULAR YELLOW
    CIRCULAR GREEN
    Straight-through GREEN ARROW
    Steady left-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Flashing left-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Left-turn GREEN ARROW
    Steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Flashing right-turn YELLOW ARROW
    Right-turn GREEN ARROW
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2019, 04:30:27 PM
^^ The left green arrow should be above the green right arrow
[cut]

Well that's certainly annoying. I much prefer how WSDOT set it up, as the left and right arrows are horizontally aligned with one-another.

At any rate, this signal doesn't meet new MUTCD guidelines, as it doesn't have a second through signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2019, 03:29:19 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 04, 2019, 03:29:50 AM
Curious what people think of this: https://goo.gl/maps/8WQEYeisRgDNc79Y9

In the link, there's a couple things to notice:

1) the right turn (from the linked approach) is a slip lane
2) there are two left turn lanes at the signal (right lane may go straight)
3) the overhead signals have one green left arrow, one green orb, and one green right arrow (latter two stacked upon each other).

Based on the information, I think the right-green arrow may have been installed facing the wrong direction (right instead of left). There is no indication that right turns are even permitted at the intersection, plus (more importantly) this sort of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/Fnyss7j6rYQQHonp6), with two green left arrows and a green orb were very common prior to the 2009 MUTCD for option lane approaches without a dedicated right turn lane, at least in states that don't require pole-mounted signals (such as VA). The signal in the original link was installed in 2013/2014, although the signal may have been designed prior to VDOT's adoption of the 2009 MUTCD.

I managed to find an old photo of the intersection from 2012, taken by our very own 1995hoo. The signal appears to be coming together by 2012. But as I indicated before, that may have been before VDOT adopted the 2009 MUTCD, so although the signal isn't compliant, it may have been acceptable by that point (even with the wrong-way arrow as discussed up-thread).

Quote from: 1995hoo on April 26, 2012, 04:09:36 PM
Edited to add: While I was at the mall I went up to the top of the parking garage out back of where Woodies used to be and took some pictures. Here's the future Westpark Connector exit from the new Express Lanes. The long concrete overpass beyond that is the Metrorail line; you can see in the distance to the right where it swoops around to join the Dulles Access Road Extension in the median.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2F6dfb0def.jpg&hash=a6f0c4dbb9cfa1fd9bfa9a51d83786dcb06e7e98)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 10:21:16 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2019, 04:30:27 PM
^^ The left green arrow should be above the green right arrow
[cut]

Well that's certainly annoying. I much prefer how WSDOT set it up, as the left and right arrows are horizontally aligned with one-another.

At any rate, this signal doesn't meet new MUTCD guidelines, as it doesn't have a second through signal.

True, it isn't compliant with MUTCD, but it's possible that adding only one more additional orb could be problematic.

I agree that people are likely to view the signal as determining lane assignment, so if someone sees a green orb in the left lane, they may assume that they could go straight in the left lane.  But of course, you must turn left in the left lane, you must turn right in the right lane, and can go in any direction in the middle lane.

To be compliant, assuming you can ignore the one signal per lane rule (which I feel is not necessary in many cases), is to have two signal faces.  The left signal face: R-Y-G-GA left.  The right signal face: R-Y-G-GA right.  And a sign to indicate permitted turn movements would be most helpful.  If the third signal is absolutely required, it will be a regular RYG in the middle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on July 14, 2019, 02:42:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2019, 04:30:27 PM
^^ The left green arrow should be above the green right arrow
[cut]

Well that's certainly annoying. I much prefer how WSDOT set it up, as the left and right arrows are horizontally aligned with one-another.

At any rate, this signal doesn't meet new MUTCD guidelines, as it doesn't have a second through signal.


I would agree.  Given there are two lanes on the ramp, the left is left and through, and the right is right-only, both signals should just be 4-element, with a left arrow on the left one, and a right arrow on the right one, otherwise just 3-elements with orbs would be perfect.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2019, 04:43:36 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on July 14, 2019, 02:42:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2019, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2019, 04:30:27 PM
^^ The left green arrow should be above the green right arrow
[cut]

Well that's certainly annoying. I much prefer how WSDOT set it up, as the left and right arrows are horizontally aligned with one-another.

At any rate, this signal doesn't meet new MUTCD guidelines, as it doesn't have a second through signal.

I would agree.  Given there are two lanes on the ramp, the left is left and through, and the right is right-only, both signals should just be 4-element, with a left arrow on the left one, and a right arrow on the right one, otherwise just 3-elements with orbs would be perfect.

We were referring to this signal (which I cut from my quote): https://goo.gl/maps/B7sEFGDJF8wSMkfK9 -- the center lane of the off-ramp can go three different directions.



Quote from: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 10:21:16 AM
True, it isn't compliant with MUTCD, but it's possible that adding only one more additional orb could be problematic.

I agree that people are likely to view the signal as determining lane assignment, so if someone sees a green orb in the left lane, they may assume that they could go straight in the left lane.  But of course, you must turn left in the left lane, you must turn right in the right lane, and can go in any direction in the middle lane.

To be compliant, assuming you can ignore the one signal per lane rule (which I feel is not necessary in many cases), is to have two signal faces.  The left signal face: R-Y-G-GA left.  The right signal face: R-Y-G-GA right.  And a sign to indicate permitted turn movements would be most helpful.  If the third signal is absolutely required, it will be a regular RYG in the middle.

This off-ramp in the Silver Lake neighborhood of Lynnwood, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/6EkMnssq3tYCpd2n6) was recently re-done. It's an identical setup to my earlier Auburn example, but it does differ slightly: there are two additional signals on either side of the off-ramp (pole-mounted) with green arrows, pointing in respective directions. Overhead, there are two green arrows, and two green orbs (as required). This seems like a fine setup.

I would, realistically, be fine with using just all orbs. Perhaps even having just one overhead green orb, and two on either side of the intersection. I'm trying to find an example of this somewhere in either WA or BC, but both places use right-turn slip lanes at a majority of off-ramps; most, therefore, are only signed for left and straight-through movements.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 05:05:39 PM
Five signal faces seems like overkill to me.

One thing about these ramps is that it seems odd to allow the straight movement altogether.  There are some of these in the L.A. area as well at diamond ramps, but generally they are used to facilitate transit use.  There are some freeway buses that exit, go across the street at the signal, stop to pick up passengers, and then go up the ramp back to the freeway.

Here is an example at US 101 / Van Nuys Blvd.


https://www.google.com/maps/@34.156675,-118.4489662,3a,75y,115.22h,76.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY3vbS2c84PGzdM08wqc6RQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, there are 3 signal faces.   Like Jake's example, left lane for left turns, right lane for right turns, and the center lane for left/straight/right.  The left signal and center signal are RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  This seems more than sufficient.  The only thing that I would add would be another right arrow onto the middle signal so that it is properly symmetric.

Oddly enough at the opposite off-ramp you have this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1574035,-118.4485884,3a,75y,287.12h,77.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssqXbaJZkWiLYMfgikaBjDw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Same lane configuration.  2 signal faces.  The left signal is RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  (Not shown in this view is a near side signal that is the same as the signal on the right corner.)

[The old signal configuration had only two RYG signals on each side, without any arrows.  Even this would be sufficient as there is no need for a protected turn off of a one way street (or off-ramp, on-ramp as in this specific case).

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2019, 08:34:05 PM
The arrows are probably there to tell drivers there is no conflicting pedestrian movement. That's common in California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on July 14, 2019, 10:00:45 PM
I stumbled on this temporary traffic signal setup (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9338091,-74.616729,3a,75y,248.85h,88.29t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srV5iLlmX_NUh2fprbBFzMQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrV5iLlmX_NUh2fprbBFzMQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D108.152145%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) a few nights ago.  Any idea how the cross street signals work?  Are both directions on the main road red so traffic from the cross street can go either direction?  If you were to turn right on red from the right side street, isn't there potential to have a conflict with oncoming traffic if the far end of the bridge had a green light?  This is probably not very likely, since that direction is just a gated driveway (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9337487,-74.616902,3a,51.6y,328.67h,85.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snNr1SlQnsUjAkUkaqLETkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but could be solved by putting up a "NO TURN ON RED" sign.  If NY allowed left turns on red from a two-way street onto a one-way street, would the main street be considered a one way street that keeps changing direction?  If so, the potential for conflicts with traffic from the far end of the bridge could again be eliminated by a "NO TURN ON RED" sign.

Also, I noticed that the far end of the bridge doesn't have a signal for the side street (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9332328,-74.6185698,3a,87.5y,270.94h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NKbY0-pa3dXbiXhXn_nfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but I'm assuming people would be smart enough to figure out what direction traffic is going, and that if traffic at this end is stopped, it's to let traffic from the other end cross.  Also, it's a dead end, so the only people on it would be people who live on it and lock employees.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 11:34:56 PM
Quote from: Michael on July 14, 2019, 10:00:45 PM
I stumbled on this temporary traffic signal setup (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9338091,-74.616729,3a,75y,248.85h,88.29t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srV5iLlmX_NUh2fprbBFzMQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DrV5iLlmX_NUh2fprbBFzMQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D108.152145%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) a few nights ago.  Any idea how the cross street signals work?  Are both directions on the main road red so traffic from the cross street can go either direction?  If you were to turn right on red from the right side street, isn't there potential to have a conflict with oncoming traffic if the far end of the bridge had a green light?  This is probably not very likely, since that direction is just a gated driveway (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9337487,-74.616902,3a,51.6y,328.67h,85.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snNr1SlQnsUjAkUkaqLETkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but could be solved by putting up a "NO TURN ON RED" sign.  If NY allowed left turns on red from a two-way street onto a one-way street, would the main street be considered a one way street that keeps changing direction?  If so, the potential for conflicts with traffic from the far end of the bridge could again be eliminated by a "NO TURN ON RED" sign.

Also, I noticed that the far end of the bridge doesn't have a signal for the side street (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9332328,-74.6185698,3a,87.5y,270.94h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NKbY0-pa3dXbiXhXn_nfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but I'm assuming people would be smart enough to figure out what direction traffic is going, and that if traffic at this end is stopped, it's to let traffic from the other end cross.  Also, it's a dead end, so the only people on it would be people who live on it and lock employees.



The typical emergency traffic signal to control a single lane bridge would have eastbound traffic as a separate phase from westbound traffic with a sufficiently long all red phase between each direction.  Given that there are intersections so close to the bridge entrances, the westbound phase is further split between River Road and Old Station Road.  Neither side will have green when eastbound has a green.

I would imagine that the feeling was that any forgotten direction would have traffic that is so small as to be negligible.  Not always the best practice, but it may just work here. So that would explain traffic from the the second intersection.

So it means that there is a potential danger from the guy in the private driveway making a right on red.  If this is only one household, perhaps they wrote him a letter explaining the situation and telling him that he would have to get out of his car and push the button and only proceed on green.  And a similar potential danger exists at the second intersection, but again based on the law of averages, the likelihood of traffic is probably very small.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on July 16, 2019, 02:03:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 05:05:39 PM
Five signal faces seems like overkill to me.

One thing about these ramps is that it seems odd to allow the straight movement altogether.  There are some of these in the L.A. area as well at diamond ramps, but generally they are used to facilitate transit use.  There are some freeway buses that exit, go across the street at the signal, stop to pick up passengers, and then go up the ramp back to the freeway.

Here is an example at US 101 / Van Nuys Blvd.


https://www.google.com/maps/@34.156675,-118.4489662,3a,75y,115.22h,76.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY3vbS2c84PGzdM08wqc6RQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, there are 3 signal faces.   Like Jake's example, left lane for left turns, right lane for right turns, and the center lane for left/straight/right.  The left signal and center signal are RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  This seems more than sufficient.  The only thing that I would add would be another right arrow onto the middle signal so that it is properly symmetric.

Oddly enough at the opposite off-ramp you have this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1574035,-118.4485884,3a,75y,287.12h,77.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssqXbaJZkWiLYMfgikaBjDw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Same lane configuration.  2 signal faces.  The left signal is RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  (Not shown in this view is a near side signal that is the same as the signal on the right corner.)

[The old signal configuration had only two RYG signals on each side, without any arrows.  Even this would be sufficient as there is no need for a protected turn off of a one way street (or off-ramp, on-ramp as in this specific case).



One interesting find in that second setup is that the southbound Van Nuys far left signal (north of 101) still has the old 8-8-12 with the straight arrow in the 12" lens. Looks like a relic of the 60s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 01:15:44 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on July 16, 2019, 02:03:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 14, 2019, 05:05:39 PM
Five signal faces seems like overkill to me.

One thing about these ramps is that it seems odd to allow the straight movement altogether.  There are some of these in the L.A. area as well at diamond ramps, but generally they are used to facilitate transit use.  There are some freeway buses that exit, go across the street at the signal, stop to pick up passengers, and then go up the ramp back to the freeway.

Here is an example at US 101 / Van Nuys Blvd.


https://www.google.com/maps/@34.156675,-118.4489662,3a,75y,115.22h,76.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY3vbS2c84PGzdM08wqc6RQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, there are 3 signal faces.   Like Jake's example, left lane for left turns, right lane for right turns, and the center lane for left/straight/right.  The left signal and center signal are RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  This seems more than sufficient.  The only thing that I would add would be another right arrow onto the middle signal so that it is properly symmetric.

Oddly enough at the opposite off-ramp you have this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1574035,-118.4485884,3a,75y,287.12h,77.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssqXbaJZkWiLYMfgikaBjDw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Same lane configuration.  2 signal faces.  The left signal is RYG-GA left and the right signal is RYG-GA right.  (Not shown in this view is a near side signal that is the same as the signal on the right corner.)

[The old signal configuration had only two RYG signals on each side, without any arrows.  Even this would be sufficient as there is no need for a protected turn off of a one way street (or off-ramp, on-ramp as in this specific case).



One interesting find in that second setup is that the southbound Van Nuys far left signal (north of 101) still has the old 8-8-12 with the straight arrow in the 12" lens. Looks like a relic of the 60s.

I think the signal head is newer as the very dark signal heads tend to be newer.

It is common in California to have a green straight arrow on the left most signal whenever a left turn is permanently prohibited, as in this case since a left turn would be wrong way turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on July 19, 2019, 02:43:18 PM
Quote from: Michael on July 14, 2019, 10:00:45 PM
Also, I noticed that the far end of the bridge doesn't have a signal for the side street (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9332328,-74.6185698,3a,87.5y,270.94h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NKbY0-pa3dXbiXhXn_nfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but I'm assuming people would be smart enough to figure out what direction traffic is going, and that if traffic at this end is stopped, it's to let traffic from the other end cross.  Also, it's a dead end, so the only people on it would be people who live on it and lock employees.

There's a sign set a few dozen feet back from the stop sign with red flags on it for emphasis. It wouldn't surprise me if it's a "right turn only" sign to prevent traffic trying to cross the bridge.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 09:47:26 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/PcDx5Lnx1JW1ovyF8
I see PA is now copying NJ with left side signal heads.  Also the extra doghouse here is unusual as PA like many states uses just one green arrow for left turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 23, 2019, 09:54:18 PM
^^ That left signal is likely there due to the curvature of the road so traffic can see the signal ahead of time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 10:04:02 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 23, 2019, 09:54:18 PM
^^ That left signal is likely there due to the curvature of the road so traffic can see the signal ahead of time.
Probably, but Philly has plenty of them on Broad Street and some roads in Bucks County now install left side signaling just like NJ always had for ages.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 23, 2019, 10:11:09 PM
I've driven a lot in lower Bucks County and the only places I've seen those reverse-mounted supplemental heads are where there is a curved approach and you need a near-side signal, like the previous poster said.

Have you seen any such signals in that area where the approach is straight? If so can you tell us where they are? 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 24, 2019, 03:51:33 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 10:04:02 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 23, 2019, 09:54:18 PM
^^ That left signal is likely there due to the curvature of the road so traffic can see the signal ahead of time.
Probably, but Philly has plenty of them on Broad Street and some roads in Bucks County now install left side signaling just like NJ always had for ages.

The left-side signals in Philly are left-over* from when PA extensively used regular traffic signals for pedestrian crossings. They also acted as supplemental signals for vehicular traffic; many intersections in Philly only had one overhead signal on those approaches.

For the record, many states have been using left-side signals besides NJ. Maryland installs overhead, near-side left turn signals on almost every approach. Not to mention the numerous Western and Midwestern states that use left and right side signals (in addition to overhead signals).

*This old standard was arguably better than the current standard, but it's the older standard nonetheless
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 25, 2019, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: US71 on July 01, 2019, 10:29:52 AM
I found a 4-way pedestal in Toledo Iowa last week
(https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/65961574_10217097860631093_2588567117032849408_o.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_oc=AQk16QP7JNtvs7mVyFhVYrlQIYS665C9sUpNWKCMe4dw37lMf-ClgyIxmcQK0VJbACw&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=08baa818e2314bb6c0e08d209322d7f5&oe=5DB1A671)
I saw one of those very recently: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190725/df80064266078d5db43cc9e0b475df62.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on July 26, 2019, 10:11:00 AM
This is either a MnDOT signage mistake, or this "FYA" operates way differently than any other I've seen. 12th St W and Oakland Ave, Austin, MN (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6666037,-92.9896172,3a,75y,232.32h,93.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF06RKAPAT9odcA-E0JbKcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Note the sign to the left of the three-section arrow head.

(https://i.imgur.com/JVtbSIj.jpg)

As I saw it operate, it operates as a standard RYG protected-only left arrow, but yet has a sign telling to yield on FYA? Unless it operates differently (and very non-standardly, without a fourth signal section for the FYA) at different hours of the day, the sign is unnecessary here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2019, 10:23:01 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 26, 2019, 10:11:00 AM
This is either a MnDOT signage mistake, or this "FYA" operates way differently than any other I've seen. 12th St W and Oakland Ave, Austin, MN (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6666037,-92.9896172,3a,75y,232.32h,93.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF06RKAPAT9odcA-E0JbKcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Note the sign to the left of the three-section arrow head.

(https://i.imgur.com/JVtbSIj.jpg)

As I saw it operate, it operates as a standard RYG protected-only left arrow, but yet has a sign telling to yield on FYA? Unless it operates differently (and very non-standardly, without a fourth signal section for the FYA) at different hours of the day, the sign is unnecessary here.

I believe both 3 and 4 headed signals are standard.  The 4 headed signal appears to be preferred by most transportation departments though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 26, 2019, 12:35:54 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 26, 2019, 10:23:01 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 26, 2019, 10:11:00 AM
This is either a MnDOT signage mistake, or this "FYA" operates way differently than any other I've seen. 12th St W and Oakland Ave, Austin, MN (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6666037,-92.9896172,3a,75y,232.32h,93.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF06RKAPAT9odcA-E0JbKcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Note the sign to the left of the three-section arrow head.

(https://i.imgur.com/JVtbSIj.jpg)

As I saw it operate, it operates as a standard RYG protected-only left arrow, but yet has a sign telling to yield on FYA? Unless it operates differently (and very non-standardly, without a fourth signal section for the FYA) at different hours of the day, the sign is unnecessary here.

I believe both 3 and 4 headed signals are standard.  The 4 headed signal appears to be preferred by most transportation departments though.

The 4 headed signal is preferred to highlight that the flashing yellow arrow and the solid yellow arrow are different.  The solid yellow arrow is to denote that the phase is ending.

I have also seen RA-YA-FYA signals with no green arrow.  This highlights some signals that do not provide a protected left turn phase, but still need FYA functionality (like to avoid yellow trap or to provide extra caution for pedestrians).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 27, 2019, 04:07:33 PM
I think the observation is mainly that it's "in the style" of a protected-only signal, and seems to operate in protected-only mode, yet has a "yield on [FYA]" sign.

I have certainly seen many 3-face FYAs, but none that operate by time-of-day. There are some time-of-day FYAs in my area, but they're all 4-face displays.

IIRC, Minnesota does use time-of-day FYAs, but only for double-left turns?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on July 28, 2019, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 27, 2019, 04:07:33 PM
I think the observation is mainly that it's "in the style" of a protected-only signal, and seems to operate in protected-only mode, yet has a "yield on [FYA]" sign.

Correct.

Quote
I have certainly seen many 3-face FYAs, but none that operate by time-of-day. There are some time-of-day FYAs in my area, but they're all 4-face displays.

IIRC, Minnesota does use time-of-day FYAs, but only for double-left turns?

I have never seen a three-section FYA that had all three colors, using the yellow section for both flashing and steady. This would be the first, if it did operate that way.

As far as time-of-day FYAs for double lefts, I don't know for certain that some operate that way, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 28, 2019, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 28, 2019, 06:24:05 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 27, 2019, 04:07:33 PM
I think the observation is mainly that it's "in the style" of a protected-only signal, and seems to operate in protected-only mode, yet has a "yield on [FYA]" sign.

Correct.

Quote
I have certainly seen many 3-face FYAs, but none that operate by time-of-day. There are some time-of-day FYAs in my area, but they're all 4-face displays.

IIRC, Minnesota does use time-of-day FYAs, but only for double-left turns?

I have never seen a three-section FYA that had all three colors, using the yellow section for both flashing and steady. This would be the first, if it did operate that way.

As far as time-of-day FYAs for double lefts, I don't know for certain that some operate that way, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Not sure if it's legal (per MUTCD or state equivalents) to have the yellow section for both steady and flashing yellow arrow, but it is highly inadvisable.  It is important to highlight the steady yellow arrow, which signifies the end of the permissive turn phase, and simply turning the flash into steady is too subtle for many to realize.  That is part of the reason for having 4 aspects on the FYA signal.

MD, AFAIK, does not use FYA, but instead uses flashing red arrow.  Those are exclusively 3 aspect signals.  I believe part of the reason for this is because in some of the early literature of FYA, there was some confusion since in many areas that have signals go on flash (and most MD signal go on flash overnight) and would treat that as CAUTION there is an intersection but you have the right of way.  FYA, of course, does not mean that you have the right of way, but rather yield to oncoming traffic.   Technically, with a flashing red arrow you need to come to a complete stop each time before you turn, and I beleive that you are not allowed to rest in the middle of the intersection to wait for a gap.  If there is no gap, then you wait for the green arrow, even if you have to go through the whole cycle.  There is no 4th aspect to distinguish between flashing red and solid red arrows.

The intersection with flashing red arrows closest to me seems to be always on a lead-lead left turn signalization (or one direction leading if there is no one coming in the other way).  The SB left is much heavier and there is almost someone over there.  The signalization is typically: green arrow-red orb, yellow arrow-red orb, steady red arrow (for a few seconds)-red orb, steady red arrow (for a few seconds)-green orb), flashing red arrow-green orb, steady red arrow-yellow orb, steady red arrow-red orb.  Given this signalization, I don't believe they permit you to complete your turn if you are waiting, but most people do.  I don't understand why they did this, doghouse signals would work so much better for lead-lead left turns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 28, 2019, 02:15:20 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 28, 2019, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 28, 2019, 06:24:05 AM
I have never seen a three-section FYA that had all three colors, using the yellow section for both flashing and steady. This would be the first, if it did operate that way.

Not sure if it's legal (per MUTCD or state equivalents) to have the yellow section for both steady and flashing yellow arrow, but it is highly inadvisable.  It is important to highlight the steady yellow arrow, which signifies the end of the permissive turn phase, and simply turning the flash into steady is too subtle for many to realize.  That is part of the reason for having 4 aspects on the FYA signal.

A three-section FYA that uses the middle yellow section for both the flashing and steady yellow arrow is not allowed per the 2009 MUTCD as currently written. However, the FHWA issued Interim Approval for Optional Use of Three-Section Flashing Yellow Arrow Signal Faces (IA-17) (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia17/index.htm) in 2014 that will allow agencies to install three-section FYAs operating in this manner subject to conditions. This option will likely be added to the next MUTCD. (It was likely allowed to give agencies the opportunity to use existing protected signal heads to implement FYA operations without having to buy and install new signal heads.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 28, 2019, 05:29:36 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 28, 2019, 02:15:20 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 28, 2019, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on July 28, 2019, 06:24:05 AM
I have never seen a three-section FYA that had all three colors, using the yellow section for both flashing and steady. This would be the first, if it did operate that way.

Not sure if it's legal (per MUTCD or state equivalents) to have the yellow section for both steady and flashing yellow arrow, but it is highly inadvisable.  It is important to highlight the steady yellow arrow, which signifies the end of the permissive turn phase, and simply turning the flash into steady is too subtle for many to realize.  That is part of the reason for having 4 aspects on the FYA signal.

A three-section FYA that uses the middle yellow section for both the flashing and steady yellow arrow is not allowed per the 2009 MUTCD as currently written. However, the FHWA issued Interim Approval for Optional Use of Three-Section Flashing Yellow Arrow Signal Faces (IA-17) (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia17/index.htm) in 2014 that will allow agencies to install three-section FYAs operating in this manner subject to conditions. This option will likely be added to the next MUTCD. (It was likely allowed to give agencies the opportunity to use existing protected signal heads to implement FYA operations without having to buy and install new signal heads.)

Every flashing yellow arrow in Pierce County, WA (except for one) uses a flashing center lens (probably at least 60-80 total signal heads?). No bi-modal signals here. Lakewood, a city within Pierce County, uses a flashing lower (bi-modal) lens; everyone else uses a four-section FYA. You can see it all around here!

You thinking that they may have gotten carried away with that IA? They even went so far as to replace (https://goo.gl/maps/5BnzU17m5m3o5yR37) a 4-section FYA with a 3-section FYA about a year ago (skip forward a year to see the new signal).

https://youtu.be/tD7YtZvjTFU
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 29, 2019, 11:16:03 PM
Quote from: Ian on June 26, 2019, 04:03:56 PM
This brings up a question that I've had in the past. What states continued to use red orbs for their protected left-turn signals up until the recent MUTCD mandate requiring red arrows? Other than Virginia and Pennsylvania, I know this was standard operating procedure in Connecticut and Louisiana. You can still find examples throughout those states.

Missouri used to, and it seems like they would like to keep using it as there are a few flashing yellow installations using red orbs.  MO 95 at US 60 has these (although Streetview (https://goo.gl/maps/yfTWDivbfq6nmD238) never shows it).  There are also a few near I-49 in the Kansas City area (example on MO 58 (https://goo.gl/maps/BBjSF5xzdg4M8i5x8)).

The Collinsville District of IDOT also used to, although they used louvers on at least the red indication on the left turn heads closest to the through lanes (example (https://goo.gl/maps/zn8zTqPPzgWAcXZSA)).  I believe they kept this practice a bit after the 2009 MUTCD was adopted, although they have since made the switch to red arrows.

Indiana also used the red orbs; I recall there still being a few that have not been converted to red arrows.

Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

Converse Avenue at Dell Range Boulevard in Cheyenne, WY, (https://goo.gl/maps/fSfr8q8cRpGH6KHr6) may be a candidate for an all-orb left turn head. looks like it comes close, but it appears NB and SB are split phased here.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 29, 2019, 11:29:18 PM
Green Bay has a couple intersections with a red orb on an otherwise all arrow FYA installation.  Other intersections use the proper all arrow FYA installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 30, 2019, 03:08:43 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 29, 2019, 11:16:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2019, 05:42:19 PM
Does anyone known if there are any all-orb dedicated left turn displays in use? The kind that say "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" and use, among red and yellow, a green orb to indicate a protected left.

Converse Avenue at Dell Range Boulevard in Cheyenne, WY, (https://goo.gl/maps/fSfr8q8cRpGH6KHr6) may be a candidate for an all-orb left turn head. looks like it comes close, but it appears NB and SB are split phased here.

Ahh yes, the old "split phased but all green orbs anyway" approach. Seen that before, not a fan. Very misleading.



Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2019, 11:29:18 PM
Green Bay has a couple intersections with a red orb on an otherwise all arrow FYA installation.  Other intersections use the proper all arrow FYA installation.

Left or right turns? Or both?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 30, 2019, 01:34:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 30, 2019, 03:08:43 AM

Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2019, 11:29:18 PM
Green Bay has a couple intersections with a red orb on an otherwise all arrow FYA installation.  Other intersections use the proper all arrow FYA installation.

Left or right turns? Or both?
Left turns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 30, 2019, 02:11:25 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 30, 2019, 01:34:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 30, 2019, 03:08:43 AM

Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2019, 11:29:18 PM
Green Bay has a couple intersections with a red orb on an otherwise all arrow FYA installation.  Other intersections use the proper all arrow FYA installation.

Left or right turns? Or both?
Left turns.

Weird. I would have thought that most/all FYA signals would have been introduced after the elimination of red orb, "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" setups.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 30, 2019, 04:49:07 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48384458012/in/dateposted-public/

I noticed that Louisiana uses both span wire and mast arms just like Texas and Florida.  Was just curious as it appeared to me that Louisiana was replacing the span wire with mast arms as in the Houma area many replacements are the mast arm, so I assume that they were phasing out the span wiring.

This one is in Shreveport on LA 1 at I-49, which is not only a few years old, but mounted from telephone poles which La usually uses metal poles for span wires.  Is this a temporary set up, or does La occasionally use wood poles?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 31, 2019, 09:25:34 AM
The Philadelphia Inquirer:

Why Philly's traffic lights still aren't synchronized – and won't be anytime soon

Includes some pictures of old timing mechanisms and other shop stuff, and a graphic of how most of Philly's lights aren't working as well as they should.

https://www.inquirer.com/transportation/philadelphia-traffic-light-congestion-technology-20190731.html
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 31, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 31, 2019, 09:25:34 AM
The Philadelphia Inquirer:

Why Philly’s traffic lights still aren’t synchronized — and won’t be anytime soon

Includes some pictures of old timing mechanisms and other shop stuff, and a graphic of how most of Philly's lights aren't working as well as they should.

https://www.inquirer.com/transportation/philadelphia-traffic-light-congestion-technology-20190731.html
NY still has the old click boxes and double guy mast arms, and they are not synchronized in many places except going up or down the Manhattan Avenues as you can drive them for several blocks without issue. Crosstown in Manhattan is another story!  Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx I have found in recent trips have gotten worse since 1990 from what I experienced.  I drove Flatbush Avenue in Downtown Brooklyn in 2003 on a Saturday and it was like the weekdays during rush hour back when I lived in NJ.  Usually roads in NYC before I moved to FL were easy to manipulate on Saturdays and Sundays, but in 2003 I saw an increase in weekend drivers for sure.  The lights were no help either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 31, 2019, 09:07:41 PM
Back in the 1970's the signals on Queens Blvd were synchronized. Back then I once got 9 consecutive greens at about 40 mph. The speed limit was reduced to 25mph on that road a few years back to try to reduce pedestrian strikes. I don't know if the signals still work as well as years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 02, 2019, 03:01:04 AM
Would anyone care to try and identify the manufacturer of this yet-to-be-activated signal?

https://goo.gl/maps/xUCzbdi4QWav2GMe8

(Future signal for off-ramp, BC-1 @ Mountain Hwy)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 05, 2019, 05:15:27 PM
i came across these signals in downtown Buffalo, NY today. These are not that old but have guy wires on the mast arms for some reason.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022056,-78.8706533,3a,75y,275.48h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG3JC0u_HrpxOLHZpkVbFtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022132,-78.8711792,3a,75y,261.77h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svR5MrkdwkB9hj6-fdgWbZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Most signals in Buffalo use straight mast arms without the guy wire supports or are on span wire.

EDIT: After looking at old Google Steetview these were installed sometime after 2007.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 06, 2019, 12:22:06 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 05, 2019, 05:15:27 PM
i came across these signals in downtown Buffalo, NY today. These are not that old but have guy wires on the mast arms for some reason.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022056,-78.8706533,3a,75y,275.48h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG3JC0u_HrpxOLHZpkVbFtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022132,-78.8711792,3a,75y,261.77h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svR5MrkdwkB9hj6-fdgWbZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Most signals in Buffalo use straight mast arms without the guy wire supports or are on span wire.

EDIT: After looking at old Google Steetview these were installed sometime after 2007.

Now that's interesting. It's hard to believe either of the main possibilities: that, A) they dusted off an old guy-wire standard for an historic look (who would really have any idea that a guy-wire is historic?), or, B) it was installed because it was the best option available.

Of course, it's possible an NYC engineer ended up in Buffalo, and insisted on this design for some reason. But it's not like they have anything in common with the traditional NYC guy-wire setup, besides the guy-wire itself. It's not like he just popped downstate, stole some plans, and came back.

Alas, it could be that the guy-wire is actually not that old of a standard, and I'm overthinking all of this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 06, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2019, 12:22:06 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 05, 2019, 05:15:27 PM
i came across these signals in downtown Buffalo, NY today. These are not that old but have guy wires on the mast arms for some reason.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022056,-78.8706533,3a,75y,275.48h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG3JC0u_HrpxOLHZpkVbFtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022132,-78.8711792,3a,75y,261.77h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svR5MrkdwkB9hj6-fdgWbZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Most signals in Buffalo use straight mast arms without the guy wire supports or are on span wire.

EDIT: After looking at old Google Steetview these were installed sometime after 2007.

Now that's interesting. It's hard to believe either of the main possibilities: that, A) they dusted off an old guy-wire standard for an historic look (who would really have any idea that a guy-wire is historic?), or, B) it was installed because it was the best option available.

Of course, it's possible an NYC engineer ended up in Buffalo, and insisted on this design for some reason. But it's not like they have anything in common with the traditional NYC guy-wire setup, besides the guy-wire itself. It's not like he just popped downstate, stole some plans, and came back.

Alas, it could be that the guy-wire is actually not that old of a standard, and I'm overthinking all of this?
It appears they went for a vintage look here. Also, the first one I linked has a bike signal phase.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022109,-78.8710477,3a,37.5y,203.02h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spT8k-m4SvgIbNXtoc-gvew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 06, 2019, 05:06:42 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 06, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
It appears they went for a vintage look here. Also, the first one I linked has a bike signal phase.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022109,-78.8710477,3a,37.5y,203.02h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spT8k-m4SvgIbNXtoc-gvew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

Probably a vintage look. It just surprises me that those in charge would think anyone would be able to tell the difference. I think people associate more complex-looking structures with vintage looks, but these guy-wire mast arms really don't look that much more complex.

I like the contraflow cycle lane. Very nice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 06, 2019, 05:17:37 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 06, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
It appears they went for a vintage look here. Also, the first one I linked has a bike signal phase.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022109,-78.8710477,3a,37.5y,203.02h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spT8k-m4SvgIbNXtoc-gvew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
It is missing the bicycle signal sign which is required in the 2013 MUTCD interim approval.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 06, 2019, 06:00:26 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 06, 2019, 05:17:37 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 06, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
It appears they went for a vintage look here. Also, the first one I linked has a bike signal phase.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022109,-78.8710477,3a,37.5y,203.02h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spT8k-m4SvgIbNXtoc-gvew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
It is missing the bicycle signal sign which is required in the 2013 MUTCD interim approval.

How long before that requirement gets tossed? Seems obvious to me that bike shapes are for bikes. Same way that arrows are for turns. Should be intuitive enough.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 06, 2019, 08:32:27 PM
Here's an interesting signal in Washington DC.  12th and "C" Streets, NW: (pictured southbound)

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8936836,-77.0281331,3a,75y,192.79h,74.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Fh5TlakHAT6FOqSdIxh3A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

The signal itself is pretty standard for some of the newer placements within DC.  Pole mounted signals, with very short straight mast arms.  "C" Street, no longer exists over here, as the IRS and EPA buildings were built in the 1930's.  To the east (left), there is still a relatively active driveway to serve deliveries to the Trump Hotel (and possibly to the IRS as well).  To the west (right), there is no street at all.  In essence this is a short T-intersection, with "C" only serving to the east*, and no longer serving thru traffic to any extent.

But what is odd about this, is that even though there is a little traffic to the east (mainly delivery trucks), there has been no vehicular traffic at all to the west for over 80 years.  Yet, if you look closely, you can see that there are three signal faces that face the west (two far side and one near side).  This is really odd, as no vehicle will ever face those signals (or have faced them in 80 years) and there are pedestrian signals present at the legal crossing on the north side of "C".

In contrast, the nearby signal at Pennsylvania and 13th, also a T-interchange, does not have vehicle signals facing the closed side of the T-intersection. (And this one might make a good argument for a vehicular signal as the gate is sometimes opened up to let vehicles through.) Don't know the exact year this was permanently closed, but 13th was open as a street a lot more recently than C.  Prior to the construction of the Reagan building, this was a big parking lot and there was a lot of traffic that came in and out from that intersection.  13th continues as a driveway (due to pylons closed to all vehicles except for deliveries) all the way to Constitution.

13th and Penn:  https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8953641,-77.0296807,3a,75y,344.24h,80.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0fUMt9R98pmthnz_ajm6Nw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

"13th" and Constitution, From 2009:  https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8921438,-77.0297733,3a,75y,356.38h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEd5U5bdqoFllrjgjkIbQKg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0


* At some point, more recent than the construction of the IRS building, traffic could go east on C to 11th toward Pennsylvania.  This was stopped when they constructed the "pavilion" adjacent to the IRS building.  (Don't know the exact year, but I believe it was in the 1990's.).  I have seen no recent record of C existing west of 12th.

EPA building information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jefferson_Clinton_Federal_Building
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 07, 2019, 10:12:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2019, 06:00:26 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 06, 2019, 05:17:37 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 06, 2019, 04:32:27 PM
It appears they went for a vintage look here. Also, the first one I linked has a bike signal phase.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9022109,-78.8710477,3a,37.5y,203.02h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spT8k-m4SvgIbNXtoc-gvew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
It is missing the bicycle signal sign which is required in the 2013 MUTCD interim approval.

How long before that requirement gets tossed? Seems obvious to me that bike shapes are for bikes. Same way that arrows are for turns. Should be intuitive enough.

I think the bike signal sign is required because the green indication could be green arrow(s), depending on implementation and phasing. So the requirement for a sign is likely to stay in effect until they can somehow legibly combine a bike symbol and an arrow into a single indication...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on August 10, 2019, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 07, 2019, 10:12:14 AM
I think the bike signal sign is required because the green indication could be green arrow(s), depending on implementation and phasing. So the requirement for a sign is likely to stay in effect until they can somehow legibly combine a bike symbol and an arrow into a single indication...

Didn't even have to shrink the bike symbol to make this work. (https://imgur.com/a/bs2mU2z) The arrow would need to be about 10% shorter than what's seen here for "straight ahead", but it comes close to working for everything. A good designer could probably make the arrow shape an adjustable piece within the larger unit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 11, 2019, 05:41:35 PM
Quote from: djlynch on August 10, 2019, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 07, 2019, 10:12:14 AM
I think the bike signal sign is required because the green indication could be green arrow(s), depending on implementation and phasing. So the requirement for a sign is likely to stay in effect until they can somehow legibly combine a bike symbol and an arrow into a single indication...

Didn't even have to shrink the bike symbol to make this work. (https://imgur.com/a/bs2mU2z) The arrow would need to be about 10% shorter than what's seen here for "straight ahead", but it comes close to working for everything. A good designer could probably make the arrow shape an adjustable piece within the larger unit.

You used a sign arrow style instead of a traffic signal style arrow, which have different layouts...

To implement something like this would need official MUTCD experimentation, but I'd be in favor of such if it meant eliminating the bike signal sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2019, 07:05:26 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 11, 2019, 05:41:35 PM
Quote from: djlynch on August 10, 2019, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 07, 2019, 10:12:14 AM
I think the bike signal sign is required because the green indication could be green arrow(s), depending on implementation and phasing. So the requirement for a sign is likely to stay in effect until they can somehow legibly combine a bike symbol and an arrow into a single indication...

Didn't even have to shrink the bike symbol to make this work. (https://imgur.com/a/bs2mU2z) The arrow would need to be about 10% shorter than what's seen here for "straight ahead", but it comes close to working for everything. A good designer could probably make the arrow shape an adjustable piece within the larger unit.

You used a sign arrow style instead of a traffic signal style arrow, which have different layouts...

To implement something like this would need official MUTCD experimentation, but I'd be in favor of such if it meant eliminating the bike signal sign.

The biggest issue would be the size of the images in the lenses. From over 50 feet away, both the arrow and the bicycle would be smaller than if they were in an 8" lense...which aren't used due to their smaller size.

Similar to a "Left Turn Signal" sign, a "Bicycle Signal" sign could be used, along with louvers or programmable sight line lenses, so the bike signal can only be readily seen by those in the bike lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on August 11, 2019, 08:08:39 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 11, 2019, 05:41:35 PM
You used a sign arrow style instead of a traffic signal style arrow, which have different layouts...

To implement something like this would need official MUTCD experimentation, but I'd be in favor of such if it meant eliminating the bike signal sign.

I'm aware, but I also think that a smaller-than-typical signal style arrow wouldn't be as legible as the sign arrow at a distance. IMO, even just a triangle would be enough. And if sign arrows are apparently close enough to the real thing for the U-turn signals a few posts back...

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2019, 07:05:26 PM
The biggest issue would be the size of the images in the lenses. From over 50 feet away, both the arrow and the bicycle would be smaller than if they were in an 8" lense...which aren't used due to their smaller size.

The symbol is as close to the same size relative to the diameter of the lens as I could manage when tracing it from the MUTCD interim approval document. There's a significant amount of space on all sides because the symbol is wider than it is tall and the widest point on the symbol is well below the widest point on the lens.

I also think that the legibility of the symbol itself could be dramatically improved with some simplification and heavier lines. I think it's copied from the Standard Highway Signs design and it's way too detailed and has too much negative space for this application. I think I've seen a version on some lights that's just two circles and a triangle symbolizing the frame.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 12, 2019, 01:52:14 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2019, 07:05:26 PM
From over 50 feet away, both the arrow and the bicycle would be smaller than if they were in an 8" lense...which aren't used due to their smaller size.

8-inch signals are still used, just not so much in the US. Still very common in BC, where they are the predominant lens for post-mounted signals. They still have applications. For bikes, they're all that's needed.

(https://i.imgur.com/FEHgEQw.jpg)

Do note that near-side bike signals, which I've seen in Seattle pretty regularly, are tiny lenses. These combo bike/arrow signals would be about the same size. Plus, most bike signals, at least in Seattle, are rarely larger than 8 inches. Early ones were 12 inch, but they realized it was unnecessary, and were more often mistaken for regular signals (even with signage). The smaller signals would be more in-context with cycling in general (i.e. designed for slower approach speeds).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 12, 2019, 10:08:55 AM
Here is a FLYA on US 59 in Marshall, TX with a LED board lit up with the flashing arrow to inform the ignorant motorist what its purpose is.
(http://marshall,%20tx- %20us%2059)(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48520028442_3bf572951f_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on August 13, 2019, 12:37:14 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/vKmF773.mp4)

I finally got a traffic light, bonus points because its green, my favorite color!

Imgur link is here (https://imgur.com/vKmF773) in case the vid breaks because of the forum.

Edit: Mods, please fix this, if you can, it is indeed not showing up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on August 13, 2019, 07:43:53 AM
Maple City, MI: https://youtu.be/8tuJdm510iM
Stanwood, MI: https://youtu.be/xaYjo1G6sdk
Mansfield, OH: https://youtu.be/FYGgN2lHXHQ
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 13, 2019, 05:55:20 PM
Here's something rare for New York State. Curved CALTRANS style mast arms.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2204312,-78.3869743,3a,75y,95.55h,91.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shqUw-TKfmkVCZd7TKXtEzw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

EDIT: Also, in typical NYSDOT fashion it's a sloppy installation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 13, 2019, 06:20:47 PM
Looks decent, except for the oversized arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 13, 2019, 09:13:21 PM
NYSDOT Region-10 on Long Island is now installing a lot of curved mast-arms where they mostly used diagonal-span wire for many years. But as the above poster said, they tend to be very gawky looking. Usually diagonal span, and very fat curved mast-arms; heads mounted using standard astro-brackets which do look sloppy on curved arms. They're building a couple of those now on NY 107 in Hicksville.

Nassau County DPW by comparison builds very neat looking mast-arm installations using their own hardware, standard small-diameter pipe with curved elbow fittings also usually in a diagonal span.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 13, 2019, 09:50:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 13, 2019, 09:13:21 PM
NYSDOT Region-10 on Long Island is now installing a lot of curved mast-arms where they mostly used diagonal-span wire for many years. But as the above poster said, they tend to be very gawky looking. Usually diagonal span, and very fat curved mast-arms; heads mounted using standard astro-brackets which do look sloppy on curved arms. They're building a couple of those now on NY 107 in Hicksville.

Nassau County DPW by contrast builds very neat looking mast-arm installations using their own hardware, standard small-diameter pipe with curved elbow fittings also usually in a diagonal span.

I agree with signbridge.

See an example below. This was a new installation where there was never one before. Inconsistent mounting styles, mounts with stubs, longer than needed arms, ugh

https://maps.app.goo.gl/VhWwk69xRa9WLaVCA

Compared to a span wire installation from around the same time. Clean setup except for a missing backplate or two

https://maps.app.goo.gl/WnC9EA5nAJzhh55W9

And earlier mast arm NYSDOT installation in Queens

https://maps.app.goo.gl/DTJAV5fSv1epvVoM9


NYSDOT should stick to span wire or get their act together when putting in mast arms.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 13, 2019, 10:01:42 PM
Yes, interestingly NYS DOT's span wire installations (and Nassau County DPW's too) are generally well built with a good quality appearance, much more so than that seen in some other states. Except as the previous poster noted, for their cheezy quality backplates many of which crack, break off and disappear after a few years of service.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 18, 2019, 06:58:17 PM
I've never quite understood these traffic lights:

https://goo.gl/maps/jSm3TmzoebUx8Jep7

Red arrow on top, a bottom green arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/HMis7hSbrBywYA7s5), a yellow arrow somewhere in the middle, and then two more bulbs for who knows what. The accompanying overhead signal is a three-arrow protected-only left turn.

There are several of these along WA-99 in the Lynnwood/South Everett area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 18, 2019, 10:10:14 PM
^^ Could ir be a former protected-permissive signal converted to a protected-only signal and they were too cheap to change the signal head?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 18, 2019, 11:51:14 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 18, 2019, 10:10:14 PM
^^ Could it be a former protected-permissive signal converted to a protected-only signal and they were too cheap to change the signal head?

That seems most likely, but left-side green orb signals are extremely rare in the Seattle area. Probably more now than ever before, and they're still rare. The overhead signals look pretty old, so those 5-section towers must be ancient.

Left side all-arrow signals are pretty common, but WSDOT instituted a rule a long time ago not to use green orbs on the left pole at intersections, because they felt drivers may mistake it for a protected left. So permissive left turn setups with green orbs on the far left (like how the signal in my link would normally work) are virtually unheard of in WA outside of Spokane. It's almost like they wanted to use a permissive left at this intersection, but changed their mind at the last second.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 25, 2019, 10:24:00 AM
This is interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.609146,-73.9219648,3a,75y,77.28h,98.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_bXQCMSPWGE59FpCRF7RCA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The two section signals serve a driveway for a shopping center.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 25, 2019, 08:28:08 PM
I've seen a similar two-section signal in Nassau County on Old Country Rd. in Mineola. It serves the driveway of a condo/apartment house parking garage. Right across the street from the county executive building.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 31, 2019, 10:06:45 AM
Found this on the Forgotten NY website. https://forgotten-ny.com/2018/05/classic-stoplights/

(https://forgotten-ny.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/weber-edgecombe2.jpg)

That signal is no longer there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM

Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.  I was also confused by the lane guide sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/HoDZ47P.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DaBigE on September 02, 2019, 07:34:51 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM

Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.  I was also confused by the lane guide sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/HoDZ47P.jpg)

Since the right lane doesn't have an 'ONLY' with it, left turns must be a common movement, but other movements (right?) are allowed. My guess is the bottom portion of the signal is a green left and right arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 02, 2019, 09:42:33 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM

Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.  I was also confused by the lane guide sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/HoDZ47P.jpg)
Where was this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on September 02, 2019, 10:05:28 PM
The bottom part of the signal could also be a green left arrow and a green orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2019, 03:28:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 02, 2019, 09:42:33 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM

Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.  I was also confused by the lane guide sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/HoDZ47P.jpg)
Where was this?

Found it ... exit from the Sands Expo Center/Venetian/Palazzo loading bays: https://goo.gl/maps/fTAA2s6FH942KaQr6

The right lane can go either left or right. In WA, similar signs would say "OK" below the arrow.

Quote from: Big John on September 02, 2019, 10:05:28 PM
The bottom part of the signal could also be a green left arrow and a green orb.

Based on the whole setup (visible in the link above), this appears to be the case. The green orb would compliment the through signal on the right mast.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2019, 07:24:14 PM
A very Canadian-looking signal along Olympic Hwy (WA-3) east of Aberdeen. The backs are painted green...?

https://goo.gl/maps/XJkcdZnhDc6dK7pb8

(https://i.imgur.com/1w3H1Az.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 03, 2019, 11:39:34 PM
Speaking of Canada, I was in Montreal on a trip recently and observed some oddities compared to US signalling.

There were a lot of signals with leading pedestrian intervals. Most were RYG with a green up arrow on the bottom. For the first 5 seconds of the cycle, only the arrow would light up, supposedly prohibiting turns. Then the arrow went out and was replaced with the usual green ball.

Example (skip to 50 seconds) https://youtu.be/DrvL3EURCY8

Compared to an equivalent NYC LPI setup using affirmative red flashing yellow arrows (safer IMO)
https://youtu.be/nCvfPUnpaww

Next, there were flashing green balls at some intersections that I think mean protected lefts allowed (most I saw were lagging). Example of a leading flashing green at 18 seconds https://youtu.be/MAqB1z1epIY

Finally, all pedestrian timers have countdowns that always show zero simultaneously with the solid red hand.

What other signalling oddities exist in Canada?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 04, 2019, 01:32:50 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 03, 2019, 11:39:34 PM
What other signalling oddities exist in Canada?

Primary distinctions in BC:

* flashing green orb = pedestrian-activated crossing (not protected turn, as in Ontario)
* flashing green arrow = protected phase of a protective/permissive turn
* in some jurisdictions (primarily Richmond), the yellow orb and yellow arrow of a protected-only turn are active simultaneously (the green arrow is bi-modal at these)

Related to the last one, Canada (except Quebec) is holding out on the all-arrow protected left turn display, continuing to opt for circular indications with "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs. Not sure why.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 04, 2019, 10:57:41 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2019, 03:28:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 02, 2019, 09:42:33 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM

Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.  I was also confused by the lane guide sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/HoDZ47P.jpg)
Where was this?

Found it ... exit from the Sands Expo Center/Venetian/Palazzo loading bays: https://goo.gl/maps/fTAA2s6FH942KaQr6

The right lane can go either left or right. In WA, similar signs would say "OK" below the arrow.

Ah okay. I'm guessing there's not a whole lot of traffic that turns right here, but there's no reason to not use a proper lane assignment sign–that second arrow should be a split left/right instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on September 05, 2019, 11:38:39 AM
There is now an intersection with T-signals here in Richmond, on Leigh St at Lombardy St. These are fairly new as the last time I went through this intersection was February of this year and they weren't there.

Images from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190905/f4ed37352bbcf47917950efd15abbe19.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190905/9cfabfbb601100ba756f837900fdba01.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190905/cd2953dce1eec45a69461aa9601d4047.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190905/ff31f8d8ef879ac1798fd59e4e9720bb.jpg)

SM-S820L

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 05, 2019, 04:55:51 PM
I really don't get the purpose of the double-red. The installation would be perfectly fine with the usual single-red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on September 05, 2019, 11:59:53 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 05, 2019, 04:55:51 PM
I really don't get the purpose of the double-red. The installation would be perfectly fine with the usual single-red.

I actually agree with you. I guess the city feels the need for an extra red here (it is a pretty dangerous intersection).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 06, 2019, 10:08:23 AM
This photo is odd for Texas. It has the usual horizontal mounted signal heads as Texas mostly uses but the one facing FM 559 is vertical.  It appears to be a left turn signal, however Texas has no issue elsewhere using the horizontal mount for left turn signals.

In NJ, where I grew up, this is quite common as you used to see many places both installations were used in the same intersection, but here I think not.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48683106786/sizes/z/)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48683106786/sizes/z/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 06, 2019, 12:50:26 PM
Some places want to have a backup red bulb in case the other one dies.  In Illinois, it's required for every signal indication to have a duplicate, whether red, yellow, or green--but at other agencies, some signals will only have a duplicate of the red indication built.  If I were to choose any signal indication to duplicate, it makes the most sense to choose the red one, because it's the most important.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 07, 2019, 10:43:17 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 06, 2019, 12:50:26 PM
Some places want to have a backup red bulb in case the other one dies.  In Illinois, it's required for every signal indication to have a duplicate, whether red, yellow, or green--but at other agencies, some signals will only have a duplicate of the red indication built.  If I were to choose any signal indication to duplicate, it makes the most sense to choose the red one, because it's the most important.
SC is copying that one that Eastern Texas uses.  However look at this one https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48688036163/in/dateposted-public/
and this:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48635711223/in/dateposted-public/

Both have the extra lens and are horizontal.  If that is your point Paul.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on September 11, 2019, 08:53:09 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM
Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.

A little late of a reply, but you'll find signals like this commonly around Pennsylvania (https://goo.gl/maps/bdbRG5vZc18XVQwx5), Delaware (https://goo.gl/maps/HDFVavE8hp9nk5JNA), and New Jersey (https://goo.gl/maps/WeJNwMgA1rA3Qee58).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 11, 2019, 09:03:28 PM
I've never seen horizontal signals in Pennsylvania. Lot's in Northern New Jersey though. Don't know about Delaware.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 17, 2019, 03:21:54 AM
I was alerted to this signal thanks to US 89 (see here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25653.msg2444043#msg2444043)).

At the intersection of Arsenal Road/Goff Blvd/Isleta Blvd in Albuquerque, the southbound left turn is a permissive left "yield on green" maneuver. This is nothing special, but the oncoming right turn (northbound), which goes through a slip lane, is a signal.

Normally at these setups, the turns would be protected only, so the right turn could be signalized with a green arrow. But because of the permissive left, the double right stays red during the through phase, so that left-turning traffic would have the right-of-way. Genius? Perhaps. Unusual for sure. The green arrow is only active during the westbound-to-southbound left turn.

Google Maps: https://goo.gl/maps/2ctUEdxmCPRPDQhh7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on September 26, 2019, 05:34:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2019, 07:24:14 PM
A very Canadian-looking signal along Olympic Hwy (WA-3) east of Aberdeen. The backs are painted green...?

https://goo.gl/maps/XJkcdZnhDc6dK7pb8


Another Canadian-looking signal in Renton.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48800743206_0610d33295_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hmmyLf)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 26, 2019, 06:48:02 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 11, 2019, 09:03:28 PM
I've never seen horizontal signals in Pennsylvania. Lot's in Northern New Jersey though. Don't know about Delaware.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/K3VwCAZ5pxeWHvbL8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on September 26, 2019, 07:19:50 PM
Quote from: Ian on September 11, 2019, 08:53:09 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 02, 2019, 05:17:43 PM
Just got back from Las Vegas, and found another oddity.

A little late of a reply, but you'll find signals like this commonly around Pennsylvania (https://goo.gl/maps/bdbRG5vZc18XVQwx5), Delaware (https://goo.gl/maps/HDFVavE8hp9nk5JNA), and New Jersey (https://goo.gl/maps/WeJNwMgA1rA3Qee58).


But it appears in those cases to be similar to doghouse light, where the two greens can be in separate phases.  I had a post a few months ago about a similar WSDOT installation that was similar to the one behind the Venetian.  Except, there were no separate phases, and I assume there aren't separate phases for the the Venetian either, making a single orb more appropriate in both instances.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on September 26, 2019, 08:48:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 11, 2019, 09:03:28 PM
I've never seen horizontal signals in Pennsylvania. Lot's in Northern New Jersey though. Don't know about Delaware.

One intersection in PA that jumps to mind with horizontal signals is Eisenhower Blvd. and Paxton St. (https://goo.gl/maps/isM2gVSY9wPisSj59) near the Eisenhower Interchange in the Harrisburg area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 26, 2019, 10:30:18 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 26, 2019, 05:34:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2019, 07:24:14 PM
A very Canadian-looking signal along Olympic Hwy (WA-3) east of Aberdeen. The backs are painted green...?

https://goo.gl/maps/XJkcdZnhDc6dK7pb8


Another Canadian-looking signal in Renton.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48800743206_0610d33295_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hmmyLf)

Oh shit, nice find! That must be pretty new? It's even got cutaway visors, as is more common in British Columbia (though not absolutely the norm).

I always knew Renton would be the first city around here to just fill in the rest of the backplate with yellow. They use the most yellow of any place around here: the signals are always yellow, the backplates are usually painted yellow (except the front, usually), and they always use really thick retroreflective yellow borders. Plus, many of their post-mounted signals don't use backplates, much like BC.

Looking at the intersection of Rainier and Grady, the southbound approach (https://goo.gl/maps/Ahivqf5oMaRgWGNZA) could easily pass as a BC install (minus the lack of all-yellow backplates); the other three approaches lack post-mounted through signals, but are still damn close. A few more all-yellow backplates and the intersection would be nearly indistinguishable from this kind of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/1PLc1rtQ648oJ62A7) (North Vancouver).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 27, 2019, 08:32:44 PM
Ya' know the coming of yellow reflective borders on backplates has all but made the rule requiring black backplates almost useless. Because in places where yellow heads are used with yellow bordered backplates, you now only have a thin rectangular black strip showing. So the backplate itself might just as well be yellow. I wonder if we'll see a change in that rule in the next edition of the MUTCD.

I've decided I don't like the yellow borders anyway. I've come to think the original plain dark colored backplates were better. The yellow borders create a picture that is too visually complex for my taste. I like things as visually simple as possible.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 29, 2019, 01:18:10 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 27, 2019, 08:32:44 PM
Ya' know the coming of yellow reflective borders on backplates has all but made the rule requiring black backplates almost useless. Because in places where yellow heads are used with yellow bordered backplates, you now only have a thin rectangular black strip showing. So the backplate itself might just as well be yellow. I wonder if we'll see a change in that rule in the next edition of the MUTCD.

I've decided I don't like the yellow borders anyway. I've come to think the original plain dark colored backplates were better. The yellow borders create a picture that is too visually complex for my taste. I like things as visually simple as possible.

Damn, I agree on both counts. The black backplate requirement is almost certainly doomed with the advent of the retroreflective yellow border. The fact that it's not already common to see all-yellow backplates actually surprises me a bit.

But, yet, I still too prefer all-black signals. Combined with black or silver mast-arms, and non-colored diodes with inner-phosphor coatings (https://goo.gl/maps/GH4XTamF9zQUz1ip6) (lenses that have no color), and it's a very satisfying, sort-of sleek black-and-white look.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 29, 2019, 01:18:10 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 27, 2019, 08:32:44 PM
Ya' know the coming of yellow reflective borders on backplates has all but made the rule requiring black backplates almost useless. Because in places where yellow heads are used with yellow bordered backplates, you now only have a thin rectangular black strip showing. So the backplate itself might just as well be yellow. I wonder if we'll see a change in that rule in the next edition of the MUTCD.

I've decided I don't like the yellow borders anyway. I've come to think the original plain dark colored backplates were better. The yellow borders create a picture that is too visually complex for my taste. I like things as visually simple as possible.

Damn, I agree on both counts. The black backplate requirement is almost certainly doomed with the advent of the retroreflective yellow border. The fact that it's not already common to see all-yellow backplates actually surprises me a bit.

But, yet, I still too prefer all-black signals. Combined with black or silver mast-arms, and non-colored diodes with inner-phosphor coatings (https://goo.gl/maps/GH4XTamF9zQUz1ip6) (lenses that have no color), and it's a very satisfying, sort-of sleek black-and-white look.

My state also began using the blackplates with the yellow borders thing. It's a weird look, but I kind of like it. I think the simple black backplate thing is too bland. Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 30, 2019, 07:04:54 PM
NYC has installed some new bus queue jump signals. They are used to allow buses a 7 second head start from the bus lane alongside a leading pedestrian interval. The new signals have a very bright solid white bar in place of the green, which lights up for 7 seconds before the main signal turns green regardless of whether or not a bus is there. The yellow and red are synced with the main signal. An example is shown here.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTugb-1hjkkJI5QxGWnwlwHVqTPMEzJaqUxOylt5FL-CJxkSJvH)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
My state also began using the blackplates with the yellow borders thing. It's a weird look, but I kind of like it. I think the simple black backplate thing is too bland. Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night.

I actually don't mind the yellow piping. The all-yellow signal posted above is absolutely fine with me, especially as the signal housing is also yellow. In my head, the backplate should match the signal housing. So if the housing is black, the backplate should be black as well. But the housing is yellow, everything else should be yellow as well. So in PA, I would be totally fine with yellow borders as it's "in-sync" with the color of the signal housings (which I know are always yellow).

Why do my aesthetic preferences not allow a combination? I couldn't say!

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 30, 2019, 07:04:54 PM
The new signals have a very bright solid white bar in place of the green, which lights up for 7 seconds before the main signal turns green regardless of whether or not a bus is there.

Seems to me that either a video or loop detection system should be considered. Pedestrians are still released, which is good (especially for NYC), but there's no reason not to allow cars to go right-away if there's no buses.

Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on September 30, 2019, 08:55:42 PM
The bus signal at Central Ave and Wolf Road in Colonie, NY has been there quite a while now -- years.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 01, 2019, 01:53:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night. 

Why does this matter?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:19:37 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2019, 01:53:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night. 
Why does this matter?

No shit. The whole point of backplates is to make the signal itself more visible, not to make the backplate more visible.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jjakucyk on October 01, 2019, 03:42:50 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:19:37 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2019, 01:53:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night. 
Why does this matter?

No shit. The whole point of backplates is to make the signal itself more visible, not to make the backplate more visible.

Partly, but backplates also make signals easier to see when backlit by the sun.  The yellow border helps one see that there is a signal there when it's dark and the power is out.  That's one thing I really like about Cincinnati's color scheme, which is actually not found in many other places.  The signal housings and visors are black (in some older signals the housing was dark green), but the doors are yellow.  The yellow also helps the signal show up in blackout conditions as that's the one part of the signal other than the lights themselves that you're supposed to actually see.  The visors and rear housing are parts that you're not supposed to really see, so they blend into the background.  When backplates are used, they have the yellow border on the front, but they're all black in the rear. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on October 01, 2019, 04:18:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).


I find it very interesting that Community Transit, in Snohomish County, just opted for another normal signal for the queue jumps for the Switft BRT service - https://goo.gl/maps/mktonjwJqooSAPcN6 , instead of light-rail/trolley signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on October 01, 2019, 04:45:43 PM
Quote from: jjakucyk on October 01, 2019, 03:42:50 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on October 01, 2019, 03:19:37 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2019, 01:53:58 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night. 
Why does this matter?

No shit. The whole point of backplates is to make the signal itself more visible, not to make the backplate more visible.

Partly, but backplates also make signals easier to see when backlit by the sun.

Even in that case the point is still to make the signal easier to see. The point of a backplate is not to be seen, but to emphasize what's inside it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 01, 2019, 05:08:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on September 30, 2019, 06:54:52 PM
My state also began using the blackplates with the yellow borders thing. It's a weird look, but I kind of like it. I think the simple black backplate thing is too bland. Plus, the yellow borders allow drivers to be aware of where the backplate ends. The plain black can easily camouflage with other objects, especially at night.

I actually don't mind the yellow piping. The all-yellow signal posted above is absolutely fine with me, especially as the signal housing is also yellow. In my head, the backplate should match the signal housing. So if the housing is black, the backplate should be black as well. But the housing is yellow, everything else should be yellow as well. So in PA, I would be totally fine with yellow borders as it's "in-sync" with the color of the signal housings (which I know are always yellow).

Why do my aesthetic preferences not allow a combination? I couldn't say!

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on September 30, 2019, 07:04:54 PM
The new signals have a very bright solid white bar in place of the green, which lights up for 7 seconds before the main signal turns green regardless of whether or not a bus is there.

Seems to me that either a video or loop detection system should be considered. Pedestrians are still released, which is good (especially for NYC), but there's no reason not to allow cars to go right-away if there's no buses.

Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).

After observing the intersections in question, I think the LPI may have been intended as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 02, 2019, 07:47:40 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.619679,-74.4168252,3a,44.2y,309.38h,91.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfkZeV5rh_XCYOMuy9fqpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Never seen a horizontal 8-8-12 signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 02, 2019, 08:37:01 PM
^^ Or a 8-8-12-12 signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 03, 2019, 02:25:09 AM
Quote from: TEG24601 on October 01, 2019, 04:18:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).

I find it very interesting that Community Transit, in Snohomish County, just opted for another normal signal for the queue jumps for the Switft BRT service - https://goo.gl/maps/mktonjwJqooSAPcN6, instead of light-rail/trolley signals.

I've always thought dedicated, unique signals were better options. I hate the idea of using limited-visibility signals when there are other choices that would be less...confusing, for regular drivers.

Seattle is particularly strange. I've seen more than a few light rail/trolley signals for bus signals, but there's plenty of limited-visibility (3M) signals for buses as well. Not sure what their MO is.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 03, 2019, 11:30:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 03, 2019, 02:25:09 AM
Quote from: TEG24601 on October 01, 2019, 04:18:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).

I find it very interesting that Community Transit, in Snohomish County, just opted for another normal signal for the queue jumps for the Switft BRT service - https://goo.gl/maps/mktonjwJqooSAPcN6, instead of light-rail/trolley signals.

I've always thought dedicated, unique signals were better options. I hate the idea of using limited-visibility signals when there are other choices that would be less...confusing, for regular drivers.

Seattle is particularly strange. I've seen more than a few light rail/trolley signals for bus signals, but there's plenty of limited-visibility (3M) signals for buses as well. Not sure what their MO is.
And really at this point, there is no excuse for NOT using the white bar signals for transit-only signals, especially in new installations. They've been in the MUTCD for a while now...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 03, 2019, 11:59:26 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 03, 2019, 11:30:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 03, 2019, 02:25:09 AM
Quote from: TEG24601 on October 01, 2019, 04:18:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 30, 2019, 07:31:56 PM
Queue jump signals are fairly common in the PNW, but most use video detection. Note the small two-lens signal (https://goo.gl/maps/ujUc5rsGKNE5nqQ4A) above the far-right signal tower on the mast (you'll have to click forward and zoom in...street view is set for overview).

I find it very interesting that Community Transit, in Snohomish County, just opted for another normal signal for the queue jumps for the Switft BRT service - https://goo.gl/maps/mktonjwJqooSAPcN6, instead of light-rail/trolley signals.

I've always thought dedicated, unique signals were better options. I hate the idea of using limited-visibility signals when there are other choices that would be less...confusing, for regular drivers.

Seattle is particularly strange. I've seen more than a few light rail/trolley signals for bus signals, but there's plenty of limited-visibility (3M) signals for buses as well. Not sure what their MO is.
And really at this point, there is no excuse for NOT using the white bar signals for transit-only signals, especially in new installations. They've been in the MUTCD for a while now...

That's a very good point. To be honest, I didn't realize it was in the MUTCD. I figured it was something experimental that some agencies were doing. I assumed that because I've seen multiple variations of those signals in cities like San Francisco.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on October 06, 2019, 09:27:35 PM
On September 5th, I drove under these (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0284491,-76.2033418,3a,31.4y,66.96h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOMr2sBFBrQ9xMY-bL9ub2g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) relatively new signals.  In both directions, the second set of lights are PV signals.  Since PV signals are relatively rare in NY, and most of the ones I've seen have been fairly old, I was surprised to see them on such a new installation.  I hadn't been on the road in several years, and the last time I was, there was just a blinking light where the second light is now.



Last weekend, I was approaching this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0554619,-76.1853545,3a,38.4y,213.09h,95.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAJsxp2bkVRnBZHdWrox1rA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) light, and noticed it had been replaced sometime in the past year.  Street View shows the old signals.  The new lights are a pair three section signals with left arrows on the left signal head, and right arrows on the right signal head.  I didn't see the yellow phase, but I assume they are arrows too.  Since the MUTCD requires two through heads, would this be MUTCD compliant?  There's no separate right turn arrow like the old signals had, so I assume there won't ever be a phase that allows just right turns, which means the arrows will always change together.  The old green right arrow allowed right turns while traffic coming from the right had a left turn arrow.  I didn't see if the new signals for traffic from the right had a left turn arrow or not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 08, 2019, 08:05:52 PM
Quote from: Michael on October 06, 2019, 09:27:35 PM
On September 5th, I drove under these (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0284491,-76.2033418,3a,31.4y,66.96h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOMr2sBFBrQ9xMY-bL9ub2g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) relatively new signals.  In both directions, the second set of lights are PV signals.  Since PV signals are relatively rare in NY, and most of the ones I've seen have been fairly old, I was surprised to see them on such a new installation.  I hadn't been on the road in several years, and the last time I was, there was just a blinking light where the second light is now.


I'm surprised to see 3M signals on a single wire.  Other times I've seen temporary installations they were supported by another wire beneath so they can stay focused on their intended location.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on October 09, 2019, 05:50:36 PM
Quote from: Michael on October 06, 2019, 09:27:35 PM
On September 5th, I drove under these (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0284491,-76.2033418,3a,31.4y,66.96h,89.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOMr2sBFBrQ9xMY-bL9ub2g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) relatively new signals.  In both directions, the second set of lights are PV signals.  Since PV signals are relatively rare in NY, and most of the ones I've seen have been fairly old, I was surprised to see them on such a new installation.  I hadn't been on the road in several years, and the last time I was, there was just a blinking light where the second light is now.

I wouldn't call PV signals rare in New York. They're semi-common in the Hudson Valley and Capital District and I know of a few installations in the Southern Tier.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on October 09, 2019, 09:37:02 PM
I can only think of three other PV signals in CNY off the top of my head, but I may have seen more I can't remember.

NY 104 (eastbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4468357,-76.5413538,3a,35.7y,69.65h,98.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3yEF5cOhdT6W6-x5TFTs5A!2e0!5s20131001T000000!7i13312!8i6656), westbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4467617,-76.5414935,3a,36.4y,240.29h,98.08t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sI_-l-jvjDR-ykuAksPlLvQ!2e0!5s20131001T000000!7i13312!8i6656)) at the entrance to SUNY Oswego (Now gone based on Street View.  I never understood the point of these since both directions had a regular signal on the near side.  I haven't been there since they were removed.

Midler Ave (northbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0538963,-76.1039757,3a,47.2y,2.88h,94.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si57QHIbKN4o-ynqHAG3RWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), southbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0535384,-76.1041549,3a,38.8y,179.21h,94.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skGFhZCjOiF2v2F9ifjmlqA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)) at Erie Blvd (I've only noticed the southbound one in person.  I think I last saw it last year, and the northbound Street View shows a new mast arm being installed, so I'm not sure if the new signals are PV too.  After looking along this area of Erie Blvd in Street View, I also see a few other PV signals to the east that I've never noticed before.)

NY 46 in Downtown Oneida (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0972523,-75.6534178,3a,37.5y,345.65h,95.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soa-dtWKLfMBBC-UKU8COHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

As I was writing this post, I thought I remembered seeing another one before near the intersection of Hiawatha Blvd and 7th North St in Syracuse.  I couldn't find anything in Street View, but I did forget about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0826351,-76.1576691,3a,15y,312.42h,94.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7oii4t3wCGRpo-HXaAYbGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) PV signal for trains.  I think this is the only train PV signal I've ever seen!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on October 09, 2019, 10:29:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 26, 2019, 10:30:18 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 26, 2019, 05:34:14 PM

Another Canadian-looking signal in Renton.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48800743206_0610d33295_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hmmyLf)

Oh shit, nice find! That must be pretty new? It's even got cutaway visors, as is more common in British Columbia (though not absolutely the norm).

I always knew Renton would be the first city around here to just fill in the rest of the backplate with yellow. They use the most yellow of any place around here: the signals are always yellow, the backplates are usually painted yellow (except the front, usually), and they always use really thick retroreflective yellow borders. Plus, many of their post-mounted signals don't use backplates, much like BC.

Looking at the intersection of Rainier and Grady, the southbound approach (https://goo.gl/maps/Ahivqf5oMaRgWGNZA) could easily pass as a BC install (minus the lack of all-yellow backplates); the other three approaches lack post-mounted through signals, but are still damn close. A few more all-yellow backplates and the intersection would be nearly indistinguishable from this kind of setup (https://goo.gl/maps/1PLc1rtQ648oJ62A7) (North Vancouver).

King County has always used a lot of yellow as well. (Example: https://goo.gl/maps/MvtC8c1LTidyAY9DA) In fact, I don't think I've ever seen any back signals from them, just those backplates with the bit of black inside the yellow border (which does indeed look quite silly).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 11, 2019, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2017, 07:39:35 PM
I was down in Tucson, Arizona over the weekend. For as uninteresting as the city may be for those who aren't traffic nerds (at least according to my family who live in Phoenix), I've always found the city fascinating. They seem to be on the cutting edge of just about every new traffic control device, intersection configuration, etc. I've never seen so many "foreign" setups in my life.

I came upon this intersection in NE Tucson (Tanque Verde Road @ Sabino Canyon Road (https://goo.gl/uS7jcF)), where I noticed that the EB to NB left turn, a double left turn with permissive phasing (as is the way for almost all double lefts in Tucson), featured both a leading green arrow, and a lagging green arrow. I assume this is necessary due to a large amount of traffic performing the maneuver. Nonetheless, I've never seen this phasing used before:

https://youtu.be/1WWBn_6o4oY

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but the 5-section signals on E Tanque Verde Rd were replaced with FYA's in both directions as of April 2019. Did the phasing change to lag-lag (or lead-lag) with TOD phasing, or was the phasing in the video retained?

April 2019 Street View (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Sabino+Canyon+Rd+%26+E+Tanque+Verde+Rd,+Tucson,+AZ+85715,+USA/@32.2506822,-110.8409437,3a,28.1y,90.07h,92.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSD3srQ0h1Wa6bcyGYXH63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x86d66ee481de6a89:0x18074e1ce996a193!8m2!3d32.2506776!4d-110.8407365)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2019, 07:52:15 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 11, 2019, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2017, 07:39:35 PM
I was down in Tucson, Arizona over the weekend. For as uninteresting as the city may be for those who aren't traffic nerds (at least according to my family who live in Phoenix), I've always found the city fascinating. They seem to be on the cutting edge of just about every new traffic control device, intersection configuration, etc. I've never seen so many "foreign" setups in my life.

I came upon this intersection in NE Tucson (Tanque Verde Road @ Sabino Canyon Road (https://goo.gl/uS7jcF)), where I noticed that the EB to NB left turn, a double left turn with permissive phasing (as is the way for almost all double lefts in Tucson), featured both a leading green arrow, and a lagging green arrow. I assume this is necessary due to a large amount of traffic performing the maneuver. Nonetheless, I've never seen this phasing used before:

https://youtu.be/1WWBn_6o4oY

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but the 5-section signals on E Tanque Verde Rd were replaced with FYA's in both directions as of April 2019. Did the phasing change to lag-lag (or lead-lag) with TOD phasing, or was the phasing in the video retained?

April 2019 Street View (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Sabino+Canyon+Rd+%26+E+Tanque+Verde+Rd,+Tucson,+AZ+85715,+USA/@32.2506822,-110.8409437,3a,28.1y,90.07h,92.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSD3srQ0h1Wa6bcyGYXH63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x86d66ee481de6a89:0x18074e1ce996a193!8m2!3d32.2506776!4d-110.8407365)

Just saw your comment over there. To save you the time of heading over there, I'm not totally sure if runs with more conventional phasing now. That said, it seems that the old setup (seen in my video) was necessitated by the unique setup (really heavy left turns in one direction, not at all in another) and that Tucson used 5-section towers exclusively until a short time ago. More than likely, it uses regular phasing (probably lagging in both directions) with the current setup. But again, I'm not 100% sure.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2019, 07:54:23 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 11, 2019, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2017, 07:39:35 PM
I was down in Tucson, Arizona over the weekend. For as uninteresting as the city may be for those who aren't traffic nerds (at least according to my family who live in Phoenix), I've always found the city fascinating. They seem to be on the cutting edge of just about every new traffic control device, intersection configuration, etc. I've never seen so many "foreign" setups in my life.

I came upon this intersection in NE Tucson (Tanque Verde Road @ Sabino Canyon Road (https://goo.gl/uS7jcF)), where I noticed that the EB to NB left turn, a double left turn with permissive phasing (as is the way for almost all double lefts in Tucson), featured both a leading green arrow, and a lagging green arrow. I assume this is necessary due to a large amount of traffic performing the maneuver. Nonetheless, I've never seen this phasing used before:

https://youtu.be/1WWBn_6o4oY

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but the 5-section signals on E Tanque Verde Rd were replaced with FYA's in both directions as of April 2019. Did the phasing change to lag-lag (or lead-lag) with TOD phasing, or was the phasing in the video retained?

April 2019 Street View (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Sabino+Canyon+Rd+%26+E+Tanque+Verde+Rd,+Tucson,+AZ+85715,+USA/@32.2506822,-110.8409437,3a,28.1y,90.07h,92.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSD3srQ0h1Wa6bcyGYXH63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x86d66ee481de6a89:0x18074e1ce996a193!8m2!3d32.2506776!4d-110.8407365)

EDIT (somehow I deleted this): I have not been back so I'm not sure how it runs. But likely runs with regular phasing now, as the old phasing was necessitated by the 5-section towers.

Quote from: stevashe on October 09, 2019, 10:29:26 PM
King County has always used a lot of yellow as well. (Example: https://goo.gl/maps/MvtC8c1LTidyAY9DA) In fact, I don't think I've ever seen any back signals from them, just those backplates with the bit of black inside the yellow border (which does indeed look quite silly).

I think the county's practice for decades is what led cities like Renton and, for a while, Federal Way (and others) to use yellow signals, and to paint the back yellow as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 11, 2019, 08:55:00 PM
Jakeroot mentioned lead/lag arrow phasing in that post from 2017. Ten years ago I saw protected-only lead/lag left-arrow phasing in Millbrae, Calif. on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) not far from San Francisco Airport. Only single left-turn lane though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 12, 2019, 12:35:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 11, 2019, 08:55:00 PM
Jakeroot mentioned lead/lag arrow phasing in that post from 2017. Ten years ago I saw protected-only lead/lag left-arrow phasing in Millbrae, Calif. on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) not far from San Francisco Airport. Only single left-turn lane though.

I updated my post to reflect my total omission of any response (somehow it got deleted). I think that signal in Tucson runs with regular phasing now.

The signal that you mentioned, it was just a simple lead/lag operation? The video that I posted above (from 2017) was notable for having both a leading and lagging phase, on either side of a permissive green orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 12, 2019, 05:12:30 PM
Right, it was protected-only before and after the thru-green phase, but not automatic. It was actuated by vehicles in the left-turn lane. If no vehicles were in that lane waiting to turn the system would omit that phase as it cycled.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 13, 2019, 02:26:26 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 12, 2019, 05:12:30 PM
Right, it was protected-only before and after the thru-green phase, but not automatic. It was actuated by vehicles in the left-turn lane. If no vehicles were in that lane waiting to turn the system would omit that phase as it cycled.

Interesting. I've seen things like that before, but not because it was programmed to do so. Just happened as part of normal actuation.

Seems like your signal could do with permissive phasing!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 13, 2019, 08:36:17 PM
The area where I saw those signals back in 2010 are in Santa Mateo County just south of San Francisco. Virtually every signalized intersection I saw out there was protected only left turns, even at intersections where you wouldn't think turn arrows were needed. I saw no permissive left-turns there at all. It seems like when they signalize an intersection in that area, they do it 100% with ped-signals and left-turn arrows. The authorities out there must have a heck of a budget for traffic signals. LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 13, 2019, 11:03:19 PM
I'm from Chattanooga, Tennessee and I'm wondering what model of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/TtgVii3Vfa4zMqXX7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on October 14, 2019, 01:39:13 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 13, 2019, 08:36:17 PM
The area where I saw those signals back in 2010 are in Santa Mateo County just south of San Francisco. Virtually every signalized intersection I saw out there was protected only left turns, even at intersections where you wouldn't think turn arrows were needed. I saw no permissive left-turns there at all. It seems like when they signalize an intersection in that area, they do it 100% with ped-signals and left-turn arrows. The authorities out there must have a heck of a budget for traffic signals. LOL

Yeah it's weird, they seem to really like their protected lefts there, and elsewhere in Northern California too. In fact, I don't think I've seen a single permitted/protected signal in northern CA, and I've been all around the Bay Area and Sacramento and a few other places, it's like they've got something against them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 14, 2019, 03:08:42 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 13, 2019, 11:03:19 PM
I'm from Chattanooga, Tennessee and I'm wondering what model of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/TtgVii3Vfa4zMqXX7

Those are PEEK signals. My favorite! They could also be another brand that I can't recall the name of, but have identical styling. I pretty much refer to all of them as PEEK signals.

Quote from: stevashe on October 14, 2019, 01:39:13 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 13, 2019, 08:36:17 PM
The area where I saw those signals back in 2010 are in Santa Mateo County just south of San Francisco. Virtually every signalized intersection I saw out there was protected only left turns, even at intersections where you wouldn't think turn arrows were needed. I saw no permissive left-turns there at all. It seems like when they signalize an intersection in that area, they do it 100% with ped-signals and left-turn arrows. The authorities out there must have a heck of a budget for traffic signals. LOL

Yeah it's weird, they seem to really like their protected lefts there, and elsewhere in Northern California too. In fact, I don't think I've seen a single permitted/protected signal in northern CA, and I've been all around the Bay Area and Sacramento and a few other places, it's like they've got something against them.

They do exist, but are needlessly rare:

Industrial Ave @ Freedom Way, Roseville: https://goo.gl/maps/3LhJ1HHmzJnSgbqR7
Valley Trails/Parkside Drive @ Hopyard Road, Pleasanton: https://goo.gl/maps/TgWKsidDEVL6noQr6
Geary Road @ Putnam/Buena Vista, Walnut Creek: https://goo.gl/maps/gMh4nMYW97Jjn2x29

There are also some doghouse/tower signals out there, but again, needlessly rare.

EDIT: The Pleasanton signal previously featured mast arms without any signal, despite the hardware clearly being there...how very strange:

(https://i.imgur.com/mCDj5F8.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 14, 2019, 01:16:53 PM
I think that the intersection of Morrison Springs Road @ Red Bank High School has the same type of traffic light
https://goo.gl/maps/ZbXCcfknjih5wC6w6 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZbXCcfknjih5wC6w6)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 01:04:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 14, 2019, 03:08:42 AM

They do exist, but are needlessly rare:

Industrial Ave @ Freedom Way, Roseville: https://goo.gl/maps/3LhJ1HHmzJnSgbqR7
Valley Trails/Parkside Drive @ Hopyard Road, Pleasanton: https://goo.gl/maps/TgWKsidDEVL6noQr6
Geary Road @ Putnam/Buena Vista, Walnut Creek: https://goo.gl/maps/gMh4nMYW97Jjn2x29

There are also some doghouse/tower signals out there, but again, needlessly rare.


Yeah it's strange, the only real reason to not have permitted phasing is to reduce pedestrian conflict, but then you'd think they'd only avoid it in areas with high foot traffic, not everywhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 02:01:53 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 14, 2019, 01:16:53 PM
I think that the intersection of Morrison Springs Road @ Red Bank High School has the same type of traffic light
https://goo.gl/maps/ZbXCcfknjih5wC6w6 (https://goo.gl/maps/ZbXCcfknjih5wC6w6)

The all-yellow signals are indeed PEEKs. I can't remember what the black-front signals are called.

Quote from: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 01:04:39 AM
Yeah it's strange, the only real reason to not have permitted phasing is to reduce pedestrian conflict, but then you'd think they'd only avoid it in areas with high foot traffic, not everywhere.

It's something to do with California's state-supplied MUTCD. Honestly, it's the case throughout California, except in Los Angeles-proper which remains as a high-profile holdout (for good reason IMO). A lot of side approaches to arterial intersections in California seem to use fully-permissive phasing, but it's like there was a huge period where either fully-permissive or fully-protected were the only options. IIRC, Los Angeles was the first California municipality to adopt protective/permissive 5-section signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 03:49:13 PM
this intersection in Red Bank, TN still has 4 old traffic lights except 3 being replaced in 2014
https://goo.gl/maps/gB9FR5M7WPxuHE5e7 (https://goo.gl/maps/gB9FR5M7WPxuHE5e7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 06:01:16 PM
does anyone know what brand of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7 (https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on October 15, 2019, 06:52:54 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

I'd say it's relatively common when there is a railroad track parallel to a major arterial. See this example really close to my work:

https://goo.gl/maps/4p8FvrvPeSjCTdmy8

In this case, the tracks are part of the Denver RTD light rail.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 02:01:53 AM

Quote from: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 01:04:39 AM
Yeah it's strange, the only real reason to not have permitted phasing is to reduce pedestrian conflict, but then you'd think they'd only avoid it in areas with high foot traffic, not everywhere.

It's something to do with California's state-supplied MUTCD. Honestly, it's the case throughout California, except in Los Angeles-proper which remains as a high-profile holdout (for good reason IMO). A lot of side approaches to arterial intersections in California seem to use fully-permissive phasing, but it's like there was a huge period where either fully-permissive or fully-protected were the only options. IIRC, Los Angeles was the first California municipality to adopt protective/permissive 5-section signals.

I thought it might be something like that, I was reading through their MUTCD at some point because I was curious about exactly which of the more unique features of California's roads were due to their state MUTCD, but I think I only got through signs and pavement markings so far. I think I'll go investigate the traffic signal section now to see what it says...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 11:40:04 PM
Quote from: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 02:01:53 AM
Quote from: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 01:04:39 AM
Yeah it's strange, the only real reason to not have permitted phasing is to reduce pedestrian conflict, but then you'd think they'd only avoid it in areas with high foot traffic, not everywhere.

It's something to do with California's state-supplied MUTCD. Honestly, it's the case throughout California, except in Los Angeles-proper which remains as a high-profile holdout (for good reason IMO). A lot of side approaches to arterial intersections in California seem to use fully-permissive phasing, but it's like there was a huge period where either fully-permissive or fully-protected were the only options. IIRC, Los Angeles was the first California municipality to adopt protective/permissive 5-section signals.

I thought it might be something like that, I was reading through their MUTCD at some point because I was curious about exactly which of the more unique features of California's roads were due to their state MUTCD, but I think I only got through signs and pavement markings so far. I think I'll go investigate the traffic signal section now to see what it says...

I honestly haven't looked at it myself; what I said was just what I've heard through the grapevine. Nevertheless, I'm sure there's some truth to it. CA seems to have the most consistent signal design strategy of any US state. Surely it has something to do with their state-supplied MUTCD (something WA lacks and is perhaps why so many municipalities here have different signal designs, and thus different operational strategies).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 11:44:37 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

Reminds me a lot of this approach in Aberdeen, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/nPNHg7ZtW8VGZBuz9) (adjacent to several other identical approaches), just without the railway crossing.

Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 03:49:13 PM
this intersection in Red Bank, TN still has 4 old traffic lights except 3 being replaced in 2014
https://goo.gl/maps/gB9FR5M7WPxuHE5e7 (https://goo.gl/maps/gB9FR5M7WPxuHE5e7)

I quite like the right-turn overlap signal for northbound to eastbound traffic. Definitely strange to see only some signals upgraded, although I see stuff like that in WA from time to time, mostly as part of minor operational upgrades (protected-only to protected-permissive, for instance, or even upgrades to ped signals, which wouldn't necessitate all new signal heads).

Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 06:01:16 PM
does anyone know what brand of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7 (https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7)

I believe those signals are Eagle "Bubblebacks", or possibly the Siemens Eagle (the newer variation).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 11:57:19 PM
some of the traffic lights in that intersection in Red Bank, TN were replaced due to storms knocking them down
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 16, 2019, 04:20:57 PM
this is the most dangerous intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://goo.gl/maps/vVCR5CuKdzSReCxp7 (https://goo.gl/maps/vVCR5CuKdzSReCxp7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 16, 2019, 05:01:12 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 16, 2019, 04:20:57 PM
this is the most dangerous intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://goo.gl/maps/vVCR5CuKdzSReCxp7 (https://goo.gl/maps/vVCR5CuKdzSReCxp7)

Define "dangerous".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 16, 2019, 05:03:49 PM
that intersection is so busy
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 16, 2019, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

More common than you might think.
https://goo.gl/maps/cX9pk7K7p3MKtij19
https://goo.gl/maps/thte8Ex8WReKPJYC6 (site of an infamous school bus/train crash in 1995 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Fox_River_Grove_bus%E2%80%93train_collision))
https://goo.gl/maps/tfteJjJVcZtLr4cr8
https://goo.gl/maps/RfgYEZBwjaNNDtX3A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 16, 2019, 05:21:16 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 16, 2019, 05:03:49 PM
that intersection is so busy

By itself, "busy" does not a dangerous intersection make.  This is a pretty standard "+" intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on October 16, 2019, 05:42:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 16, 2019, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

More common than you might think.
https://goo.gl/maps/cX9pk7K7p3MKtij19
https://goo.gl/maps/thte8Ex8WReKPJYC6 (site of an infamous school bus/train crash in 1995 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Fox_River_Grove_bus%E2%80%93train_collision))
https://goo.gl/maps/tfteJjJVcZtLr4cr8
https://goo.gl/maps/RfgYEZBwjaNNDtX3A

The Illinois examples have the pre-signal prior to the track(s).  Missouri has a few examples closer to the original with the pre-signal on the far side of the tracks:
https://goo.gl/maps/eQuRyAjZ27nNDYYWA (https://goo.gl/maps/eQuRyAjZ27nNDYYWA)
https://goo.gl/maps/uJmKXciXApqSwxKo7 (https://goo.gl/maps/uJmKXciXApqSwxKo7)
https://goo.gl/maps/FKrhJX3diXC8J6ZK7 (https://goo.gl/maps/FKrhJX3diXC8J6ZK7)
https://goo.gl/maps/sZdZdfoh35bYRyen7 (https://goo.gl/maps/sZdZdfoh35bYRyen7)


FHWA did issue an interpretation that is against the design Illinois likes to use with the pre-signal right at or over the stop bar prior to the tracks - see https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/8_09_19.htm (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/8_09_19.htm)

Quote from: FHWAWhen road users are stopped by the display of red signal indications at the pre-signals, they need to be able to see at least one signal face from the stop line so that they know when it is appropriate to proceed again on a green signal indication. Because the signal faces at the downstream signal display different signal indications than the pre-signal signal faces, road users who are waiting at the stop line cannot use the signal faces at the downstream signal to determine when it is appropriate to proceed again.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on October 17, 2019, 12:49:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 15, 2019, 11:40:04 PM
Quote from: stevashe on October 15, 2019, 11:23:31 PM
I thought it might be something like that, I was reading through their MUTCD at some point because I was curious about exactly which of the more unique features of California's roads were due to their state MUTCD, but I think I only got through signs and pavement markings so far. I think I'll go investigate the traffic signal section now to see what it says...

I honestly haven't looked at it myself; what I said was just what I've heard through the grapevine. Nevertheless, I'm sure there's some truth to it. CA seems to have the most consistent signal design strategy of any US state. Surely it has something to do with their state-supplied MUTCD (something WA lacks and is perhaps why so many municipalities here have different signal designs, and thus different operational strategies).

Oh yes, California's state MUTCD definitely goes a long way towards making designs consistent. The reason why I was curious was I noticed a bunch of features in signing/striping/signals that all seemed to match very well across different cities there. As for the signals, there is a bit in the CA MUTCD detailing when exactly permitted signals are justified as an option (quoted below), but nothing specifically restricting the use of permitted-protected phasing. I suppose the fact that the state MUTCD specifically states criteria for permitted signal use may sway designers to choose it over permitted protected since the guidelines for its use are more clear. Or maybe protected-permitted was not allowed in a previous edition? It's an interesting case at any rate.

Quote from: CA MUTCD
Guidance:
Protected left turn phases should be considered where such alternatives couldn't be utilized, and one or more of the following conditions exist:
    1. Collisions - Five or more left turn collisions for a particular left turn movement during a recent 12-month period.
    2. Delay - Left-turn delay of one or more vehicles, which were waiting at the beginning of the green interval and are still remaining in the left turn lane after at least 80% of the total number of cycles for one hour.
    3. Volume - At new intersections where only estimated volumes are available, the following criteria may be used. For pre-timed signal or a background-cycle-controlled actuated signal, a left turn volume of more than two vehicles per approach per cycle for a peak hour; or for a traffic-actuated signal, 50 or more left turning vehicles per hour in one direction with the product of the turning and conflicting through traffic during the peak hour of 100,000 or more.
    4. Miscellaneous. Other factors that might be considered include but are not limited to: impaired sight distance due to horizontal or vertical curvature, or where there are a large percentage of buses and trucks.

----

Quote from: Mark68 on October 15, 2019, 06:52:54 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

I'd say it's relatively common when there is a railroad track parallel to a major arterial. See this example really close to my work:

https://goo.gl/maps/4p8FvrvPeSjCTdmy8

In this case, the tracks are part of the Denver RTD light rail.

Here's one in Redmond, WA: https://goo.gl/maps/queSVfuvHZapSHfr7

I always thought the setup here was a bit weird, but now that you mention that it's usually due to proximity to rail,  it now makes a lot more sense, since there did used to be a track running through here. (Present in the 2008 streetview https://goo.gl/maps/fNXLNZFpfDfmWjpDA)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 17, 2019, 06:06:18 AM
Quote from: Brandon on October 16, 2019, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 01:41:46 PM
how common is this setup
https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7 (https://goo.gl/maps/5n1iRm9ycjGy3SSE7)

More common than you might think.
https://goo.gl/maps/cX9pk7K7p3MKtij19
https://goo.gl/maps/thte8Ex8WReKPJYC6 (site of an infamous school bus/train crash in 1995 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Fox_River_Grove_bus%E2%80%93train_collision))
https://goo.gl/maps/tfteJjJVcZtLr4cr8
https://goo.gl/maps/RfgYEZBwjaNNDtX3A

To continue...
https://goo.gl/maps/U1zLnXdy4ytRJr8M7
https://goo.gl/maps/9VXmsqW8AF3ZvUSKA
https://goo.gl/maps/y7iF9gVCMQPQq48A8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 17, 2019, 06:02:21 PM
I wonder what brand of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/jCb8XWdNZhN78b5Q7 (https://goo.gl/maps/jCb8XWdNZhN78b5Q7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 17, 2019, 06:32:57 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 17, 2019, 06:02:21 PM
I wonder what brand of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/jCb8XWdNZhN78b5Q7 (https://goo.gl/maps/jCb8XWdNZhN78b5Q7)

McCain
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 17, 2019, 06:37:08 PM
I'm surprised how dark the red light is and I've noticed that it's hard to see in the day time
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on October 18, 2019, 05:28:52 AM
Kind of related to the discussion about pre-signals right at the stop line where there's railroad tracks...

Here's a strange setup where there are pre-signals quite a bit before the stop line due to the regular ones being obstructed by an overpass:
https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2591113,-122.7558478,3a,47.9y,286.77h,89.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sf-RvXiE9graatYNH0ArY9Q!2e0!5s20140601T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

And yeah... the combination Wendy's / Tim Hortons gets its very own traffic light  :-/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 02:24:26 PM
the traffic light in the middle of this intersection was replaced
in 2017
https://goo.gl/maps/idnDTbNhxqxHAHfj8 (https://goo.gl/maps/idnDTbNhxqxHAHfj8) 2011
https://goo.gl/maps/ETMHQGjeq3QMAHsW7 (https://goo.gl/maps/ETMHQGjeq3QMAHsW7) 2017
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 18, 2019, 02:39:22 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 02:24:26 PM
the traffic light in the middle of this intersection was replaced
in 2017
https://goo.gl/maps/idnDTbNhxqxHAHfj8 (https://goo.gl/maps/idnDTbNhxqxHAHfj8) 2011
https://goo.gl/maps/ETMHQGjeq3QMAHsW7 (https://goo.gl/maps/ETMHQGjeq3QMAHsW7) 2017

It's strange that they replaced a non-matching light with another non-matching light, but in general traffic lights should be replaced fully every so often anyway.  When they're replaced in-kind...at least with the same color housing...almost no one will ever notice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 06:07:32 PM
the traffic light in the left lane is odd
https://goo.gl/maps/rkUvGKjbeLnb4MmB9 (https://goo.gl/maps/rkUvGKjbeLnb4MmB9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on October 18, 2019, 06:55:07 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 06:07:32 PM
the traffic light in the left lane is odd
https://goo.gl/maps/rkUvGKjbeLnb4MmB9 (https://goo.gl/maps/rkUvGKjbeLnb4MmB9)

Actually, the light on the right is what seems weird to me. What's with that being a standard 3-lens setup with a red ball and green (right) arrow being lit simultaneously?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 08:31:57 PM
not only does that doghouse traffic light have a right green arrow it also has a left one
https://goo.gl/maps/ZxDunmnJLcGxFDf37
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on October 18, 2019, 08:56:57 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 08:31:57 PM
not only does that doghouse traffic light have a right green arrow it also has a left one
https://goo.gl/maps/ZxDunmnJLcGxFDf37

I'm aware of least one other example of this, at the I-84/US 89 interchange near Ogden, Utah (https://goo.gl/maps/kBAsqYBrru3CVfjK6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
has anyone ever seen a intersection like this
https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87 (https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 19, 2019, 01:59:34 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
has anyone ever seen a intersection like this
https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87 (https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87)

When you're providing Google links, tell us a little about what you're talking about here so we're not looking around guessing at what you're referring to.

I'm guessing you're saying that it's a 'keep left' type intersection, where traffic flows in the opposite direction.

And yes.  https://goo.gl/maps/5iA4RzZSybk9piPU8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 19, 2019, 06:57:06 PM
^^^^^^
Agreed. More context the better! Maybe even provide some in-line images, so we don't always have to click the link.

Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
has anyone ever seen a intersection like this
https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87 (https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87)

There's a CFI-T intersection just south of Washington DC, which operates in a very similar manner: https://goo.gl/maps/PvVVMCMLJtFWUVYPA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 19, 2019, 07:13:33 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 01:13:25 PM
has anyone ever seen a intersection like this
https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87 (https://goo.gl/maps/4ihbjq9kw5GDvBd87)

Are you talking about the intersection being offset, like this example at Western and Polk in Chicago?
https://goo.gl/maps/hNEBV45sVYHYMjfYA
https://goo.gl/maps/AsC3UYys7LDvpB2x6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 09:24:32 PM
I was talking about the 3 traffic lights in the middle being right next to each other
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ilpt4u on October 19, 2019, 11:19:36 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 18, 2019, 08:56:57 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 18, 2019, 08:31:57 PM
not only does that doghouse traffic light have a right green arrow it also has a left one
https://goo.gl/maps/ZxDunmnJLcGxFDf37

I'm aware of least one other example of this, at the I-84/US 89 interchange near Ogden, Utah (https://goo.gl/maps/kBAsqYBrru3CVfjK6).
The only Doghouse in IL (that I am aware of) also only has arrows, as the "straight"  movement is prohibited

https://goo.gl/maps/vtQvZVuAe1LGUV6v6 Zoomed in one can see the Arrow silhouettes for Left and Right

Leaving the DuPage Children's Museum at Washington St and across from North Ave, in downtown Naperville
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on October 20, 2019, 08:27:20 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 09:24:32 PM
I was talking about the 3 traffic lights in the middle being right next to each other

That's not uncommon.

Here's several mastarms from Illinois with three or more signals:
Caton Farm & IL-59, Joliet: https://goo.gl/maps/c7VJ7N9o2NtvTEHi9
Van Emmon & Bridge, Yorkville: https://goo.gl/maps/n38rZdZokuRc44m2A
Torrance & the Kingery Expressway, Lansing: https://goo.gl/maps/841u1gARxUvuJFpz6
171st Street & 96th Avenue (LaGrange Road), Orland/Tinley: https://goo.gl/maps/xRvJQzRY9vHdDVtx6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 20, 2019, 07:34:25 PM
I've seen mast arms with as many as five signal heads down in Virginia, especially on S.R. 7 in Loudoun County. And some with four heads in Bucks County, Pa. I'm sure it's a common enough practice in lots of places.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on October 20, 2019, 10:28:36 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 19, 2019, 09:24:32 PM
I was talking about the 3 traffic lights in the middle being right next to each other

I'm only seeing the two doghouses really being next to each other.  At least around Chicgolaond, heads next to each other or back to back for opposing directions on mast arms is common:
*IL 83 at IL 53 (https://goo.gl/maps/D491Q7seQrGQF3hz9)
*IL 59 at Penny Road (https://goo.gl/maps/WdJYjR4qKMo1wbJY7)
*IL 72 at IL 59 (https://goo.gl/maps/pnReTTrnd8KcD1hi6)
*IL 72 at Barrington Road (https://goo.gl/maps/D34j4fgzJ9PzJn2V6)

As for the number of heads on a single mast arm, Kane County, IL gets up to 5 (Randall at Longmeadow (https://goo.gl/maps/bDHR4Z8pfpVJWEHF6) for example).  IIRC there are one or two with six heads going it as part of the current signal upgrade project for Randall Road.  I thought there may already be one on Randall Road with six but I don't see any.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on October 24, 2019, 03:50:16 AM
I found a horizontal, post-mounted signal in Honolulu.

https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3127146,-157.8621132,3a,15y,354.22h,90.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sioH_bVN_geuxMtpzWOQT6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Are these common anywhere?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 24, 2019, 06:24:27 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on October 24, 2019, 03:50:16 AM
I found a horizontal, post-mounted signal in Honolulu.

https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3127146,-157.8621132,3a,15y,354.22h,90.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sioH_bVN_geuxMtpzWOQT6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Are these common anywhere?

Posted on a pole like that, not at all.

Otherwise, we have threads in here that have discussed where horizontal lights are utilized.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on October 24, 2019, 09:42:55 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on October 24, 2019, 03:50:16 AM
I found a horizontal, post-mounted signal in Honolulu.

https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3127146,-157.8621132,3a,15y,354.22h,90.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sioH_bVN_geuxMtpzWOQT6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Are these common anywhere?

Looks like a good solution to the awnings getting in the way of the signal.

Over here, they just make the pole shorter to fit:
https://www.google.com/maps/@-31.9513736,115.8583257,3a,41.8y,296.16h,85.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szypBVyJSqa7N2bDDuVeZBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@-31.9513736,115.8583257,3a,41.8y,296.16h,85.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szypBVyJSqa7N2bDDuVeZBA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on October 27, 2019, 01:08:16 PM
I found a decommissioned Eagle signal in Norristown:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48964388657_5d4c326da2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hAPhRx)Decommissioned 8-inch Eagle flatback signal (https://flic.kr/p/2hAPhRx) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48964331762_0c0a4f01d1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hANZWA)Decommissioned eagle signal (https://flic.kr/p/2hANZWA) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48963632513_856cdcf9d5_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hAKq5z)Decommissioned 8&quot; Eagle signal (https://flic.kr/p/2hAKq5z) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on November 01, 2019, 08:22:32 PM
Non-standard arrow on an eight inch head in Edmonds, Washington.  From a distance it just looks like a horizontal line, like a transit signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48998418841_978b042411_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hDPGQR)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 01, 2019, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 01, 2019, 08:22:32 PM
Non-standard arrow on an eight inch head in Edmonds, Washington.  From a distance it just looks like a horizontal line, like a transit signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48998418841_978b042411_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hDPGQR)

That looks like an MUTCD voilation
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 01, 2019, 09:53:44 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 01, 2019, 08:22:32 PM
Non-standard arrow on an eight inch head in Edmonds, Washington.  From a distance it just looks like a horizontal line, like a transit signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48998418841_978b042411_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hDPGQR)

Is the turn leading P/P, lagging P/P, or split phase? I am also going to assume that the arrow isn't bimodal...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 01, 2019, 11:04:21 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 01, 2019, 09:18:45 PM
That looks like an MUTCD voilation

There's a few others in WA (here (https://goo.gl/maps/aPBo8kmQgMhuEHJ16), here (https://goo.gl/maps/DEWc2LJCqBayznr7A) to name a few)...that's not to say they're compliant now, but they must have been acceptable at one point.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 01, 2019, 09:53:44 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 01, 2019, 08:22:32 PM
Non-standard arrow on an eight inch head in Edmonds, Washington.  From a distance it just looks like a horizontal line, like a transit signal.

Is the turn leading P/P, lagging P/P, or split phase? I am also going to assume that the arrow isn't bimodal...

I believe it's split-phased.

There are actually four 8-inch green arrows at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/9cdWaWVQ9MqMfCHz5), two for each direction (both with left-pointing arrows).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Brandon on November 02, 2019, 07:58:36 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 01, 2019, 09:18:45 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 01, 2019, 08:22:32 PM
Non-standard arrow on an eight inch head in Edmonds, Washington.  From a distance it just looks like a horizontal line, like a transit signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48998418841_978b042411_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hDPGQR)

That looks like an MUTCD violation

Only a violation of modern standards.  I'd say this is an old signal kept in decent condition.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on November 03, 2019, 01:48:32 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 01, 2019, 11:04:21 PM
There are actually four 8-inch green arrows at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/9cdWaWVQ9MqMfCHz5), two for each direction (both with left-pointing arrows).
Bizarrely, it looks like these signals used to have standard (though 8-inch) green arrows and they were changed out at some point in the last few years to these much less legible ones. (Not that the normal ones are particularly legible in 8-inch form either -- I'm quite familiar with that Campus Parkway example, and I always think that those lights look like they're out from a distance...)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on November 03, 2019, 04:15:11 AM
You guys realize that's a standard Type D arrow, right? Someone flipped to the "signs" chapter of the standards and copied from that instead of the "signals" chapter. Might have been a sign guy getting stuck on signal duty...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2019, 12:28:01 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 03, 2019, 04:15:11 AM
You guys realize that's a standard Type D arrow, right? Someone flipped to the "signs" chapter of the standards and copied from that instead of the "signals" chapter. Might have been a sign guy getting stuck on signal duty...

Nope! Didn't occur to me for even a second. But that's mostly because I've seen arrows like this before (both U-turn arrows, strangely):

(https://i.imgur.com/tM56Ntf.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/sDllfYc.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on November 08, 2019, 06:39:33 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on October 15, 2019, 06:01:16 PM
does anyone know what brand of traffic light this is
https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7 (https://goo.gl/maps/ffW4Tfcr9h99LEsU7)
Those are Siemens traffic signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

This signal has been in place for a very long time, as you can tell. All 8-inch incandescent signals, except for the 12-inch signals which are the old round-door Bullseye signals. The bimodal left turn display was recently installed, more than likely to make the signal more compliant with the "two through signals" requirement; formerly, the left signal controlled the left lane (https://goo.gl/maps/WW7ZLM65y6xZcxoS7), and the right lane was controlled by the green up arrow. The only permissive turn, thus, was the left turn onto Yakima. The slight left was protected only.

Here's a video of the operation:

https://youtu.be/TxW7rb7g5XI
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 11, 2019, 10:52:07 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

The biggest issue I see is that the green arrow is for traffic in the left lane...but the left lane is also forced to yield for the sharper left turn. That's usually a No-no.  If an arrow is above the lane that lane is exclusively to be used for that movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 11, 2019, 11:20:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

This signal has been in place for a very long time, as you can tell. All 8-inch incandescent signals, except for the 12-inch signals which are the old round-door Bullseye signals. The bimodal left turn display was recently installed, more than likely to make the signal more compliant with the "two through signals" requirement; formerly, the left signal controlled the left lane (https://goo.gl/maps/WW7ZLM65y6xZcxoS7), and the right lane was controlled by the green up arrow. The only permissive turn, thus, was the left turn onto Yakima. The slight left was protected only.

Here's a video of the operation:

https://youtu.be/TxW7rb7g5XI

Is this intersection in Nashua NH similar to the one mentioned above:
NH 130 and 101 A (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7698211,-71.4789644,3a,75y,277.17h,96.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDtVzdtfaKe1GiYhSVL18wQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

I thought that the 4-section signal is not allowed in exclusive left turn lanes because circular indications were not permitted in in exclusive left turn lanes... the movement from 130 E does not allow left turns, and the movement from 101 E does not allow right turns.

Here's the phasing (order is from top to bottom):
(https://i.ibb.co/cbyZzCN/IMG-3954.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cbyZzCN)
(https://i.ibb.co/9gPKw8C/IMG-3956.jpg) (https://ibb.co/9gPKw8C)
(https://i.ibb.co/ScXQMQv/IMG-3952.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ScXQMQv)
(https://i.ibb.co/dmdTGbw/IMG-3957.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dmdTGbw)
(https://i.ibb.co/1YC0XKV/IMG-3958.jpg) (https://ibb.co/1YC0XKV)
(https://i.ibb.co/LzkdxZ0/IMG-3959.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LzkdxZ0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 12, 2019, 02:04:12 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

Interesting that you'd bring up the U-turn comparison. I've never actually seen one of those "U-turn Must Yield" signs in real life. Signalized U-turns in WA never have overlapping right turn green arrows, though I know they exist elsewhere. I've always assumed they weren't MUTCD compliant, honestly. But you're absolutely right, that this situation is very similar!

I too would appreciate further guidance on this kind of situation. I have some ideas of my own, but no idea how the FHWA may approach it.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 11, 2019, 10:52:07 PM
The biggest issue I see is that the green arrow is for traffic in the left lane...but the left lane is also forced to yield for the sharper left turn. That's usually a No-no.  If an arrow is above the lane that lane is exclusively to be used for that movement.

That was my thought. Even if the green arrow was for a different movement, it's still one lane. The green arrow seems misleading. The hard-left is a fairly uncommon turn, but it's nonetheless permitted, and I feel the current signal is not ideal. It's better than the old setup but still seems problematic.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 11, 2019, 11:20:26 PM
Is this intersection in Nashua NH similar to the one mentioned above:
NH 130 and 101 A (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7698211,-71.4789644,3a,75y,277.17h,96.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDtVzdtfaKe1GiYhSVL18wQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

I thought that the 4-section signal is not allowed in exclusive left turn lanes because circular indications were not permitted in in exclusive left turn lanes... the movement from 130 E does not allow left turns, and the movement from 101 E does not allow right turns.

Here's the phasing (order is from top to bottom):
[snipped]

Fairly similar! Big difference being two possible left turns in my example, versus one in yours. My example would probably be identical, with the constant green up arrow, if not for the road from the left (N Yakima Ave). Oh crap, I didn't see that road on the hard left (Bennett St). Very similar! Although it appears that the "protected" phasing holds traffic along NH-130, whereas mine has them go at the same time, with traffic going to my equivalent of "Bennett St" is required to yield, despite the green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 12, 2019, 01:54:27 PM
Technically, all traffic facing a green arrow of any sort is still required to yield.

Quote from: 2009 Edition Chapter 4D. Traffic Control Signal Features
Section 4D.04 Meaning of Vehicular Signal Indications

Standard:

03 The following meanings shall be given to highway traffic signal indications for vehicles and pedestrians:

2.  Vehicular traffic facing a GREEN ARROW signal indication, displayed alone or in combination with another signal indication, is permitted to cautiously enter the intersection only to make the movement indicated by such arrow, or such other movement as is permitted by other signal indications displayed at the same time.

Such vehicular traffic, including vehicles turning right or left or making a U-turn movement, shall yield the right-of-way to:

Pedestrians lawfully within an associated crosswalk, and
Other vehicles lawfully within the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 12, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 12, 2019, 01:54:27 PM
Technically, all traffic facing a green arrow of any sort is still required to yield.

But is traffic destined for the hard left (in my example) considered "such vehicular traffic" under Chapter 4D? Since although their lane has a green arrow, their movement does not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 12, 2019, 03:07:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 12, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 12, 2019, 01:54:27 PM
Technically, all traffic facing a green arrow of any sort is still required to yield.

But is traffic destined for the hard left (in my example) considered "such vehicular traffic" under Chapter 4D? Since although their lane has a green arrow, their movement does not.

Well, yes.  As I read it, "such vehicular traffic" refers to "vehicular traffic facing a GREEN ARROW signal indication".  And, as such, they are required to "yield the right-of-way to ... other vehicles lawfully within the intersection."  However, none of that is relevant.  The same rule applies to circular green signals, besides the fact that the traffic you really have to worry about are the ones not yet within the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 12, 2019, 08:42:18 PM
The key phrase in that MUTCD section is "lawfully" within the intersection or crosswalk. So for instance a pedestrian crossing against a red light or a "don't walk" signal would be unlawfully in the crosswalk and drivers would not be required to yield to them. At least that's my understanding.

The theory of the green turning arrow is that it's an exclusive right-of-way. The signal will not clear any movement that conflicts with the green turning arrow, and that includes pedestrian signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on November 12, 2019, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 12, 2019, 02:04:12 AM
Interesting that you'd bring up the U-turn comparison. I've never actually seen one of those "U-turn Must Yield" signs in real life. Signalized U-turns in WA never have overlapping right turn green arrows, though I know they exist elsewhere. I've always assumed they weren't MUTCD compliant, honestly. But you're absolutely right, that this situation is very similar!

The 'U-Turn Yield to Right Turn' signs show up in Illinois every now and then.  Example at the IL 31/Charles J. Miller Road intersection near McHenry. (https://goo.gl/maps/AjvHo9yNT3q3uTB8A)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 13, 2019, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

I'm not 100% sure it's compliant, but also not 100% sure that it isn't. It's one of those situations that sufficiently unusual that you can't come up with a "typical" scenario to put into the MUTCD. It also doesn't help that both left turns are made from the same lane, so you can't separate the operation.

The only way I can think of to improve this and also remove the ambiguity with the sign is to use a modified doghouse. In the left column would be FYA for the hard left, and the right column would display green and FYA arrows for the slight left. (This solution would need to introduce an additional through signal to maintain compliance with the MUTCD standard about two through signals.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 13, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 13, 2019, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

I'm not 100% sure it's compliant, but also not 100% sure that it isn't. It's one of those situations that sufficiently unusual that you can't come up with a "typical" scenario to put into the MUTCD. It also doesn't help that both left turns are made from the same lane, so you can't separate the operation.

The only way I can think of to improve this and also remove the ambiguity with the sign is to use a modified doghouse. In the left column would be FYA for the hard left, and the right column would display green and FYA arrows for the slight left. (This solution would need to introduce an additional through signal to maintain compliance with the MUTCD standard about two through signals.)

So for both the Nashua, NH and Tacoma, WA intersections, something like this?

(https://i.ibb.co/GPJVbBN/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-26-12.png) (https://ibb.co/GPJVbBN) (https://i.ibb.co/f98QtmD/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-28-42.png) (https://ibb.co/f98QtmD)

The topmost section is a red ball, the upper yellow sections are for clearance, and the bottom green/yellow bimodal section is for the protected and permissive movements. The "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign is only there because in the Nashua example, the left turn from WB NH-101A to WB NH-130 cannot proceed when the opposing (eastbound NH-101A) traffic has a green, which results in a red ball for the left turn onto 130, and straight-arrow for traffic proceeding on 101A west.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2019, 01:00:39 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 13, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 13, 2019, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

I'm not 100% sure it's compliant, but also not 100% sure that it isn't. It's one of those situations that sufficiently unusual that you can't come up with a "typical" scenario to put into the MUTCD. It also doesn't help that both left turns are made from the same lane, so you can't separate the operation.

The only way I can think of to improve this and also remove the ambiguity with the sign is to use a modified doghouse. In the left column would be FYA for the hard left, and the right column would display green and FYA arrows for the slight left. (This solution would need to introduce an additional through signal to maintain compliance with the MUTCD standard about two through signals.)

So for both the Nashua, NH and Tacoma, WA intersections, something like this?

(https://i.ibb.co/GPJVbBN/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-26-12.png) (https://ibb.co/GPJVbBN) (https://i.ibb.co/f98QtmD/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-28-42.png) (https://ibb.co/f98QtmD)

The topmost section is a red ball, the upper yellow sections are for clearance, and the bottom green/yellow bimodal section is for the protected and permissive movements. The "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign is only there because in the Nashua example, the left turn from WB NH-101A to WB NH-130 cannot proceed when the opposing (eastbound NH-101A) traffic has a green, which results in a red ball for the left turn onto 130, and straight-arrow for traffic proceeding on 101A west.

You'll have a single signal for each movement, when 2 signals per movement are preferred.

Really, this is an issue regarding lane assignments or phasing.  If you take the right lane and make that the straight/soft left movement, and make the left lane the hard left movement, then you can dedicate the signal for the left lane for the hard left, and dedicate the signals for the right lane for the other two movements, then everything is MUTCD kosher.  Likewise, if you add an additional phase where traffic from the soft left has it's own phase, then traffic in the left lane pictured above can turn left hard or soft without interference.

Yet, there are issues with the above.  If traffic volumes warrant the two lanes, there may be too much traffic going straight and making the soft left to stuff in one lane.  How do you show the signal for the hard left - a solid green arrow indicates they have priority, which isn't true.  This is where a FYA works well, due to the unusual intersection layout.   Also, it may feel unnatural to make that soft left from the right lane, confusing motorists.  Or, if you add an additional cycle, then that creates more waiting time for traffic, adding potential delay and congestion to the intersection.

Intersections like this are tough to deal with, and any option presented has downsides.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on November 13, 2019, 06:09:09 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 13, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
So for both the Nashua, NH and Tacoma, WA intersections, something like this?

(https://i.ibb.co/GPJVbBN/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-26-12.png) (https://ibb.co/GPJVbBN) (https://i.ibb.co/f98QtmD/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-28-42.png) (https://ibb.co/f98QtmD)



The topmost section is a red ball, the upper yellow sections are for clearance, and the bottom green/yellow bimodal section is for the protected and permissive movements. The "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign is only there because in the Nashua example, the left turn from WB NH-101A to WB NH-130 cannot proceed when the opposing (eastbound NH-101A) traffic has a green, which results in a red ball for the left turn onto 130, and straight-arrow for traffic proceeding on 101A west.

Technically those would not be MUTCD compliant either:

Quote from:  MUTCD 4D.08 Paragraph 08A U-turn arrow signal indication pointing to the left shall not be used in a signal face that also contains a left-turn arrow signal indication. A U-turn arrow signal indication pointing to the right shall not be used in a signal face that also contains a right-turn arrow signal indication.

It's kind of a no-win intersection with the current MUTCD.  I would certainly like the above section to be revisited in the next edition so both a green U-turn arrow and green left could be used in areas with a decent number of U-turns and no conflicting right turn overlaps.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 14, 2019, 02:44:22 AM
^^^
For my intersection, it would not be correct to use a U-turn arrow. A regular hard-left arrow would suffice:

(https://i.imgur.com/V1bD5IR.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 15, 2019, 09:59:44 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2019, 01:00:39 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 13, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 13, 2019, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

I'm not 100% sure it's compliant, but also not 100% sure that it isn't. It's one of those situations that sufficiently unusual that you can't come up with a "typical" scenario to put into the MUTCD. It also doesn't help that both left turns are made from the same lane, so you can't separate the operation.

The only way I can think of to improve this and also remove the ambiguity with the sign is to use a modified doghouse. In the left column would be FYA for the hard left, and the right column would display green and FYA arrows for the slight left. (This solution would need to introduce an additional through signal to maintain compliance with the MUTCD standard about two through signals.)

So for both the Nashua, NH and Tacoma, WA intersections, something like this?

(https://i.ibb.co/GPJVbBN/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-26-12.png) (https://ibb.co/GPJVbBN) (https://i.ibb.co/f98QtmD/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-28-42.png) (https://ibb.co/f98QtmD)

The topmost section is a red ball, the upper yellow sections are for clearance, and the bottom green/yellow bimodal section is for the protected and permissive movements. The "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign is only there because in the Nashua example, the left turn from WB NH-101A to WB NH-130 cannot proceed when the opposing (eastbound NH-101A) traffic has a green, which results in a red ball for the left turn onto 130, and straight-arrow for traffic proceeding on 101A west.

You'll have a single signal for each movement, when 2 signals per movement are preferred.

Really, this is an issue regarding lane assignments or phasing.  If you take the right lane and make that the straight/soft left movement, and make the left lane the hard left movement, then you can dedicate the signal for the left lane for the hard left, and dedicate the signals for the right lane for the other two movements, then everything is MUTCD kosher.  Likewise, if you add an additional phase where traffic from the soft left has it's own phase, then traffic in the left lane pictured above can turn left hard or soft without interference.

Yet, there are issues with the above.  If traffic volumes warrant the two lanes, there may be too much traffic going straight and making the soft left to stuff in one lane.  How do you show the signal for the hard left - a solid green arrow indicates they have priority, which isn't true.  This is where a FYA works well, due to the unusual intersection layout.   Also, it may feel unnatural to make that soft left from the right lane, confusing motorists.  Or, if you add an additional cycle, then that creates more waiting time for traffic, adding potential delay and congestion to the intersection.

Intersections like this are tough to deal with, and any option presented has downsides.

Yeah fwydriver, that's kinda what I envisioned, just not the U-turn arrow version. Although I would maybe use a louvered circular red on that left turn head to avoid a "left turn signal" sign.

jeffandnicole is right that there's really an issue with phasing or lane assignment here that contributes to the problem, and there won't be an elegant solution if you can't get each movement to have a dedicated lane.

I suspect the hard left in these cases is a more minor movement, so making both lefts from the left lane promotes lane balance on the approach. It also helps with phasing, because the through direction is able to run with any phase other than the side street/conflicting peds. But this gives us the awkward signal arrangement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 17, 2019, 08:48:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 15, 2019, 09:59:44 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2019, 01:00:39 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 13, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 13, 2019, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 11, 2019, 10:32:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 11, 2019, 09:15:17 PM
Rather unusual situation. Curious if it's MUTCD compliant?

At this intersection in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4GRm5LQ4BSPzuEby7), traffic is permitted to go three directions: straight-on, slight left, and hard left. At the beginning of the phase, there is a protected green arrow for the slight left turn, to coincide with that direction's green movement, but the hard left turn "must yield" (as the slightly-angled green arrow only protects the slight left turn). This is followed by a permissive phase for the slight left (the hard left remaining as fully-permissive).

My question is whether or not it's acceptable to permit this situation. My worries arise because of the green arrow in combination with the "must yield" action for the hard left, and that both movements occur from the same lane.

IMHO, I would go with MUTCD compliant, given the angle of the green arrow - but I would love to see FHWA's take on it.  It would be similar to many cases where a left turn would protected, but a U-turn would have to yield.

Hopefully the next edition of the MUTCD will have more discussion of this and other non-standard intersections (such as how to do signal warrants for this intersection and/or those with five or more legs).

I'm not 100% sure it's compliant, but also not 100% sure that it isn't. It's one of those situations that sufficiently unusual that you can't come up with a "typical" scenario to put into the MUTCD. It also doesn't help that both left turns are made from the same lane, so you can't separate the operation.

The only way I can think of to improve this and also remove the ambiguity with the sign is to use a modified doghouse. In the left column would be FYA for the hard left, and the right column would display green and FYA arrows for the slight left. (This solution would need to introduce an additional through signal to maintain compliance with the MUTCD standard about two through signals.)

So for both the Nashua, NH and Tacoma, WA intersections, something like this?

(https://i.ibb.co/GPJVbBN/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-26-12.png) (https://ibb.co/GPJVbBN) (https://i.ibb.co/f98QtmD/Screenshot-2019-11-13-at-12-28-42.png) (https://ibb.co/f98QtmD)

The topmost section is a red ball, the upper yellow sections are for clearance, and the bottom green/yellow bimodal section is for the protected and permissive movements. The "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign is only there because in the Nashua example, the left turn from WB NH-101A to WB NH-130 cannot proceed when the opposing (eastbound NH-101A) traffic has a green, which results in a red ball for the left turn onto 130, and straight-arrow for traffic proceeding on 101A west.

You'll have a single signal for each movement, when 2 signals per movement are preferred.

Really, this is an issue regarding lane assignments or phasing.  If you take the right lane and make that the straight/soft left movement, and make the left lane the hard left movement, then you can dedicate the signal for the left lane for the hard left, and dedicate the signals for the right lane for the other two movements, then everything is MUTCD kosher.  Likewise, if you add an additional phase where traffic from the soft left has it's own phase, then traffic in the left lane pictured above can turn left hard or soft without interference.

Yet, there are issues with the above.  If traffic volumes warrant the two lanes, there may be too much traffic going straight and making the soft left to stuff in one lane.  How do you show the signal for the hard left - a solid green arrow indicates they have priority, which isn't true.  This is where a FYA works well, due to the unusual intersection layout.   Also, it may feel unnatural to make that soft left from the right lane, confusing motorists.  Or, if you add an additional cycle, then that creates more waiting time for traffic, adding potential delay and congestion to the intersection.

Intersections like this are tough to deal with, and any option presented has downsides.

Yeah fwydriver, that's kinda what I envisioned, just not the U-turn arrow version. Although I would maybe use a louvered circular red on that left turn head to avoid a "left turn signal" sign.

jeffandnicole is right that there's really an issue with phasing or lane assignment here that contributes to the problem, and there won't be an elegant solution if you can't get each movement to have a dedicated lane.

I suspect the hard left in these cases is a more minor movement, so making both lefts from the left lane promotes lane balance on the approach. It also helps with phasing, because the through direction is able to run with any phase other than the side street/conflicting peds. But this gives us the awkward signal arrangement.

It's not just awkward, it's dangerous.  The minor movement is in conflict with traffic that is coming from the opposing right turn.  Many people would not be expecting traffic coming from their side, especially if they are facing what amounts to a green arrow.

IMO the only safe options for the Tacoma signal would be: 1) Prohibition of left onto Yakima or 2) Protected left for both 1st and Yakima, and traffic coming from 1st with right onto Division must have a separate phase.

While functionally, the situation is equivalent to one who makes a u-turn at a signal with protected lefts concurrent with protected rights* (or left turns into a driveway just in front of an intersection with a protected left concurrent with protected right), the situation is unique enough that it could lead to confustion.  Since you don't want cars turning left from Division onto Yakima thinking they have a protected left, the left must be prohibited.

* As noted some states (like CA) prohibit u-turns where there is a concurrent right turn.  I agree with this practice since it is much safer.  Some states allow the practice, but put in signage to have u-turns yield to right turns.  Here in MD, u-turns are routinely allowed in such situations, and the really busy u-turn intersections may have a u-turn yield sign, but not commonly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on November 19, 2019, 09:13:31 PM
Here's video of a five-way intersection I have mentioned before: Langston, Hardie and Sunset in Renton, Washington.  The 3M'ed permissive left comes on when the soft left Langston gets a green, and is intended for hard lefts onto Sunset. [edit: That lane is intended for both lefts onto both streets.]  It's an older light and would have been a flashing yellow arrow if it were installed today.  At the start of the video we see traffic in the middle lane trying to turn onto Langston and causing lefts from Hardie to turn behind them.  Location on Google Maps. (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.4797023,-122.2200269,19z)

(This is the first time I used the slightly higher bit rate on this camera, and I couldn't even get the video to play on my computer.  It loaded to YouTube, but without sound.)

https://youtu.be/iGj7pM0zn48
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 19, 2019, 09:39:14 PM
Surprised to see Dallas Phasing in Renton, Washington. (Green ball over left-turn lane with red over thru lanes) I thought that was only used in Texas. And yes, today a flashing-yellow arrow would be required for that application.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2019, 09:48:50 PM
News flash...a flashing yellow is NEVER required. It's sinply another option to utilize when appropriate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on November 20, 2019, 12:04:41 AM
Also taken today, something I had been thinking about photographing for years.  Looking down South 2nd Street, a one-way street with synchronized lights, I occasionally noticed you can see them all green for a brief time.  Lately this has been complicated by the changed timing of the Main Street light in front, but wait long enough you can see them all green.  A bus got in the way of some of the lights, and I gave up waiting for things to line up again.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49093066283_b7f050021d_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hNbNei)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2019, 04:10:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2019, 09:48:50 PM
News flash...a flashing yellow is NEVER required. It's sinply another option to utilize when appropriate.

It would be required for the above application, however, assuming Renton wanted to keep it permissive.

Quote from: mrsman on November 17, 2019, 08:48:37 PM
IMO the only safe options for the Tacoma signal would be: 1) Prohibition of left onto Yakima or 2) Protected left for both 1st and Yakima, and traffic coming from 1st with right onto Division must have a separate phase.

I'm not sure if I mentioned this or not, but there will be a trolley running along 1st within the next couple of years. I'm not sure how the intersection will be modified to incorporate this modification, but I know it will involve flashing yellow arrows. I don't remember where I read that (News Tribune, I think), but I know someone asked the city about flashing yellow arrows in general within the last 12 months, and they mentioned this intersection as being a place that will have flashing yellow arrows in the future.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2019, 06:15:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2019, 04:10:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2019, 09:48:50 PM
News flash...a flashing yellow is NEVER required. It's sinply another option to utilize when appropriate.

It would be required for the above application, however, assuming Renton wanted to keep it permissive.


All the flashing yellow arrow is, is the historic 'yield on green'.

Find me a law, statute or ruling that says Flashing Yellow arrow is required.

Some states don't even use flashing yellow arrows yet.

And to be technical, all the light needs to be is red/yellow/green.  Arrows of any sort aren't required, and is based on an engineering study or guidance.  Heck, a light isn't even required either.  They could have stop signs at these intersections!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 20, 2019, 09:14:30 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2019, 06:15:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2019, 04:10:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2019, 09:48:50 PM
News flash...a flashing yellow is NEVER required. It's sinply another option to utilize when appropriate.

It would be required for the above application, however, assuming Renton wanted to keep it permissive.


All the flashing yellow arrow is, is the historic 'yield on green'.

Find me a law, statute or ruling that says Flashing Yellow arrow is required.

Some states don't even use flashing yellow arrows yet.

And to be technical, all the light needs to be is red/yellow/green.  Arrows of any sort aren't required, and is based on an engineering study or guidance.  Heck, a light isn't even required either.  They could have stop signs at these intersections!

Doesn't MUTCD Chapter 4d.18.02 prohibit circular green in separate left turn faces over the left turn lane, which essentially prohibits Dallas Phasing?

Quote from: 2009 Edition MUTCD, Chapter 4D. Traffic Control Signal Features, Section 4D.18 Signal Indications for Permissive Only Mode Left-Turn Movements02 If a separate left-turn signal face is being operated in a permissive only left-turns mode, a CIRCULAR GREEN signal indication shall not be used in that face.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2019, 12:07:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2019, 06:15:31 AM
Find me a law, statute or ruling that says Flashing Yellow arrow is required.

Man, you are being real dense. If the city of Renton wants to continue operating the left turns with permissive phasing, and it wants to run that far left turn separate from the other left turn, it would need to use a flashing yellow arrow because Dallas Phasing is no longer permitted.

The FYA was not invented for shits and giggles. It has very specific advantages over traditional "yield on green" signals. And while you are correct, it is not "required", it is a city's only option in scenarios like the above video in Renton, assuming the far left turn lane needs to run separately and with permissive phasing (in other words, exactly how it operates right now).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 20, 2019, 05:14:06 PM
Jakeroot is correct. As per the Manual, if left turns are permitted while the thru lanes have a red light, a green-arrow or FYA must be used. A green-ball can be used only as part of a so-called "shared-signal" (see the MUTCD for definition) over the line separating the turn-lane from the thru-lane and must show green for all lanes in the same direction at the same time.

I'm kind of surprised that our friend J&N who is usually a very helpful participant on this board is being so argumentative today. LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2019, 09:55:55 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 20, 2019, 05:14:06 PM
Jakeroot is correct. As per the Manual, if left turns are permitted while the thru lanes have a red light, a green-arrow or FYA must be used. A green-ball can be used only as part of a so-called "shared-signal" (see the MUTCD for definition) over the line separating the turn-lane from the thru-lane and must show green for all lanes in the same direction at the same time.

I'm kind of surprised that our friend J&N who is usually a very helpful participant on this board is being so argumentative today. LOL

I was more hung up on the "required" use of the FYA.

Reviewing the video again, I see a bit more what's happening. It's just a messed up situation. I now see the left lane has it's own green but left turning traffic has to yield. But to compound it, traffic in the left they lane also makes a left turn. It's probably a situation where the locals have made their own traffic pattern.

(Yeah, I'm sure I'm just repeating what you already know)

There are some ways to deal with this without a FYA, but it will mostly be at the expense of adding another phase to the cycle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 21, 2019, 01:42:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2019, 09:55:55 PM
There are some ways to deal with this without a FYA, but it will mostly be at the expense of adding another phase to the cycle.

But that was kind of my point. To operate the intersection exactly the way that it operates right now, it would need an FYA. Sure, you could add or delete this or that phase, and in a world without the FYA, that's probably what would happen (assuming Dallas Phasing was eliminated as an option but not replaced by anything else). But given that a separate left-turn signal with permissive phasing was actually invented (the FYA), this just so happens to be the exact kind of situation where that kind of signal would need to be installed (again, to operate it the same way that it was before).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 21, 2019, 12:02:27 PM
It appears we have now found a case that makes the invention of the FYA 100% justified.  All the haters can now bite their tongues.   :-P
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 21, 2019, 07:12:11 PM
I found some old Eagles on angled mast-arms the other day:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49076973032_142e8dd524_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hLLjgs)Old Eagles on an angled mast-arm (https://flic.kr/p/2hLLjgs) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49076232078_f3b3479e72_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hLGw1o)Old Eagles on an angled mast-arm (https://flic.kr/p/2hLGw1o) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49075435186_f9fff48834_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hLCr7S)Old Eagles on an angled mast-arm (https://flic.kr/p/2hLCr7S) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr


You don't find setups like these too often nowadays, especially an intersection like this, which still has the original signal heads intact. I think PA was one of the few states to do the practice of mounting signals using poles that were slanted at 45-degree angle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MNHighwayMan on November 24, 2019, 12:18:17 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 21, 2019, 07:12:11 PM
I found some old Eagles on angled mast-arms the other day:

Now let's play the game of "How many more relevant threads can I post these pictures to?"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 24, 2019, 01:19:39 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 24, 2019, 12:18:17 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on November 21, 2019, 07:12:11 PM
I found some old Eagles on angled mast-arms the other day:

Now let's play the game of "How many more relevant threads can I post these pictures to?"
Only two, just this and old traffic signals

LG-M327

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 03, 2019, 08:44:10 PM
Lowest mounted traffic signal I have ever seen (https://goo.gl/maps/fGBpj1RdEuaKXkiL8) (not counting signals used by railroads).  At least it is on an island prohibiting pedestrians, otherwise it would be low enough to touch.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 03, 2019, 09:07:02 PM
Two lefts and one right. (https://goo.gl/maps/mN3sY5ZtQHsRmCVu5)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 03, 2019, 11:29:28 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on December 03, 2019, 09:07:02 PM
Two lefts and one right. (https://goo.gl/maps/mN3sY5ZtQHsRmCVu5)

Probably there to satisfy the "two signals for through and/or dominant movement" rule.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on December 04, 2019, 11:27:30 PM
Speaking of angled mast arms, there's this one on EB IL 62 in Rolling Meadows (Chicagoland) (https://goo.gl/maps/WQwy2uj72s9uqrK6A)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 06, 2019, 07:07:25 PM
How often are traffic signal heads and pedestrian heads mounted at the same level?

I see this in British Columbia but not so often in the US. This image is from Tacoma, WA (mid-block crossing over a tram track):

(https://i.imgur.com/3gId7CZ.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on December 06, 2019, 07:50:17 PM
^^

MUTCD
QuoteSection 4D.15 Mounting Height of Signal Faces

04 The bottom of the signal housing (including brackets) of a vehicular signal face that is vertically arranged and not located over a roadway:

    Shall be a minimum of 8 feet and a maximum of 19 feet above the sidewalk or, if there is no sidewalk, above the pavement grade at the center of the roadway.
    Shall be a minimum of 4.5 feet and a maximum of 19 feet above the median island grade of a center median island if located on the near side of the intersection.
QuoteSection 4E.05 Location and Height of Pedestrian Signal Heads

Standard:
01 Pedestrian signal heads shall be mounted with the bottom of the signal housing including brackets not less than 7 feet or more than 10 feet above sidewalk level, and shall be positioned and adjusted to provide maximum visibility at the beginning of the controlled crosswalk.

02 If pedestrian signal heads are mounted on the same support as vehicular signal heads, there shall be a physical separation between them.

so it is not a violation of MUTCD, 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 07, 2019, 01:48:51 AM
Quote from: Big John on December 06, 2019, 07:50:17 PM
so it is not a violation of MUTCD,

Thanks for looking that up. Seems to be a rather unusual placement. I'm guessing the "physical separation" requirement keeps the two signals from being on the same level too often.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 07, 2019, 03:22:34 PM
Want to say I've seen a fair amount of that in Philadelphia when I visited a few years back.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on December 08, 2019, 02:04:11 PM
https://youtu.be/9I2sSpL6v6A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2019, 02:24:17 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on December 08, 2019, 02:04:11 PM
https://youtu.be/9I2sSpL6v6A

A very unique setup. Thanks for sharing.

I like the extra flashing red arrow on the left edge of the road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on December 08, 2019, 03:13:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2019, 02:24:17 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on December 08, 2019, 02:04:11 PM
https://youtu.be/9I2sSpL6v6A (https://youtu.be/9I2sSpL6v6A)

A very unique setup. Thanks for sharing.

I like the extra flashing red arrow on the left edge of the road.


I always loved the Michigan traffic signals.  Left turns green always at the end of the cycle, Red Flashing Arrow at the beginning (supposed to mean: "Stop, Go if clear", but usually treated as either "Yield" or "Leroy Jenkins!").  Seemed to make traffic flow much easier.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2019, 04:06:28 PM
Here's a rather interesting signal, in Frederick, MD. On the left near-corner, there is a four-head signal:

https://goo.gl/maps/6EzpMcGLL7wbP9Sd6

From top to bottom: Circular Red -- Red Arrow -- Amber Arrow -- Green Arrow

The left turn is fully protected. The signal effectively works as a near-side repeater for both the through signal and the turn signal, but only when the through signal is red. When it's not, you see this:

https://goo.gl/maps/uGuPhPm5zgjQ1eVa6

... where only the red arrow is illuminated, second from the top.

I've always thought that near-side signals on corners should have repeaters for both left turn and through signals, if both exist; this may not be my ideal setup, but I suppose it's a bit more important that drivers prepare for a red signal coming around a corner, than a green signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2019, 09:38:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

At this intersection, I also notice that there are two kinds of PPRT signals being used... is there a reason why southern Central St uses a 5-section doghouse, while westbound Lowell St uses an FYA? I know MA allows RTOR (and LTOR from one way to one way) on red arrow but shouldn't red arrows be used instead of red balls at this intersection if NTOR is desired? Finally, if you also look at westbound Lowell St, you'll notice that while southern Central St gets a protected left, westbound Lowell St doesn't get a protected right arrow - they only get a permissive flashing yellow right arrow...

Seems like they haven't fixed the yellow trap at that intersection... someone must have wired or misprogrammed the FYA as that is not how it should be programmed - the FYA should be wired to the oncoming circular green, not the adjacent ones. If eastbound Lowell St is lagging left, there needs to be a W25-1 or 2 sign alerting drivers of an extended green/yellow trap or (although not explicitly permitted), use an FYA doghouse on westbound Lowell St to prevent yellow trap.

The phasings get even more complex since your example is near a rail crossing - how often do trains pass by that level crossing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on December 10, 2019, 07:55:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
The other thing a number of places do is have basically a LPI for the left turn. All of them around here seem to wait about 3-5 seconds after the opposing direction has green to start flashing, which could have also resulted in that photo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 11:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

FYA = Flashing Yellow Arrow
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 10, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 10, 2019, 07:55:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
The other thing a number of places do is have basically a LPI for the left turn. All of them around here seem to wait about 3-5 seconds after the opposing direction has green to start flashing, which could have also resulted in that photo.

But if the turn is leading, would that cause yellow trap on the side with the permissive only FYA if the leading left turn gets recycled due to phase skip?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 11:21:48 AM
FYA = Flashing Yellow Arrow

When he says "FYA", he means the signal, not the state of the signal. A bit confusing, but I got what he meant. should have said "FYA signal", IMO.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 10, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 10, 2019, 07:55:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
The other thing a number of places do is have basically a LPI for the left turn. All of them around here seem to wait about 3-5 seconds after the opposing direction has green to start flashing, which could have also resulted in that photo.
But if the turn is leading, would that cause yellow trap on the side with the permissive only FYA if the leading left turn gets recycled due to phase skip?

No, there's no yellow trap. Basically, at the beginning of any through phase (regardless of the prior phase), the opposing FYA signal stays red for a few seconds to allow pedestrians to enter the crosswalk (an LPI). This only occurs at the beginning of the through phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 08:20:22 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 06:47:12 PM

Quote from: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 11:21:48 AM
FYA = Flashing Yellow Arrow

When he says "FYA", he means the signal, not the state of the signal. A bit confusing, but I got what he meant. should have said "FYA signal", IMO.

If that's the case, then he got the colors wrong.  All the FYA signals are black.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 11, 2019, 12:03:15 AM
Quote from: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 08:20:22 PM
If that's the case, then he got the colors wrong.  All the FYA signals are black.

No, no, no, "green FYA" = FYA signal showing green arrow, "red FYA" = FYA signal showing red arrow, etc.

The FYA signal is in a position whereby its defining factor (the flashing yellow arrow) is sometimes used to describe not just that individual phase, but the entire signal housing. So, a "green FYA" is an FYA signal showing a green arrow. I can understand why this might be confusing. It even confused me. I'm not necessarily used to hearing it described this way, but I understand what he meant.

More professionally, one might just describe the state of the signal ("green arrow") as the individual phases may not have anything to do with the other phases.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on December 14, 2019, 03:17:34 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 10, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 10, 2019, 07:55:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!


Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
The other thing a number of places do is have basically a LPI for the left turn. All of them around here seem to wait about 3-5 seconds after the opposing direction has green to start flashing, which could have also resulted in that photo.

But if the turn is leading, would that cause yellow trap on the side with the permissive only FYA if the leading left turn gets recycled due to phase skip?
Yeah, as jakeroot said, no yellow trap. I've heard Orlando is testing an intersection that delays the beginning of the FYA stage until it actually detects a gap in traffic. Once the first gap is detected, it has to stay in the FYA state at least until the opposing thru traffic cycle is ending. But it goes both ways, as long as the agency gets it in the right direction: FYA can start at the same time or anytime after the opposing traffic gets green, but not before, and an FYA can end at the same time or anytime after the opposing traffic gets its yellow/red. I'm not sure if its intentional or not, but many lights around here do seem to have the yellow and red phases on the FYA signal come on about 0.1 seconds after the thru signals get them. That would presumably give them an extra 0.1 seconds before they think there phase is ending to prevent a fake yellow trap from an early red light runner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on December 14, 2019, 11:00:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2019, 04:06:28 PM
Here's a rather interesting signal, in Frederick, MD. On the left near-corner, there is a four-head signal:

https://goo.gl/maps/6EzpMcGLL7wbP9Sd6

From top to bottom: Circular Red -- Red Arrow -- Amber Arrow -- Green Arrow

The left turn is fully protected. The signal effectively works as a near-side repeater for both the through signal and the turn signal, but only when the through signal is red. When it's not, you see this:

https://goo.gl/maps/uGuPhPm5zgjQ1eVa6

... where only the red arrow is illuminated, second from the top.

I've always thought that near-side signals on corners should have repeaters for both left turn and through signals, if both exist; this may not be my ideal setup, but I suppose it's a bit more important that drivers prepare for a red signal coming around a corner, than a green signal.

I'll give it points for creativity, but I have to wonder about that design versus using a 'be prepared to stop when flashing' assembly tied into the light.

Streetview has an image when both the circular red and red arrow are lit. (https://goo.gl/maps/DbDVwsw3qnRoK7mZ8)

EDIT:  Technically I don't think this design would be MUTCD compliant either.

Quote from: MUTCD 4D.19 Paragraph 01A shared signal face shall not be used for protected only mode left turns unless the CIRCULAR GREEN and left-turn GREEN ARROW signal indications always begin and terminate together.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: TEG24601 on December 15, 2019, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.


I have yet to see an FYA that activates until both through phases are green.


I have seen the 3-head FYA in Marysville, WA, just last weekend.  It seemed odd, as they were using the green position for the FYA, then I saw it turn green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 15, 2019, 05:26:37 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on December 15, 2019, 02:33:07 PM
I have yet to see an FYA that activates until both through phases are green.

They're doing it wrong...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 15, 2019, 06:19:01 PM
I've seen plenty of FYA's that activated when the left turn from the opposite direction has a protected green active.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2019, 08:06:36 PM
I think that was the original intent of how FYA was supposed to be used at least as regards Dallas Phasing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 18, 2019, 07:32:23 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2019, 09:38:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

At this intersection, I also notice that there are two kinds of PPRT signals being used... is there a reason why southern Central St uses a 5-section doghouse, while westbound Lowell St uses an FYA? I know MA allows RTOR (and LTOR from one way to one way) on red arrow but shouldn't red arrows be used instead of red balls at this intersection if NTOR is desired? Finally, if you also look at westbound Lowell St, you'll notice that while southern Central St gets a protected left, westbound Lowell St doesn't get a protected right arrow - they only get a permissive flashing yellow right arrow...

Seems like they haven't fixed the yellow trap at that intersection... someone must have wired or misprogrammed the FYA as that is not how it should be programmed - the FYA should be wired to the oncoming circular green, not the adjacent ones. If eastbound Lowell St is lagging left, there needs to be a W25-1 or 2 sign alerting drivers of an extended green/yellow trap or (although not explicitly permitted), use an FYA doghouse on westbound Lowell St to prevent yellow trap.

The phasings get even more complex since your example is near a rail crossing - how often do trains pass by that level crossing?
I'm guessing the right FYA is for the grade crossing, which is used about 2 times a day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 18, 2019, 07:33:25 AM
Quote from: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 11:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 09, 2019, 07:55:51 PM
Great job MassDOT! You ruined the FYA!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5258915,-70.9273314,3a,26.4y,54.38h,97.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saI8lN4kUUGOZgURUWG3_Sw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In the image, it shows a green fya with green thru signals. The opposing direction shows a red FYA and red thru/right signals. The FYA should be flashing!

FYA = Flashing Yellow Arrow
I was talking about the FYA signal. No the phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 21, 2019, 01:16:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 10, 2019, 11:21:48 AM
FYA = Flashing Yellow Arrow

When he says "FYA", he means the signal, not the state of the signal. A bit confusing, but I got what he meant. should have said "FYA signal", IMO.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 10, 2019, 12:36:47 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 10, 2019, 07:55:11 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 10, 2019, 03:48:33 AM
Apparently some places do not activate the FYA until the through signal gets their green. I do not understand this logic, but it's out there.
The other thing a number of places do is have basically a LPI for the left turn. All of them around here seem to wait about 3-5 seconds after the opposing direction has green to start flashing, which could have also resulted in that photo.
But if the turn is leading, would that cause yellow trap on the side with the permissive only FYA if the leading left turn gets recycled due to phase skip?

No, there's no yellow trap. Basically, at the beginning of any through phase (regardless of the prior phase), the opposing FYA signal stays red for a few seconds to allow pedestrians to enter the crosswalk (an LPI). This only occurs at the beginning of the through phase.



Just passed thru this intersection yesterday. Amtrakprod is correct about how the 3-section FYA doesn't activate when the opposing thru direction has a green light. There is no LPI at this intersection as it is an exclusive pedestrian phase. I find it strange that the right turn FYA doesn't go to a green right arrow when the perpendicular street gets a leading left turn. Also, pay attention to right turn FYA when the perpendicular lead left ends... it goes from solid yellow, to red arrow for a few tenths of a second, then back to solid yellow, than red arrow when the cross traffic has a green...

The intersection does have second yellow trap (https://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/yeltrap2.htm) however because the right turn keeps flashing yellow while all other directions (including the opposing permissive left turn) gets a solid yellow to red. Nonetheless,  there is a risk of preemption and phase skip yellow trap on the direction of the 3-section FYA...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 29, 2019, 06:37:17 PM
Very strange looking signal (https://goo.gl/maps/E5YAUnR5GsjR4hts5) in Medford, NY. How unfamiliar is region 10 to horizontal signals to warrant this monstrosity? NYSDOT is incredibly lazy with signal placement, even in new installs, and when they're forced to deviate from their standard treatment, it shows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on December 29, 2019, 06:44:20 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 29, 2019, 06:37:17 PM
Very strange looking signal (https://goo.gl/maps/E5YAUnR5GsjR4hts5) in Medford, NY. How unfamiliar is region 10 to horizontal signals to warrant this monstrosity? NYSDOT is incredibly lazy with signal placement, even in new installs, and when they're forced to deviate from their standard treatment, it shows.

That's Region 10 (or a contractor) being stupid. Every other NYSDOT region can install horizontal signals properly. R10 consistently has some of the worst installs in the state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 29, 2019, 10:55:13 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 29, 2019, 06:37:17 PM
Very strange looking signal (https://goo.gl/maps/E5YAUnR5GsjR4hts5) in Medford, NY. How unfamiliar is region 10 to horizontal signals to warrant this monstrosity? NYSDOT is incredibly lazy with signal placement, even in new installs, and when they're forced to deviate from their standard treatment, it shows.
Uuuuhhhhgggghhh that's ugly!! WTF were they thinking
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191230/c285aba5e49944086ae15de466eb8d69.jpg)

SM-S820L

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on December 29, 2019, 11:59:28 PM
Quote from: plain on December 29, 2019, 10:55:13 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 29, 2019, 06:37:17 PM
Very strange looking signal (https://goo.gl/maps/E5YAUnR5GsjR4hts5) in Medford, NY. How unfamiliar is region 10 to horizontal signals to warrant this monstrosity? NYSDOT is incredibly lazy with signal placement, even in new installs, and when they're forced to deviate from their standard treatment, it shows.
Uuuuhhhhgggghhh that's ugly!! WTF were they thinking
How about that this was right under the LIRR bridge, and a vertical signal wouldn't be seen as easily from there? Although I do admit they could use a left-turn arrow or two in this one.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 30, 2019, 12:56:55 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on December 29, 2019, 11:59:28 PM
Quote from: plain on December 29, 2019, 10:55:13 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 29, 2019, 06:37:17 PM
Very strange looking signal (https://goo.gl/maps/E5YAUnR5GsjR4hts5) in Medford, NY. How unfamiliar is region 10 to horizontal signals to warrant this monstrosity? NYSDOT is incredibly lazy with signal placement, even in new installs, and when they're forced to deviate from their standard treatment, it shows.
Uuuuhhhhgggghhh that's ugly!! WTF were they thinking
How about that this was right under the LIRR bridge, and a vertical signal wouldn't be seen as easily from there? Although I do admit they could use a left-turn arrow or two in this one.

What makes these signals ugly as hell is the fact that the heads are so far apart. And they're attached to normal heads on top of that. This is just an all out terrible install.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on December 30, 2019, 02:02:25 PM
Quote from: plain on December 30, 2019, 12:56:55 AM
What makes these signals ugly as hell is the fact that the heads are so far apart.
Yes, I see that. Having said that though, the spaces in between could always be used for left-turn signals, which unfortunately, Region 10 likes to keep at a minimum.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2019, 07:03:34 PM
Anyone have a clue when and why the traffic signals near the SB O'Neil Tunnel entrance (and Southeast Expressway, with the lane control signals) were removed? Were the traffic signals and lane controls ever used frequently ever since the Big Dig was completed to now? Every time I pass thru the tunnels, they were always green or blank, with the exception of when the tunnels initially opened in '04 (leftmost lane closed) (https://youtu.be/E6ExDSyDKd0?t=152), and the Callahan Tunnel closure back in 2013-14 which closed the rightmost lane (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-MryvkGh7A)...

Before (2004 - Nov 2018):
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3665262,-71.0608761,3a,87.7y,155.33h,85.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxOii_Txt-1WvCYdop-Q7Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Current (as of 20 Dec 2019):
(https://i.ibb.co/VtxMwnJ/Screenshot-2019-12-30-at-17-30-58.png) (https://ibb.co/R9NQjrY)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 30, 2019, 07:50:36 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on December 30, 2019, 02:02:25 PM
Quote from: plain on December 30, 2019, 12:56:55 AM
What makes these signals ugly as hell is the fact that the heads are so far apart.
Yes, I see that. Having said that though, the spaces in between could always bee used for left-turn signals, which unfortunately, Region 10 likes to keep at a minimum.



D-Dey65, I don't know what parts of Region-10 you drive, but in central Nassau County you can see lots and lots of left turn signals on NY-24, and NY106 and NY-107. Happy motoring.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on December 30, 2019, 10:22:23 PM
Last week, I found some 1950's era Crouse-Hinds type DT signals in Collingdale, Pennsylvania:


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49265611622_397d44afbd_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4r8WW)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco traffic signals (https://flic.kr/p/2i4r8WW) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49271198263_24916ca388_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4VLEk)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/2i4VLEk) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49269834991_ed04e5a0ab_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4NMpD)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco signals (https://flic.kr/p/2i4NMpD) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49265291733_58d2cb7d90_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4puRB)Crouse-Hinds Art Decos (https://flic.kr/p/2i4puRB) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49267753097_ff6cc467d7_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4C7wV)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/2i4C7wV) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49265022473_599e3282b1_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4o7Pc)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco signals (https://flic.kr/p/2i4o7Pc) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49273734986_90b6e78e9d_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i59LJW)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco signals (https://flic.kr/p/2i59LJW) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49269480177_495a108d5d_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2i4LXWa)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco signals (https://flic.kr/p/2i4LXWa) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr


What I find interesting is that several intersections on MacDade Blvd have an MUTCD violation. They have only one signal facing the cross streets, minus the signals on Jackson Avenue and Cherry Street. I also find weird how the intersection with the railroad crossing doesn't have any railroad signals facing the main street.

Here are the GSV images of the intersections that violate the MUTCD:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9096669,-75.2823792,3a,37.5y,147.03h,89.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMCOxYx-anGrPIQsMQNjTFg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMCOxYx-anGrPIQsMQNjTFg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D41.708897%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9102595,-75.281078,3a,75y,138.52h,80.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRo18xQsNAXDZXCDeK5OQ2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9122804,-75.2765135,3a,75y,133.91h,76.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAYzhp_lVLDK6VPCagolO0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9129851,-75.2747943,3a,58.8y,148.61h,89.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1SoYH33rDkTxzb3gbME0NQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on December 31, 2019, 01:06:16 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 30, 2019, 07:50:36 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on December 30, 2019, 02:02:25 PM
Quote from: plain on December 30, 2019, 12:56:55 AM
What makes these signals ugly as hell is the fact that the heads are so far apart.
Yes, I see that. Having said that though, the spaces in between could always bee used for left-turn signals, which unfortunately, Region 10 likes to keep at a minimum.



D-Dey65, I don't know what parts of Region-10 you drive, but in central Nassau County you can see lots and lots of left turn signals on NY-24, and NY106 and NY-107. Happy motoring.
So have I. But I've also seen some that need to be added, but are neglected. Mostly in Suffolk County.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 05, 2020, 08:17:51 PM
Spotted an interesting signal while riding the LIRR. This set of signals controls 2 way traffic under a narrow bridge. What makes this interesting is that there are pedestrian signals that appear to allow peds to safely walk under the bridge when given the signal.

89 Setauket Greenway Trail
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S3ew13ASRJepVBSs8

90 Setauket Greenway Trail
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VSizLrqxN9XMQMzj8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 05, 2020, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 05, 2020, 08:17:51 PM
What makes this interesting is that there are pedestrian signals that appear to allow peds to safely walk under the bridge when given the signal.

There's also a two-way cycle track leading up to the underpass; probably why they installed the current system.

Regardless, massive kudos to the local agency for giving some thought to those users.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on January 06, 2020, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 05, 2020, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 05, 2020, 08:17:51 PM
What makes this interesting is that there are pedestrian signals that appear to allow peds to safely walk under the bridge when given the signal.

There's also a two-way cycle track leading up to the underpass; probably why they installed the current system.

Regardless, massive kudos to the local agency for giving some thought to those users.

We have a similar underpass (https://goo.gl/maps/ceLomuKiHnGo64Rp8) in Lebanon, PA which also features a button-operated pedestrian signal that stops both directions of traffic. It's planned to have the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail run through it, and a segment of the trail was recently completed to the north, but the pedestrian signals were there for years before that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 11:54:28 AM
Why would the ped signal activation be on the right side of the road?  Aren't you supposed to walk facing traffic?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PHLBOS on January 06, 2020, 01:10:33 PM
Saw this oddball signal set-up (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699055,-75.2511101,3a,75y,216.96h,88.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) while driving along PA 512 southbound in Pen Argyl (Northhampton County), PA this past New Year's Day.  Even though the 3-way intersection does not have any one-way roads; one is not allowed to continue along E. Main St. where PA 512 veers off based on the posted sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 11:54:28 AM
Why would the ped signal activation be on the right side of the road?  Aren't you supposed to walk facing traffic?

I was thinking about this as well. My guess is that, while the buttons to activate the signal are only on one side of the street, you could still approach from the other side, assuming someone was there to activate the signal on the other side. Because of the visibility, they had to install six separate signal heads, so that you could still see them from the other side of the tunnel (because the edge of the tunnel blocks visibility of the signals that are on the same sides of the street). Because the signal stops both directions of traffic, it's basically just a free-for-all for pedestrians and cyclists for however long the signal lasts (so need to worry about walking against traffic, etc).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 02:27:08 PM
Nah, I think they just didn't want to bother dropping power to the other side of the street for nothing but a ped signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 02:49:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 02:27:08 PM
Nah, I think they just didn't want to bother dropping power to the other side of the street for nothing but a ped signal.

There is power on all four "corners" of the underpass, as there are no less than six pedestrian signals (at least one on each "corner" of the underpass, and two facing the cycle path). Why they would place pedestrian signals that face towards the side of the street without any buttons is beyond me. Maybe there are plans to install a sidewalk on the south/west edge of Setauket?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 03:25:16 PM
It just occurred to me that (I think) we're talking about two different locations.

↓  I was referring to this one.  ↓

Quote from: Roadsguy on January 06, 2020, 10:37:13 AM
We have a similar underpass (https://goo.gl/maps/ceLomuKiHnGo64Rp8) in Lebanon, PA which also features a button-operated pedestrian signal that stops both directions of traffic. It's planned to have the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail run through it, and a segment of the trail was recently completed to the north, but the pedestrian signals were there for years before that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 05:20:14 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 03:25:16 PM
It just occurred to me that (I think) we're talking about two different locations.

↓  I was referring to this one.  ↓

Quote from: Roadsguy on January 06, 2020, 10:37:13 AM
We have a similar underpass (https://goo.gl/maps/ceLomuKiHnGo64Rp8) in Lebanon, PA which also features a button-operated pedestrian signal that stops both directions of traffic. It's planned to have the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail run through it, and a segment of the trail was recently completed to the north, but the pedestrian signals were there for years before that.

Of course; should have occured to me, as your post was directly below that link. My apologies.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 06, 2020, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 05, 2020, 08:17:51 PM
Spotted an interesting signal while riding the LIRR. This set of signals controls 2 way traffic under a narrow bridge. What makes this interesting is that there are pedestrian signals that appear to allow peds to safely walk under the bridge when given the signal.

89 Setauket Greenway Trail
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S3ew13ASRJepVBSs8

90 Setauket Greenway Trail
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VSizLrqxN9XMQMzj8

Similar setup at a more rural tunnel by Chelan, WA, (https://goo.gl/maps/mMSMi4Po2my27hLm7) though I can't find the warning lights that the button used to activate.  (Never mind, I found them.) (https://goo.gl/maps/Va4RYGKjwitvKvht5)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on January 06, 2020, 09:58:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 03:25:16 PM
It just occurred to me that (I think) we're talking about two different locations.

↓  I was referring to this one.  ↓

Quote from: Roadsguy on January 06, 2020, 10:37:13 AM
We have a similar underpass (https://goo.gl/maps/ceLomuKiHnGo64Rp8) in Lebanon, PA which also features a button-operated pedestrian signal that stops both directions of traffic. It's planned to have the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail run through it, and a segment of the trail was recently completed to the north, but the pedestrian signals were there for years before that.

The reason you suggested is most likely, I think. The location of the actual signal doesn't matter so much, and I doubt the township (it's not a PennDOT road) would want to run power under the road for one button. The other side is exactly the same way, though with the Lebanon Valley Mall right there and no crosswalks, I imagine most pedestrians are already on that side.

It's a moot point now with the Lebanon Valley Rail Trail (this segment not even started yet in Street View or satellite imagery, but finished now) coming down on the west side of the street (the right) and dumping out where the signal is. I have no idea if they were planning that far ahead when this signal was put in, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 07, 2020, 03:01:34 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2019, 07:03:34 PM
Anyone have a clue when and why the traffic signals near the SB O'Neil Tunnel entrance (and Southeast Expressway, with the lane control signals) were removed? Were the traffic signals and lane controls ever used frequently ever since the Big Dig was completed to now? Every time I pass thru the tunnels, they were always green or blank, with the exception of when the tunnels initially opened in '04 (leftmost lane closed) (https://youtu.be/E6ExDSyDKd0?t=152), and the Callahan Tunnel closure back in 2013-14 which closed the rightmost lane (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-MryvkGh7A)...

Before (2004 - Nov 2018):
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3665262,-71.0608761,3a,87.7y,155.33h,85.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxOii_Txt-1WvCYdop-Q7Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Current (as of 20 Dec 2019):
(https://i.ibb.co/VtxMwnJ/Screenshot-2019-12-30-at-17-30-58.png) (https://ibb.co/R9NQjrY)
I wonder the same
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on January 08, 2020, 05:48:30 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on January 05, 2020, 08:17:51 PM
Spotted an interesting signal while riding the LIRR. This set of signals controls 2 way traffic under a narrow bridge. What makes this interesting is that there are pedestrian signals that appear to allow peds to safely walk under the bridge when given the signal.

There used to be a somewhat similar setup on a one-lane bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2289627,-122.8769393,3a,24.2y,294.06h,89.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siGayuQhpF9aUKb1FEkOIOw!2e0!5s20090401T000000!7i13312!8i6656) with a traffic signal allowing one direction of traffic or a pedestrian to cross the bridge.

This bridge has been a source of conflict between the two cities on either side for years.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 11, 2020, 03:04:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 02:49:55 PM
Maybe there are plans to install a sidewalk on the south/west edge of Setauket?
If they're not going to get rid of that one lane bridge, they're not going to put a sidewalk there. They wouldn't even put a bridge for the trail over the Port Jeff Branch or Gnarled Hollow Road, which was more than likely what they were going to do when they were planning it as the Setauket-Port Jefferson Station Bypass (BTW, I still think would've been better named as the "Three Village Bypass").

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jamess on January 13, 2020, 10:37:52 AM
Seen on reddit today

(https://i.imgur.com/hUIwPbF.jpg)

https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/engr3d/porter_square_just_a_green_arrow_and_red_arrow_at/?st=k5cltzzv&sh=6460b966

And:

(https://i.redd.it/ak2i2plu6ha41.jpg)

https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/enzbdp/found_another_fun_red_and_green_at_the_same_time/?st=k5cm3r7j&sh=d72c3e12
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 14, 2020, 09:24:29 PM
Quote from: jamess on January 13, 2020, 10:37:52 AM
Seen on reddit today

(https://i.imgur.com/hUIwPbF.jpg)

https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/engr3d/porter_square_just_a_green_arrow_and_red_arrow_at/?st=k5cltzzv&sh=6460b966

And:

(https://i.redd.it/ak2i2plu6ha41.jpg)


https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/enzbdp/found_another_fun_red_and_green_at_the_same_time/?st=k5cm3r7j&sh=d72c3e12

Since I'm close to the area I can explain each one.
The first one is in Porter Square, and the top signal should be facing the other way.

The second one is actually an illusion. The bottom green has no visor so it looks red and green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 14, 2020, 09:46:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 14, 2020, 09:24:29 PM
Since I'm close to the area I can explain each one.
The first one is in Porter Square, and the top signal should be facing the other way.

The second one is actually an illusion. The bottom green has no visor so it looks red and green.

Thank you. People aren't capable of doing any fucking investigative work. Took a great deal of scrolling to find anyone actually realizing that the signal had been turned slightly. Every other comment is Bostonians complaining about driving, the roads, etc.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 14, 2020, 09:55:31 PM
That was my guess too, that one of those signal heads had gotten twisted around. No way it would actually be configured that way as in the photo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on January 16, 2020, 01:37:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 14, 2020, 09:46:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 14, 2020, 09:24:29 PM
Since I'm close to the area I can explain each one.
The first one is in Porter Square, and the top signal should be facing the other way.

The second one is actually an illusion. The bottom green has no visor so it looks red and green.

Thank you. People aren't capable of doing any fucking investigative work. Took a great deal of scrolling to find anyone actually realizing that the signal had been turned slightly. Every other comment is Bostonians complaining about driving, the roads, etc.

When I saw the first one, I instantly thought it was Massachusetts. The layout of the signals on the pole just looked so MA. And the signal being turned the wrong way...let's just say it isn't the first time I've seen something like that in the Boston area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 16, 2020, 04:36:57 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on January 16, 2020, 01:37:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 14, 2020, 09:46:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 14, 2020, 09:24:29 PM
Since I'm close to the area I can explain each one.
The first one is in Porter Square, and the top signal should be facing the other way.

The second one is actually an illusion. The bottom green has no visor so it looks red and green.

Thank you. People aren't capable of doing any fucking investigative work. Took a great deal of scrolling to find anyone actually realizing that the signal had been turned slightly. Every other comment is Bostonians complaining about driving, the roads, etc.

When I saw the first one, I instantly thought it was Massachusetts. The layout of the signals on the pole just looked so MA. And the signal being turned the wrong way...let's just say it isn't the first time I've seen something like that in the Boston area.

Yeah, I can see why you'd think that. My mind also thought about DC, where all-black (or very dark) signals and masts are quite common (and where I have seen signals occasionally swung in the wrong direction).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 16, 2020, 06:40:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 16, 2020, 04:36:57 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on January 16, 2020, 01:37:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 14, 2020, 09:46:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 14, 2020, 09:24:29 PM
Since I'm close to the area I can explain each one.
The first one is in Porter Square, and the top signal should be facing the other way.

The second one is actually an illusion. The bottom green has no visor so it looks red and green.

Thank you. People aren't capable of doing any fucking investigative work. Took a great deal of scrolling to find anyone actually realizing that the signal had been turned slightly. Every other comment is Bostonians complaining about driving, the roads, etc.

When I saw the first one, I instantly thought it was Massachusetts. The layout of the signals on the pole just looked so MA. And the signal being turned the wrong way...let's just say it isn't the first time I've seen something like that in the Boston area.

Yeah, I can see why you'd think that. My mind also thought about DC, where all-black (or very dark) signals and masts are quite common (and where I have seen signals occasionally swung in the wrong direction).
If I didn't know the area, DC would've been a quick guess for me too. Signals high on poles are common in that area.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 18, 2020, 02:45:31 AM
Question for you guys. Check out this signal in Spokane, WA:

https://goo.gl/maps/iavLBKA5v9GqZRtd8

There are five sections, and it would appear that (top to bottom) they read either 6-7-8-9-10 (more logical) or (what I think it says) 8-7-8-9-0.

The signal is facing diagonally more at northbound Howard Street traffic. I thought it might have been for buses, but I don't see any other bus infrastructure in the area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on January 19, 2020, 01:55:27 AM
I have no idea what you've found, but here's another one on Sprague (https://goo.gl/maps/7aPbbt6cuKyorr4M6) immediately west of that intersection. The sections look like 6-7-8-9-0 to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on January 19, 2020, 03:02:15 AM
Just past there is the main transit plaza zones 6-10. Maybe it was a system to tell drivers if there was a bus in the zone or something along those lines. The transit plaza also has these weird things (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.657203,-117.4222349,3a,19.7y,2.66h,103.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s680cRylDKAxvd5aoiC6Eaw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at the entrance and exit to the row of zones, which look like they might be some sort of tag reader.

Looking back at 2007 street view, the system still seemed to be working, and it appears that the lights were lit when there was a bus at the corresponding bay (but it's really hard to tell because the image quality is horrible as is normal for 2007 images, and it looks like street view drove through many times in the same month which confuses matters). At this angle (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6572469,-117.4213119,3a,35y,249.72h,103.44t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syZ40DDlGT6QHX8OV4AuBbA!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664), it looks like all the lights are lit, and if you look further forward, it looks like there are buses in all of the bays. From this angle (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6571818,-117.4210626,3a,36.5y,292.92h,95.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_U3QIVLmEQSXHJwJiKH8Bg!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664), the first and third lights (6 and 8) are lit, and I think there are buses in zones 6 and 8 (though it's hard to say for sure). I'm not sure what the point of that was, but it is an interesting setup!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 19, 2020, 06:20:39 AM
Quote from: jay8g on January 19, 2020, 03:02:15 AM
Just past there is the main transit plaza zones 6-10. Maybe it was a system to tell drivers if there was a bus in the zone or something along those lines. The transit plaza also has these weird things (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.657203,-117.4222349,3a,19.7y,2.66h,103.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s680cRylDKAxvd5aoiC6Eaw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at the entrance and exit to the row of zones, which look like they might be some sort of tag reader.

Looking back at 2007 street view, the system still seemed to be working, and it appears that the lights were lit when there was a bus at the corresponding bay (but it's really hard to tell because the image quality is horrible as is normal for 2007 images, and it looks like street view drove through many times in the same month which confuses matters). At this angle (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6572469,-117.4213119,3a,35y,249.72h,103.44t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syZ40DDlGT6QHX8OV4AuBbA!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664), it looks like all the lights are lit, and if you look further forward, it looks like there are buses in all of the bays. From this angle (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6571818,-117.4210626,3a,36.5y,292.92h,95.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_U3QIVLmEQSXHJwJiKH8Bg!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664), the first and third lights (6 and 8) are lit, and I think there are buses in zones 6 and 8 (though it's hard to say for sure). I'm not sure what the point of that was, but it is an interesting setup!

I also found this 2007 imagery clearly showing a "6" on the top lit-up: https://goo.gl/maps/WMfJRq6zPLQh34bx7

Good sleuthing!

Quote from: US 89 on January 19, 2020, 01:55:27 AM
I have no idea what you've found, but here's another one on Sprague (https://goo.gl/maps/7aPbbt6cuKyorr4M6) immediately west of that intersection. The sections look like 6-7-8-9-0 to me.

Looks like the one I found was for traffic from Howard St, and the one you found for Sprague.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on January 19, 2020, 01:40:19 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2019, 07:03:34 PM
Anyone have a clue when and why the traffic signals near the SB O'Neil Tunnel entrance (and Southeast Expressway, with the lane control signals) were removed?

My guess as to the "why" would be because that's not a valid use of standard RYG traffic signals, which are meant to convey stop/go and not lane control information. For those, they need to use the ×/down arrow signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on January 24, 2020, 11:43:55 PM
I found some ancient 1950's vintage Crouse-Hinds type DT signals in Folsom:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49416330261_b416d90861_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihKBma)8-inch Crouse-Hinds type R with a Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/2ihKBma) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49416502712_4f4f83bd40_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihLuBs)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco (https://flic.kr/p/2ihLuBs) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49416676896_4bff5f7c3e_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihMooC)Crouse-Hinds Art Deco signals (https://flic.kr/p/2ihMooC) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 25, 2020, 04:31:03 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 24, 2020, 11:43:55 PM
I found some ancient 1950's vintage Crouse-Hinds type DT signals  in Folsom:

I'm guessing that's Folsom, PA? There's another much larger Folsom in California ("Folsom Prison Blues", etc).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on January 25, 2020, 08:13:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2020, 04:31:03 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on January 24, 2020, 11:43:55 PM
I found some ancient 1950's vintage Crouse-Hinds type DT signals  in Folsom:

I'm guessing that's Folsom, PA? There's another much larger Folsom in California ("Folsom Prison Blues", etc).

it is pa
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on January 25, 2020, 01:33:49 PM
Here are some old short-fin Eaglelux signals in Clifton Heights:


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49421903293_3317582ec1_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iifb1V)Short-finned Eaglelux traffic signals (https://flic.kr/p/2iifb1V) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49416474656_00c92067ca_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihLmgJ)Short-finned Eaglelux signals (green smiley lenses) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihLmgJ) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49416691612_054c7bda37_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ihMsLm)Short-finned Eaglelux signals (https://flic.kr/p/2ihMsLm) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on January 28, 2020, 08:28:01 PM
Two old-fashioned Michigan beacon setups in Dimondale, MI
https://youtu.be/QVvNe2Kdzk8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 28, 2020, 09:34:13 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on January 28, 2020, 08:28:01 PM
Two old-fashioned Michigan beacon setups in Dimondale, MI

Unrelated: I must admit that I am more familiar with Dimondale being the site of the country's first proper mini-roundabout (https://goo.gl/maps/NgXCP4eU1WkM61tE8):

(https://i.imgur.com/xkQKuix.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 29, 2020, 08:48:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 28, 2020, 09:34:13 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on January 28, 2020, 08:28:01 PM
Two old-fashioned Michigan beacon setups in Dimondale, MI

Unrelated: I must admit that I am more familiar with Dimondale being the site of the country's first proper mini-roundabout (https://goo.gl/maps/NgXCP4eU1WkM61tE8):

(https://i.imgur.com/xkQKuix.png)

What is with that European Sign.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 30, 2020, 03:09:11 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 29, 2020, 08:48:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 28, 2020, 09:34:13 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on January 28, 2020, 08:28:01 PM
Two old-fashioned Michigan beacon setups in Dimondale, MI

Unrelated: I must admit that I am more familiar with Dimondale being the site of the country's first proper mini-roundabout (https://goo.gl/maps/NgXCP4eU1WkM61tE8):

https://i.imgur.com/xkQKuix.png

What is with that European Sign.

British designers highly recommend bollards to improve visibility of the circle, but there was no American version of a keep-right light-up bollard. So they imported one from the UK, flipped the arrow, and called it good. Since replaced by reflective American bollard (after being introduced in the MUTCD).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2020, 10:19:38 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49477890746/in/dateposted-public/
Unusual two left turn signal heads at I-45's southern terminus in Galveston.  Yes, two lanes turn here, but to have them ground mounted and double reds for both (though one of the red balls is out) is very rare.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2020, 10:42:55 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49477489753/in/dateposted-public/
Sloppy sloppy sloppy!

No thought by installers to make it look more presentable as it looked like the contractors were in a big hurry to do the job!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 03, 2020, 10:13:22 AM
OMG it gets even worse.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49482439788/in/dateposted-public/

I guess Galveston has no pride in their signals at all.  It seems this is common along Spur SH 342 from what I have found and in nearby Seabrook along SH 146 at Nasa Road 1 as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on February 03, 2020, 12:24:19 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2020, 10:19:38 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49477890746/in/dateposted-public/
Unusual two left turn signal heads at I-45's southern terminus in Galveston.  Yes, two lanes turn here, but to have them ground mounted and double reds for both (though one of the red balls is out) is very rare.

Double Reds on Lefties is common in Texas

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3216/3059047470_12d7ebafab_z_d.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/2080/2530670341_2767feece0_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 12, 2020, 10:55:39 AM
After watching this video about Connecticut traffic lights (https://youtu.be/k5GSxNtScdo?t=424), I see that Connecticut is still installing new 8-inch (203 mm) signal heads...

Federal Rd, Old New Milford Rd and Junction Rd in Brookfield CT (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4546748,-73.402969,3a,75y,159.69h,102.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sncIx3qjPsfVzd3aoUJFR_A!2e0!5s20180901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

The old intersection used to use 12-inch (305 mm) heads for this leg... (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4546914,-73.4029571,3a,75y,159.69h,102.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2p4Mh7Zwf-8PFijTSGuuzA!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656) is it possible that section 4D.07.02 and 03 in the 2009 MUTCD permit this configuration, as well as the proximity of the two intersections?

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, Section 4D.07 Size of Vehicular Signal Indications
Standard:

02 Except as provided in Paragraph 3 below, 12-inch signal indications shall be used for all signal sections in all new signal faces.

Option:
03 Eight-inch circular signal indications may be used in new signal faces only for:

B. The circular indications in signal faces controlling the approach to the downstream location where two adjacent signalized locations are close to each other and it is not practical because of factors such as high approach speeds, horizontal or vertical curves, or other geometric factors to install visibility-limited signal faces for the downstream approach;

C. The circular indications in a signal face that is located less than 120 feet from the stop line on a roadway with a posted or statutory speed limit of 30 mph or less.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 12, 2020, 07:52:28 PM
I've noticed it too, that Connecticut is not one of the smarter states when it comes to traffic light installations. Massachusetts notably does far better at least in more recent installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 12, 2020, 11:26:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 12, 2020, 10:55:39 AM
The old intersection used to use 12-inch (305 mm) heads for this leg... (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4546914,-73.4029571,3a,75y,159.69h,102.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2p4Mh7Zwf-8PFijTSGuuzA!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656) is it possible that section 4D.07.02 and 03 in the 2009 MUTCD permit this configuration, as well as the proximity of the two intersections?

In reference to your quoted section, 3-C would permit 8-inch signals as long as the signal is within 120 feet of the stop line. So that installation would be compliant.

Seattle, until very recently, continued to install all 8-inch signals (all except for arrow signals). They recently switched to 12-inch signals.

Just for the record, many places around the world continue to install 200mm signals: Australia, New Zealand, much of Southern Africa (not just ZA), Japan, and other places. British Columbia calls for 200mm arrow signals for the near-side left turn signals. They're perfectly fine under many circumstances.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 13, 2020, 04:27:51 AM
There's a seemingly-old four-way flasher at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/S69mDCjNoU6gGR4z5) in Tacoma, Wash.  It replaced what was previously a signal, seen here (http://cdm17061.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p17061coll1/id/19474).

There is some evidence of the original signal in the graded-away markings (https://goo.gl/maps/DDaoyWzH6vNiKM31A) along the road (transverse crosswalk markings), as well as wiring (https://goo.gl/maps/k2fGC4AXvd5FiGYs8) that extends to about where the old displays used to hang.

Is it possible that the four-way flasher was the top red display of the original central traffic light? It appears to be the same design, and the four-way flasher that is there seems too old to date from when the signals were removed (sometime in the 1980s).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 13, 2020, 10:54:43 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 12, 2020, 10:55:39 AM
After watching this video about Connecticut traffic lights (https://youtu.be/k5GSxNtScdo?t=424), I see that Connecticut is still installing new 8-inch (203 mm) signal heads...

Federal Rd, Old New Milford Rd and Junction Rd in Brookfield CT (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4546748,-73.402969,3a,75y,159.69h,102.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sncIx3qjPsfVzd3aoUJFR_A!2e0!5s20180901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

The old intersection used to use 12-inch (305 mm) heads for this leg... (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4546914,-73.4029571,3a,75y,159.69h,102.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2p4Mh7Zwf-8PFijTSGuuzA!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656) is it possible that section 4D.07.02 and 03 in the 2009 MUTCD permit this configuration, as well as the proximity of the two intersections?

Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, Section 4D.07 Size of Vehicular Signal Indications
Standard:

02 Except as provided in Paragraph 3 below, 12-inch signal indications shall be used for all signal sections in all new signal faces.

Option:
03 Eight-inch circular signal indications may be used in new signal faces only for:

B. The circular indications in signal faces controlling the approach to the downstream location where two adjacent signalized locations are close to each other and it is not practical because of factors such as high approach speeds, horizontal or vertical curves, or other geometric factors to install visibility-limited signal faces for the downstream approach;

C. The circular indications in a signal face that is located less than 120 feet from the stop line on a roadway with a posted or statutory speed limit of 30 mph or less.

Yeah, the 8" signals are fine here. Personally, I don't like them when other options could be deployed.

What confuses me more about this installation (and the adjacent intersection), is that there were perfectly fine signal installations with fixed mast arm mountings and then they were replaced with span wire installations. That doesn't make sense to me...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2020, 10:57:58 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 12, 2020, 07:52:28 PM
I've noticed it too, that Connecticut is not one of the smarter states when it comes to traffic light installations. Massachusetts notably does far better at least in more recent installations.

In what way?  In regards to the 8 inch lights mentioned above, they were installed in full compliance with the MUTCD.  If anything, it's the states which install 12" lights too close together that are more of an issue!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 13, 2020, 12:52:08 PM
^^ The minimum distance is 8 feet apart regardless of signal size.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kj3400 on February 13, 2020, 07:30:44 PM
Lord knows this isn't 8 feet... (https://goo.gl/maps/3F7QsB4KKhghDBo2A)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2020, 07:39:02 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 13, 2020, 12:52:08 PM
^^ The minimum distance is 8 feet apart regardless of signal size.

In those examples? They all appear to be at least 8 feet apart.

Kj's wxample...yeah...um...No!!!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: silveradoman298 on February 13, 2020, 08:27:56 PM
I miss these old 12in/8in combination traffic lights manufactured by Eagle and Marbelite.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5600244,-83.0098989,3a,38.4y,352.39h,89.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDsOz3gtC1d81qMr_6WLs5w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5600244,-83.0098989,3a,38.4y,352.39h,89.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDsOz3gtC1d81qMr_6WLs5w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5601929,-83.0101225,3a,50.9y,91.15h,93.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3gIdvduJVkSGQC80K_UmZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5601929,-83.0101225,3a,50.9y,91.15h,93.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3gIdvduJVkSGQC80K_UmZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 13, 2020, 09:18:47 PM
Just a technical point-of-information, the rule requiring the two thru signals to be eight feet apart is measured from center-of-lens to center-of-lens, in case anyone wondered.

And that rule only applies to the two thru circular-green signals. Not to any supplemental heads or turn-signal heads. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: silveradoman298 on February 15, 2020, 11:01:25 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49538761092_050f18bf7f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2itz6Ly)Vernier At I-94 (https://flic.kr/p/2itz6Ly) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49538852917_680b27cf5c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2itzz4K)Vernier At I-94 (2) (https://flic.kr/p/2itzz4K) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

Somehow this interesting 3M arrangement has stood the test of time. Another Michigan rarity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2020, 05:23:07 PM
Does anyone have any idea what's going on at this off-ramp signal from northbound I-25 in Castle Rock, CO?

https://goo.gl/maps/HNUHWDzHnWeQp5p46

(https://i.imgur.com/ZUoHubV.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 16, 2020, 05:33:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2020, 05:23:07 PM
Does anyone have any idea what's going on at this off-ramp signal from northbound I-25 in Castle Rock, CO?

https://goo.gl/maps/HNUHWDzHnWeQp5p46

(https://i.imgur.com/ZUoHubV.png)

Very strange signals. Seems to me neither 4-section needs red arrows (especially in conjunction with red orbs on the same signal!!). A red orb, yellow orb, and left & right green arrows would've been fine.

Crazy how the red arrows on the mast-arm mounted and side mounted signals clash with each other there..
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 16, 2020, 06:02:09 PM
One late night driving around Bangor, I noticed some very interesting and odd flash mode sequencing:



1. The pedestrian signals are not supposed to flash at all when in flash mode, correct? If illegal, what section of the MUTCD does that violate?

2. At 0:35 in the video, notice how there are three yellow balls flashing, but the signal to the furthest right is flashing red ball. Does that require a RIGHT TURN SIGNAL sign, or at least have that signal flash yellow like the other lights as well? The signal to the furthest right acts as a right turn overlap.

3. The same could be said at 0:15 in, but the left and rightmost signal heads in normal operation hold turning traffic with red balls to allow peds to cross... very strange seeing red balls for the turning movement* and yellow balls for the thru movements...

4. Are the turning movements and thru signals supposed to flash in unison or alternate?

*Yes, I do know that some states like Pennsylvania use red balls for protected only left-turn signals. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2897756,-76.6690261,3a,36.4y,225.05h,97.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6Bs0N4VTk0H9huDNDV2qVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) So in that case, for signals that flash overnight, that would not be an unusual thing to see. However, in Maine, NH and MA, red left-turn arrows are common for protected only phasing (and FYA signals as well), and red balls for an exclusive left (right) turn signals are rare around here... (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7874114,-68.8131909,3a,17.2y,90.98h,91.77t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLITSt0FZ3bymHAhdwc0vlg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLITSt0FZ3bymHAhdwc0vlg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D92.80346%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 16, 2020, 06:21:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 16, 2020, 06:02:09 PM

1. The pedestrian signals are not supposed to flash at all when in flash mode, correct? If illegal, what section of the MUTCD does that violate?

Section 4E.06 Pedestrian Intervals and Signal Phases

Standard:
01 At intersections equipped with pedestrian signal heads, the pedestrian signal indications shall be displayed except when the vehicular traffic control signal is being operated in the flashing mode. At those times, the pedestrian signal indications shall not be displayed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 17, 2020, 03:27:45 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 16, 2020, 06:02:09 PM
2. At 0:35 in the video, notice how there are three yellow balls flashing, but the signal to the furthest right is flashing red ball. Does that require a RIGHT TURN SIGNAL sign, or at least have that signal flash yellow like the other lights as well? The signal to the furthest right acts as a right turn overlap.

3. The same could be said at 0:15 in, but the left and rightmost signal heads in normal operation hold turning traffic with red balls to allow peds to cross... very strange seeing red balls for the turning movement* and yellow balls for the thru movements...

4. Are the turning movements and thru signals supposed to flash in unison or alternate?

For 2 & 3: It seems like a "Right turn signal" or "Left turn signal" sign is needed for flash mode and regular operation as well if there's a circular red indication controlling the turning movement there. If a red arrow had been used, then these would not need such a sign. 2009 MUTCD 4D.30p08 standard says that all signals flashed on an approach must flash the same color, except for turn signal faces which may flash red arrows when adjacent through faces flash circular yellow.

4: The MUTCD does not specify that all signal heads on an approach flash in unison or alternate. I've actually wondered about this previously when encountering an all-way red flash–most signals around the Las Vegas, NV area flash all signal heads on an approach simultaneously, whereas many signals around Reno, NV area have the left turn signals and through signals flash red alternately.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 17, 2020, 09:28:43 PM
Re: signals flashing in unison or alternately in the same direction. I've seen both configurations in the Northeast. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 25, 2020, 11:54:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 19, 2020, 01:40:19 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2019, 07:03:34 PM
Anyone have a clue when and why the traffic signals near the SB O'Neil Tunnel entrance (and Southeast Expressway, with the lane control signals) were removed?

My guess as to the "why" would be because that's not a valid use of standard RYG traffic signals, which are meant to convey stop/go and not lane control information. For those, they need to use the ×/down arrow signals.

I think I may have found the answer to the traffic signals around the Central Artery / I-90 tunnels. After stumbling across this document ("RAMP METERING STATUS IN NORTH AMERICA. 1995 UPDATE")  (https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/2703/dot_2703_DS1.pdf?)by the FHWA, three mainline meters were supposed to be activated as part of the Central Artery Project, all at entrances to tunnels. Not sure where those meters were supposed to be placed, but according to the document:

Quote from: Ramp Metering Status in North America, 1995 Update, FHWA. Page 32As part of the Central Artery project, 3 locations will have mainline metering. All three locations are at portals to control flow through tunnels. Ramp metering is also being considered at 12 locations. Further studies will be done to insure the feasibility of the meters. Earliest activation would be near the year 2000.

Were the traffic signals at the entrances to the Central Artery tunnels supposed to be ramp meters at some point, before being abandoned and eventually removed? I wonder if MA will get ramp meters in the future...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: silveradoman298 on February 28, 2020, 08:02:50 PM
Here's a few odd signal combinations I came across in Detroit, MI.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596954388_412c792ccf_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyHmBf)Greenfield at I-94 Exit (2019) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyHmBf) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49598034111_0bbf3e8902_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyNTza)Greenfield at I-94 Exit (2011) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyNTza) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629843_481e2769f2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D)John Kronk at Lonyo (2009)(2)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629968_e1b449cc24_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN)John Kronk at Lonyo (2019)(3)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 28, 2020, 11:38:52 PM
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 28, 2020, 08:02:50 PM
Here's a few odd signal combinations I came across in Detroit, MI.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596954388_412c792ccf_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyHmBf)Greenfield at I-94 Exit (2019) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyHmBf) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49598034111_0bbf3e8902_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyNTza)Greenfield at I-94 Exit (2011) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyNTza) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

Nearside-left placement. Bit unusual! I like it.

Must say, all things considered, Michigan has surprisingly good signal placement for as old fashioned as things appear.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 29, 2020, 11:28:43 PM
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 28, 2020, 08:02:50 PM
Here's a few odd signal combinations I came across in Detroit, MI.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629843_481e2769f2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D)John Kronk at Lonyo (2009)(2)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629968_e1b449cc24_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN)John Kronk at Lonyo (2019)(3)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

Ugh.  3M louvered on a span wire?  Do they not get the concept?  Maybe there's no wind there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 01, 2020, 12:23:55 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 29, 2020, 11:28:43 PM
Quote from: silveradoman298 on February 28, 2020, 08:02:50 PM
Here's a few odd signal combinations I came across in Detroit, MI.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629843_481e2769f2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D)John Kronk at Lonyo (2009)(2)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFG8D) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49596629968_e1b449cc24_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN)John Kronk at Lonyo (2019)(3)(3M) (https://flic.kr/p/2iyFGaN) by Silveradoman298 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/187063866@N08/), on Flickr

Ugh.  3M louvered on a span wire?  Do they not get the concept?  Maybe there's no wind there.

Looks like its a set of signals next to a railroad crossing.  Likely the 3Ms may operate independently of the signals before the railroad crossing, and are really only for the traffic between the railroad and cross-street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 01, 2020, 03:50:14 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 01, 2020, 12:23:55 PM
Looks like its a set of signals next to a railroad crossing.  Likely the 3Ms may operate independently of the signals before the railroad crossing, and are really only for the traffic between the railroad and cross-street.

It's not that 3Ms aren't required, but that they're mounted on span wire. All things considered, that's a rare combo, least from what I've seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 01, 2020, 04:29:45 PM
Here's an interesting setup in Farmington Hills, MI, at the intersection of Grand River Ave. - Halsted Rd./Freedom Rd:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4688266,-83.4156965,3a,31.8y,171.83h,98.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slPzaPj3Aq9LxVYn92TIInQ!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

At the southbound approach, there are two 4-section signals. The bottom two lights on them are green arrows. The bottom one turns on when EB Grand River Ave has a protected left turn, and the other one turns on when Halsted Road has the green light.

The one at exit 13 at M-5 is very similar: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4680325,-83.418529,3a,75y,325.68h,100.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHdSueltmkgd-QcAPC-g2Cw!2e0!5s20181101T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 01, 2020, 04:49:12 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on March 01, 2020, 04:29:45 PM
Here's an interesting setup in Farmington Hills, MI, at the intersection of Grand River Ave. - Halsted Rd./Freedom Rd:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4688266,-83.4156965,3a,31.8y,171.83h,98.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slPzaPj3Aq9LxVYn92TIInQ!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

At the southbound approach, there a two 4-section signals. The bottom two lights on them are green arrows. The bottom one turns on when EB Grand River Ave has a protected left turn, and the other one turns on when Halsted Road has the green light.

So there's two green arrows? "Interesting" is an understatement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 01, 2020, 06:09:36 PM
^^ Looking at the road, were straight movements once allowed? meaning where the upper arrow is now then controlled the through movement and when that was disallowed all they did was to replace the lens with a green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on March 01, 2020, 08:27:50 PM
This intersection in Chattanooga, TN has traffic lights like these and there is 4 of them

and so does this other one
(https://i.ibb.co/w74xC3c/Capture.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/0nZ58Cb/Capture1.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 01, 2020, 08:33:13 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 01, 2020, 08:27:50 PM
This intersection in Chattanooga, TN has traffic lights like these and there is 4 of them

and so does this other one
(https://i.ibb.co/w74xC3c/Capture.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/0nZ58Cb/Capture1.jpg)

What am I supposed to be looking for here?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on March 01, 2020, 10:27:03 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 01, 2020, 06:09:36 PM
^^ Looking at the road, were straight movements once allowed? meaning where the upper arrow is now then controlled the through movement and when that was disallowed all they did was to replace the lens with a green arrow.
Thru traffic is not and never was allowed because of the opposing being part of an exit off of M-5. The 4-section signals here are just oddballs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on March 01, 2020, 10:44:22 PM
I was talking about the older traffic lights at those two intersections

(https://i.ibb.co/RDgQcfC/bandicam-2020-03-01-22-36-59-681.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/yg9fRZ7/bandicam-2020-03-01-22-42-08-089.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 01, 2020, 11:40:14 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 01, 2020, 10:44:22 PM
I was talking about the older traffic lights at those two intersections

How could we possibly tell how old they are? Your images are zoomed way out with an ostensible focus on just about anything but the traffic lights. Your first two images are focused on the lights, but there is no discernable detail apart from the color of the body.

A Google Maps link would go a long ways here, as would slightly doctored images circling the signals to let us know what we're looking for (if you don't want to say it outright).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on March 02, 2020, 12:53:52 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/PKSzAVV5zh455i3Y7 (https://goo.gl/maps/PKSzAVV5zh455i3Y7)

https://goo.gl/maps/q4wy9e2c4psVAjrJ9 (https://goo.gl/maps/q4wy9e2c4psVAjrJ9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 02, 2020, 01:29:27 PM
Thanks. They don't look ancient to me (minus the incandescent bulbs, which are rare as hens teeth around here), but they look to be LFE-TCD Automatics, which I believe are either well out of production, or the bodystyle was purchased by another group.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on March 06, 2020, 01:25:07 PM
I really really doubt these signals are compliant.  https://goo.gl/maps/rZNjQtJyPe9MowkQ6
1) One indication each for 2 different directions--most states require at least 2 indications for each turning or thru movement
2) 8-inch sections with arrows!?!?!

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 06, 2020, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 06, 2020, 01:25:07 PM
I really really doubt these signals are compliant.  https://goo.gl/maps/rZNjQtJyPe9MowkQ6
1) One indication each for 2 different directions--most states require at least 2 indications for each turning or thru movement
2) 8-inch sections with arrows!?!?!

Can't speak to the # of signals (seems like it might be OK, but not ideal), but the 8-inch arrows definitely aren't allowed. But then again, this is clearly an old signal.

There are overhead 8-inch arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/qoUWwKMeCbrDQWaz7) here in Seattle, but they've been grandfathered in. The signals are otherwise compliant.

I'm not even going to mention any examples from BC, where 8-inch arrows are not only completely normal, but are still installed regularly. If not for seeing them in-the-flesh all the time, I'd think they were a bad idea. But they're really just fine, especially for near-side turn signals (https://goo.gl/maps/sGhpy6pDksrL3dNz6) (oh, and yes, all three of those left turn signals have different size configurations).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 09, 2020, 07:03:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 06, 2020, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 06, 2020, 01:25:07 PM
I really really doubt these signals are compliant.  https://goo.gl/maps/rZNjQtJyPe9MowkQ6
1) One indication each for 2 different directions--most states require at least 2 indications for each turning or thru movement
2) 8-inch sections with arrows!?!?!

Can't speak to the # of signals (seems like it might be OK, but not ideal), but the 8-inch arrows definitely aren't allowed. But then again, this is clearly an old signal.

There are overhead 8-inch arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/qoUWwKMeCbrDQWaz7) here in Seattle, but they've been grandfathered in. The signals are otherwise compliant.

I'm not even going to mention any examples from BC, where 8-inch arrows are not only completely normal, but are still installed regularly. If not for seeing them in-the-flesh all the time, I'd think they were a bad idea. But they're really just fine, especially for near-side turn signals (https://goo.gl/maps/sGhpy6pDksrL3dNz6) (oh, and yes, all three of those left turn signals have different size configurations).

IMO, 8 inch arrows are too small to see adequately, but it may not be as much of a problem for near-side signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 09, 2020, 07:03:55 PM
IMO, 8 inch arrows are too small to see adequately, but it may not be as much of a problem for near-side signals.

Far-side 8-inch green arrows are pretty rare in BC (far-side circular indications are much more common, at least for post-mounted signals). 8-inch green arrows are basically reserved for near-side post-mounted left turn signals. In those situations, definitely adequate. In fact, 12-inch arrows look comically large (https://goo.gl/maps/M4FQMYMG3Ctdrrbp7). 8-inch arrows are perfectly adequate in near-side situations.

(https://i.imgur.com/FEHgEQw.jpg)

Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

We do near-side right turn signals though, for some specific right turn installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 10, 2020, 01:26:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

We do near-side right turn signals though, for some specific right turn installations.

NYC has a bunch of nearside left turn signals, mostly on medians. But they are always supplemented by farside signals.

Nearside right turn signals are common here too
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on March 10, 2020, 06:45:24 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

We do near-side right turn signals though, for some specific right turn installations.

I'm guessing Nevada used to use the same setup CA used to use--in the near-side & far-side medians during the age of the cable-stayed mast arms. I seem to recall seeing some in Vegas in the olden days.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 10, 2020, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

That's what I was trying to say (I've bolded the pertinent part). I'm sure many states have historically at least experimented with nearside left turn signals, but the only continual regular users seems to be British Columbia and Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 10, 2020, 07:39:14 PM
^^ Wisconsin is phasing out the near side left signal. using a mast arm instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 10, 2020, 07:48:22 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 10, 2020, 07:39:14 PM
^^ Wisconsin is phasing out the near side left signal. using a mast arm instead.

Phasing out, or just limiting? In British Columbia, there are still plenty of protected-only turns without near-side left turn signals. Medians are obviously required, but probably 10-15% still don't have them, even when there is room (such as here beneath Hwy 1 at East 1st in Vancouver...)

(https://i.imgur.com/3OJCY0b.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 10, 2020, 11:03:15 PM
While the current MUTCD seems to require 12" signals on all new installations, I don't think it is really warranted. 

Ideally, I think that a good system would be to have at least one overhead signal that is 12-12-12, in each direction.  For every other signal, it should be optional.  Certainly non-arrow near side signals can also be 8-8-8.  But the arrows are so small to begin with that it would be hard to see without being on a 12".

Of course, it used to be common to have the red and yellow aspects of a turn signal being orbs instead of arrows.  In that case, 8-8-12 work very well, and was very commonly used in CA on median near side installs of protected left turn signals.  But even there, the arrow was on a 12.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 11, 2020, 02:50:50 AM
Quote from: mrsman on March 10, 2020, 11:03:15 PM
Ideally, I think that a good system would be to have at least one overhead signal that is 12-12-12, in each direction.  For every other signal, it should be optional.  Certainly non-arrow near side signals can also be 8-8-8.  But the arrows are so small to begin with that it would be hard to see without being on a 12".

That's basically British Columbia practice: overhead and primary post-mounted left turn signals on the far-center (median-mounted) are always 12-12-12 (although only green arrows are utilised); everything else is a mix of 12 and 8.

Here's something to check out, mrsman. This left turn (https://goo.gl/maps/B8dcC3EvjPjDa6nJ8) along Millstream Road at McCallum Road near Victoria has a total of three left turn signals: one near-side 8-8-8, one far-center median-mounted 12-12-12, and one far-left mast-mounted 8-8-8. Just from looking at these images, I don't feel like 12-inch green arrows would be necessary. I haven't been on Vancouver Island in years, but 8-inch arrows seem perfectly adequate for at least this situation; especially when used near-side, where they're not the primary signal to begin with. To have all primary signals be 8-inch doesn't seem advisable, but to use 12-inch secondary and (as BC calls them) tertiary signals seems to be, at most, something that should be left up to the engineer. The oncoming left turn (https://goo.gl/maps/beiuScSyR1P7ZrWE9) has a far-left 8-8-12 signal, presumably due to the double lane nature of the turn.

From an outsider's perspective, BC probably looks like an odd mix of American and European styles: there's the big, meaty mast arms with per-lane 12-inch signals overhead, but then you get these comparatively smaller signals on the poles that are often no wider than the poles they're attached to (bit reminiscent of Denmark, to me).

Here's a photo I took not long ago of a near-side 8-8-8 left turn signal along Boundary Road in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/zQgSPRhPAxxLMEZM8). They're surprisingly large, especially when they're close enough to reach out and touch:

(https://i.imgur.com/Cz8ccn6.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 14, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2020, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

That's what I was trying to say (I've bolded the pertinent part). I'm sure many states have historically at least experimented with nearside left turn signals, but the only continual regular users seems to be British Columbia and Wisconsin.

I think your wording in the first sentence (underlined) set the premise of talking about near-side post mount signals for your post, but then the second part of the second sentence you suddenly switched to talking about near-side signals in general. So I see the "overhead" in rereading your post now, but likely overlooked it on the initial read and reply cause I was already on a different line of thinking.  :spin:

Quote from: mrsman on March 10, 2020, 11:03:15 PM
While the current MUTCD seems to require 12" signals on all new installations, I don't think it is really warranted. 

Ideally, I think that a good system would be to have at least one overhead signal that is 12-12-12, in each direction.  For every other signal, it should be optional.  Certainly non-arrow near side signals can also be 8-8-8.  But the arrows are so small to begin with that it would be hard to see without being on a 12".

The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D07).

But I think it is better to ask the question of what greater benefit is there to installing a new 8" signal head over a 12" signal head? I can understand certain limited circumstances like small intersections and low-post-mounted ramp meters at the stop line, but for the average intersection I see no benefit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 14, 2020, 07:56:14 PM
I agree that all new signals should be 12-inch unless there is a specific reason to use 8-inch lights. Unfortunately the DPW in Long Island's Nassau County, NY where I live doesn't agree. Their standard practice is still to use 12-inch lights on the main road, and 8-inch lights on the smaller intersecting street, which the section in the Manual cited above, does allow. I don't know what their reasoning is, possibly keeping costs down, but that's the way it is. Interestingly, they were slow to adopt 12-inch on four-lane county roads too. In the 1990's they were still using 8-inch signals in new installations, unless it was a six-lane road. Penny-wise and pound foolish, they were and still are. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 15, 2020, 12:20:49 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 14, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 10, 2020, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 10, 2020, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 09, 2020, 09:10:29 PM
Thing is, near-side post-mounted turn signals are pretty damn rare in the US. California used them for a while, but not anymore. Wisconsin is probably the only other state; Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada also use them, but usually overhead or on the far-right for a right-turn signal. None of those states use 8-inch arrows, as far as I know (with Maryland being the only user of near-side 8-inch signals for their doghouse displays).

Nevada has very few examples of a near-side post mounted left turn signal, and such installations haven't been common for ages. Any examples would be in a wide median setting, or on a mast for another signal set. Most new examples of a near-side left turn signal will be overhead on the opposing mast arm.

That's what I was trying to say (I've bolded the pertinent part). I'm sure many states have historically at least experimented with nearside left turn signals, but the only continual regular users seems to be British Columbia and Wisconsin.

I think your wording in the first sentence (underlined) set the premise of talking about near-side post mount signals for your post, but then the second part of the second sentence you suddenly switched to talking about near-side signals in general. So I see the "overhead" in rereading your post now, but likely overlooked it on the initial read and reply cause I was already on a different line of thinking.  :spin:

I suppose a period, versus a semicolon, would have helped.

Quote from: roadfro on March 14, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 10, 2020, 11:03:15 PM
While the current MUTCD seems to require 12" signals on all new installations, I don't think it is really warranted. 

Ideally, I think that a good system would be to have at least one overhead signal that is 12-12-12, in each direction.  For every other signal, it should be optional.  Certainly non-arrow near side signals can also be 8-8-8.  But the arrows are so small to begin with that it would be hard to see without being on a 12".

The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D07).

But I think it is better to ask the question of what greater benefit is there to installing a new 8" signal head over a 12" signal head? I can understand certain limited circumstances like small intersections and low-post-mounted ramp meters at the stop line, but for the average intersection I see no benefit.
Quote from: SignBridge on March 14, 2020, 07:56:14 PM
I agree that all new signals should be 12-inch unless there is a specific reason to use 8-inch lights. Unfortunately the DPW in Long Island's Nassau County, NY where I live doesn't agree. Their standard practice is still to use 12-inch lights on the main road, and 8-inch lights on the smaller intersecting street, which the section in the Manual cited above, does allow. I don't know what their reasoning is, possibly keeping costs down, but that's the way it is. Interestingly, they were slow to adopt 12-inch on four-lane county roads too. In the 1990's they were still using 8-inch signals in new installations, unless it was a six-lane road. Penny-wise and pound foolish, they were and still are. 

For the average overhead install, I also see no benefit to 8-inch signals. The only time they seem beneficial is when used in medians (https://goo.gl/maps/znpoKEY3WHpKc8K18), where larger signals (especially with backplates) could be more easily hit by turning vehicles. I also think they are appropriate for post-mounted signals in cities, where physically larger signals (https://goo.gl/maps/4FvqytGLrfNYshYy6) (again, especially with backplates) can more easily add to visual clutter. That's more a personal preference from the perspective of an urban designer, who finds signals like these (https://goo.gl/maps/5KgBr7fX2kjGDY5i8) a bit less intrusive; though potentially more numerous, I'd rather have several smaller redundant signals than two giant overhead signals, as is often the practice these days.

I think there is also a point to be made with regards to "does it actually help?" 12-inch signals replaced 8-inch signals, as we know, for several reasons I assume. But do those extra four inches really matter (:eyebrow:) when the signal is only a dozen feet from your vantage point? Consider that median-mounted signal in my link above as an example of that...I don't see how 12-inch signals would make a difference there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 15, 2020, 03:14:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 15, 2020, 12:20:49 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 14, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D07).

But I think it is better to ask the question of what greater benefit is there to installing a new 8" signal head over a 12" signal head? I can understand certain limited circumstances like small intersections and low-post-mounted ramp meters at the stop line, but for the average intersection I see no benefit.
For the average overhead install, I also see no benefit to 8-inch signals. The only time they seem beneficial is when used in medians (https://goo.gl/maps/znpoKEY3WHpKc8K18), where larger signals (especially with backplates) could be more easily hit by turning vehicles. I also think they are appropriate for post-mounted signals in cities, where physically larger signals (https://goo.gl/maps/4FvqytGLrfNYshYy6) (again, especially with backplates) can more easily add to visual clutter. That's more a personal preference from the perspective of an urban designer, who finds signals like these (https://goo.gl/maps/5KgBr7fX2kjGDY5i8) a bit less intrusive; though potentially more numerous, I'd rather have several smaller redundant signals than two giant overhead signals, as is often the practice these days.

I think there is also a point to be made with regards to "does it actually help?" 12-inch signals replaced 8-inch signals, as we know, for several reasons I assume. But do those extra four inches really matter (:eyebrow:) when the signal is only a dozen feet from your vantage point? Consider that median-mounted signal in my link above as an example of that...I don't see how 12-inch signals would make a difference there.

One could argue that if you're worried about a 12" signal in the median getting hit by traffic, an 8" signal isn't going to fare much better–you're talking a difference of 2" on either side of the signal, which isn't much in the grand scheme.

I guess it all depends on what the vantage point is supposed to be for each signal face. Going to your first example, is the rear-facing, median-mounted left turn signal head meant to just be seen by the first and second driver at the stop line, or by several vehicles in the turn pocket? 8" seems reasonable if the signal head is meant only for the first or second vehicle (unlikely given the first vehicle is stopped at the stop line beyond the signal face here), but 12" seems better if more vehicles in queue are supposed to see it (and especially if the main median signal head is blocked, as is likely with the box truck second in line here).

I'll certainly admit for this discussion that I live in a state where 8" signal heads haven't been installed for years, so I'm just used to seeing them on old signal installations (and usually as the far right/left pole mount, supplementing overhead 12" signal heads) casually living out the remainder of their useful service life. So my outlook is likely skewed toward that perspective.


On another note: Speaking of visual clutter, British Columbia and other areas of Canada could certainly reduce some visual clutter if they'd adopt red and yellow arrows for turn signals...think of all the "left turn signal" signs that would no longer be needed!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 15, 2020, 04:13:40 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 15, 2020, 03:14:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 15, 2020, 12:20:49 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 14, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D07).

But I think it is better to ask the question of what greater benefit is there to installing a new 8" signal head over a 12" signal head? I can understand certain limited circumstances like small intersections and low-post-mounted ramp meters at the stop line, but for the average intersection I see no benefit.
For the average overhead install, I also see no benefit to 8-inch signals. The only time they seem beneficial is when used in medians (https://goo.gl/maps/znpoKEY3WHpKc8K18), where larger signals (especially with backplates) could be more easily hit by turning vehicles. I also think they are appropriate for post-mounted signals in cities, where physically larger signals (https://goo.gl/maps/4FvqytGLrfNYshYy6) (again, especially with backplates) can more easily add to visual clutter. That's more a personal preference from the perspective of an urban designer, who finds signals like these (https://goo.gl/maps/5KgBr7fX2kjGDY5i8) a bit less intrusive; though potentially more numerous, I'd rather have several smaller redundant signals than two giant overhead signals, as is often the practice these days.

I think there is also a point to be made with regards to "does it actually help?" 12-inch signals replaced 8-inch signals, as we know, for several reasons I assume. But do those extra four inches really matter (:eyebrow:) when the signal is only a dozen feet from your vantage point? Consider that median-mounted signal in my link above as an example of that...I don't see how 12-inch signals would make a difference there.

One could argue that if you're worried about a 12" signal in the median getting hit by traffic, an 8" signal isn't going to fare much better–you're talking a difference of 2" on either side of the signal, which isn't much in the grand scheme.

I guess it all depends on what the vantage point is supposed to be for each signal face. Going to your first example, is the rear-facing, median-mounted left turn signal head meant to just be seen by the first and second driver at the stop line, or by several vehicles in the turn pocket? 8" seems reasonable if the signal head is meant only for the first or second vehicle (unlikely given the first vehicle is stopped at the stop line beyond the signal face here), but 12" seems better if more vehicles in queue are supposed to see it (and especially if the main median signal head is blocked, as is likely with the box truck second in line here).

I'll certainly admit for this discussion that I live in a state where 8" signal heads haven't been installed for years, so I'm just used to seeing them on old signal installations (and usually as the far right/left pole mount, supplementing overhead 12" signal heads) casually living out the remainder of their useful service life. So my outlook is likely skewed toward that perspective.


On another note: Speaking of visual clutter, British Columbia and other areas of Canada could certainly reduce some visual clutter if they'd adopt red and yellow arrows for turn signals...think of all the "left turn signal" signs that would no longer be needed!

Perhaps that is the reason why Cal (and by extension Nevada which largely follows Cal) has migrated from red orb - yellow orb - green arrow signals to RA-YA-GA signals.  Plus, there has been more and more of a trend to avoid english on signs and be more international, and RA-YA-GA signals do obviate the need for a left turn on arrow only sign or a left turn signal sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 16, 2020, 03:45:16 AM
Quote from: roadfro on March 15, 2020, 03:14:28 PM
On another note: Speaking of visual clutter, British Columbia and other areas of Canada could certainly reduce some visual clutter if they'd adopt red and yellow arrows for turn signals...think of all the "left turn signal" signs that would no longer be needed!

I've heard it's related to the lack of luminance emanating from arrow signals. It's acceptable for a green indication, but red arrows don't seem to meet their expectations. That said, Quebec uses red arrows.

Quote from: roadfro on March 15, 2020, 03:14:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 15, 2020, 12:20:49 PM
For the average overhead install, I also see no benefit to 8-inch signals. The only time they seem beneficial is when used in medians (https://goo.gl/maps/znpoKEY3WHpKc8K18), where larger signals (especially with backplates) could be more easily hit by turning vehicles. I also think they are appropriate for post-mounted signals in cities, where physically larger signals (https://goo.gl/maps/4FvqytGLrfNYshYy6) (again, especially with backplates) can more easily add to visual clutter. That's more a personal preference from the perspective of an urban designer, who finds signals like these (https://goo.gl/maps/5KgBr7fX2kjGDY5i8) a bit less intrusive; though potentially more numerous, I'd rather have several smaller redundant signals than two giant overhead signals, as is often the practice these days.

I think there is also a point to be made with regards to "does it actually help?" 12-inch signals replaced 8-inch signals, as we know, for several reasons I assume. But do those extra four inches really matter (:eyebrow:) when the signal is only a dozen feet from your vantage point? Consider that median-mounted signal in my link above as an example of that...I don't see how 12-inch signals would make a difference there.
One could argue that if you're worried about a 12" signal in the median getting hit by traffic, an 8" signal isn't going to fare much better–you're talking a difference of 2" on either side of the signal, which isn't much in the grand scheme.

I guess it all depends on what the vantage point is supposed to be for each signal face. Going to your first example, is the rear-facing, median-mounted left turn signal head meant to just be seen by the first and second driver at the stop line, or by several vehicles in the turn pocket? 8" seems reasonable if the signal head is meant only for the first or second vehicle (unlikely given the first vehicle is stopped at the stop line beyond the signal face here), but 12" seems better if more vehicles in queue are supposed to see it (and especially if the main median signal head is blocked, as is likely with the box truck second in line here).

I'll certainly admit for this discussion that I live in a state where 8" signal heads haven't been installed for years, so I'm just used to seeing them on old signal installations (and usually as the far right/left pole mount, supplementing overhead 12" signal heads) casually living out the remainder of their useful service life. So my outlook is likely skewed toward that perspective.

From my experience, you tend to look at the center signal and the median-mounted signal when you're in the first five cars, and then the far-left mast-mounted signal when further back. In these cases, the far-side green arrows are seldom anything but 12", although there are exceptions (older signals, mainly). The standard BC circular red indication for anything except primary signal faces is 8" (200mm), so far-left and near-side red and yellow indications are typically 8" (four-section bimodal signals are often 8-8-8-12 (https://goo.gl/maps/m1XkJD6ZjVzYPFEB8)).

Note in that link that another BC oddity is the general preference (outside of Vancouver proper) to mount secondary signals and pedestrian signals at the same height. In these cases, 12" signals are a little larger, and start to butt in to the mounting position. But this is a stretch, I will admit.

Considering the "difference of perspective" bit, I can certainly understand how 8" signals seem old-fashioned. I guess from seeing them installed new, and experiencing them on a regular basis, they just aren't nearly as bad as one might imagine. Basically, from your perspective, it's "why not use 12 inch signals"; for BC, it's "why go with 12 inch signals when 8 inch signals meet our expectations?"

I should note that many BC municipalities use 12" signals for all displays. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/xtL6RW6pchD2dXga6). 8" signals seem more common along Provincially-maintained routes (https://goo.gl/maps/doH1NzaJpRcwRHWL6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:12:40 AM
From my experience living in an area where all signals are 12" but driving on roads with 8" post-mounted signals a fair amount, I personally think 8" post-mounted signals are fine, but 12" signals are definitely noticeably more visible. Other than slight cost savings, I don't think there's really any benefit in using 8" signals. Personally, I'd prefer if 12" signals were used consistently everywhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:50:46 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2020, 03:45:16 AM
Note in that link that another BC oddity is the general preference (outside of Vancouver proper) to mounted secondary signals and pedestrian signals at the same height. In these cases, 12" signals are a little larger, and start to butt in to the mountain position. But this is a stretch, I will admit.

I don't think it's a huge stretch. There are a  few (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2929751,-122.7560573,3a,22.4y,61.67h,91.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DoXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D191.14363%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) intersections (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2787028,-122.7884607,3a,19.4y,92.14h,90.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NpoApg0fxJ2tj4An2vuGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) where some post-mounted signals have been moved up higher than usual, I'm assuming to make the pedestrian signals more visible to drivers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 18, 2020, 10:30:18 AM
On my way to a basketball playoff game on 6-7 March 2020, I noticed this intersection with some strange phasing:

US 2 near Delta Hotels by Marriott - phasing dosen't show on Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.4684875,-73.1786978,3a,65.7y,104.56h,91.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWpA8ko2YhGlAEseV5ZDQ1w!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

This intersection has no left turn lanes, only shared left/thru in both directions. However, at one point I noticed that the signal operated with a dual leading left (green left arrow in both directions + red ball for thru/right turns). Is this phasing legal in the MUTCD? Legal or not, I fail to see how this phasing would work with the lane configuration, especially if there is a car intending to go straight in the left-hand lane blocking left-turning drivers from proceeding when the dual left occurs...

Closer to home, I've noticed this phasing at this intersection as well... (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5282334,-70.42667,3a,75y,352.46h,91.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sm_aLuQghOkp2tzh7drMEpg!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 19, 2020, 04:35:29 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 18, 2020, 10:30:18 AM
On my way to a basketball playoff game on 6-7 March 2020, I noticed this intersection with some strange phasing:

US 2 near Delta Hotels by Marriott - phasing dosen't show on Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.4684875,-73.1786978,3a,65.7y,104.56h,91.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWpA8ko2YhGlAEseV5ZDQ1w!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

This intersection has no left turn lanes, only shared left/thru in both directions. However, at one point I noticed that the signal operated with a dual leading left (green left arrow in both directions + red ball for thru/right turns). Is this phasing legal in the MUTCD? Legal or not, I fail to see how this phasing would work with the lane configuration, especially if there is a car intending to go straight in the left-hand lane blocking left-turning drivers from proceeding when the dual left occurs...

Closer to home, I've noticed this phasing at this intersection as well... (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5282334,-70.42667,3a,75y,352.46h,91.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sm_aLuQghOkp2tzh7drMEpg!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

Yeah, pretty sure that's not really MUTCD-kosher...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 20, 2020, 02:31:20 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:12:40 AM
From my experience living in an area where all signals are 12" but driving on roads with 8" post-mounted signals a fair amount, I personally think 8" post-mounted signals are fine, but 12" signals are definitely noticeably more visible. Other than slight cost savings, I don't think there's really any benefit in using 8" signals. Personally, I'd prefer if 12" signals were used consistently everywhere.

The inconsistencies are pretty bizarre. I noticed at the new Mountain Highway interchange that the improved Keith Road uses all 12" signals, but the ramp signals (though not yet turned on) are using 8"/12" combo signals (https://goo.gl/maps/v2RT3Z5pAdBouWMy6) as is common along Provincially-maintained routes.

Quote from: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:50:46 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2020, 03:45:16 AM
Note in that link that another BC oddity is the general preference (outside of Vancouver proper) to mounted secondary signals and pedestrian signals at the same height. In these cases, 12" signals are a little larger, and start to butt in to the mountain position. But this is a stretch, I will admit.

I don't think it's a huge stretch. There are a  few (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2929751,-122.7560573,3a,22.4y,61.67h,91.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DoXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D191.14363%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) intersections (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2787028,-122.7884607,3a,19.4y,92.14h,90.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NpoApg0fxJ2tj4An2vuGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) where some post-mounted signals have been moved up higher than usual, I'm assuming to make the pedestrian signals more visible to drivers.

Some of these seem awkward enough that I wonder if the engineers did a calculation incorrectly, and realized the error only when it was too late to mount properly. I can't readily think of an example, but I recall more than a few intersections where one direction's pole-mounted signals will be at a different height than the pole-mounted signals for the other direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 20, 2020, 02:44:16 AM
Question for anyone interested:

There are two left turns in the Seattle area where dedicated left turn signals are not located directly overhead, on the far-side of the intersection:

228 St SE @ 10 Ave SE in Bothell (https://goo.gl/maps/1JyXh4XaiA6WmtAf9)
NE 116 St @ 96 Ave NE in Kirkland (https://goo.gl/maps/GMLXyGr6G1wCgn1F9)

In both cases, there is an overhead near-side mast-mounted turn signal, and a far-left pole-mounted turn signal.

Which of these signals (in either case) would be considered the primary signal face?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on March 20, 2020, 05:10:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2020, 02:31:20 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:12:40 AM
From my experience living in an area where all signals are 12" but driving on roads with 8" post-mounted signals a fair amount, I personally think 8" post-mounted signals are fine, but 12" signals are definitely noticeably more visible. Other than slight cost savings, I don't think there's really any benefit in using 8" signals. Personally, I'd prefer if 12" signals were used consistently everywhere.

The inconsistencies are pretty bizarre. I noticed at the new Mountain Highway interchange that the improved Keith Road uses all 12" signals, but the ramp signals (though not yet turned on) are using 8"/12" combo signals (https://goo.gl/maps/v2RT3Z5pAdBouWMy6) as is common along Provincially-maintained routes.

Quote from: bcroadguy on March 16, 2020, 06:50:46 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 16, 2020, 03:45:16 AM
Note in that link that another BC oddity is the general preference (outside of Vancouver proper) to mounted secondary signals and pedestrian signals at the same height. In these cases, 12" signals are a little larger, and start to butt in to the mountain position. But this is a stretch, I will admit.

I don't think it's a huge stretch. There are a  few (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2929751,-122.7560573,3a,22.4y,61.67h,91.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DoXQT7K8pnttBYBN3oPELhw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D191.14363%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) intersections (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2787028,-122.7884607,3a,19.4y,92.14h,90.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NpoApg0fxJ2tj4An2vuGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) where some post-mounted signals have been moved up higher than usual, I'm assuming to make the pedestrian signals more visible to drivers.

Some of these seem awkward enough that I wonder if the engineers did a calculation incorrectly, and realized the error only when it was too late to mount properly. I can't readily think of an example, but I recall more than a few intersections where one direction's pole-mounted signals will be at a different height than the pole-mounted signals for the other direction.

I don't think so. For the first one, the signals were moved at some point. If you look at earlier Streetview images, they're mounted at the normal height. For the second one, there used to be a protected left turn signal, but the secondary signal was moved up when it was replaced with a permissive four-section signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on March 20, 2020, 05:13:18 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2020, 02:44:16 AM
Question for anyone interested:

There are two left turns in the Seattle area where dedicated left turn signals are not located directly overhead, on the far-side of the intersection:

228 St SE @ 10 Ave SE in Bothell (https://goo.gl/maps/1JyXh4XaiA6WmtAf9)
NE 116 St @ 96 Ave NE in Kirkland (https://goo.gl/maps/GMLXyGr6G1wCgn1F9)

In both cases, there is an overhead near-side mast-mounted turn signal, and a far-left pole-mounted turn signal.

Which of these signals (in either case) would be considered the primary signal face?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the overhead signal is usually considered the primary signal face?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 20, 2020, 11:42:47 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 20, 2020, 05:13:18 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2020, 02:44:16 AM
Question for anyone interested:

There are two left turns in the Seattle area where dedicated left turn signals are not located directly overhead, on the far-side of the intersection:

228 St SE @ 10 Ave SE in Bothell (https://goo.gl/maps/1JyXh4XaiA6WmtAf9)
NE 116 St @ 96 Ave NE in Kirkland (https://goo.gl/maps/GMLXyGr6G1wCgn1F9)

In both cases, there is an overhead near-side mast-mounted turn signal, and a far-left pole-mounted turn signal.

Which of these signals (in either case) would be considered the primary signal face?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the overhead signal is usually considered the primary signal face?

MUTCD Section 4D.14 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D14) (Longitudinal Positioning of Signal Faces) would suggest that the far side pole mounts are the primary signal face in both instances. A primary signal face must be at least 40 feet beyond the stop line. And both of these appear to comply with the provisions in Section 4D.13 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4d.htm#section4D13) (Lateral Positioning of Signal Faces) by having the primary signal face be within the 20° angle from center of approach for the turn lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
I think this is a decent-enough place to post this.

City of Tacoma recently installed a new RRFB outside Annie Wright School (https://goo.gl/maps/rsH2jJB7bfjR6z9a6) to better facilitate the heavy crossings that occur in this area during peak hours; it replaced(?) a permanent flashing beacon, of which I'm not a fan but which proliferate throughout Tacoma (and are probably the most common type of crossing). This RRFB was installed maybe six months ago, but the original beacon is still posted overhead and continues to flash.

Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

(https://i.imgur.com/lR6W3F9.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 24, 2020, 06:46:43 PM
In this video, I noticed a traffic light indicating right turn yield to peds in a weird way. It showed an alternating yellow arrow and a walk sign.
https://youtu.be/WxEnX11qATs?t=89
Check the video out at 1:29.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 08:18:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

Near Thornton Academy in Saco ME, this used to be the case, until the overhead flashing beacons were replaced with RRFB's. This is on US Route 1:

RRFBs with flashing beacons (Pre-August 2017) (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5060169,-70.4379975,3a,75y,38.3h,87.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4jkATfBOgXEiv_BPjM-wMA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
RRFBs, both overhead and ground mounted (Current condition) (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5060259,-70.4379831,3a,75y,38.3h,87.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1se85qim2qmKIN2X6cLD3Teg!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

MaineDOT has not approved use of PHB's in the state for pedestrian crossings. With that in mind, Maine's only PHB is about 8 km (5 mi) north from the last link above (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5678863,-70.3907419,3a,16.5y,37.35h,91.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slfn4Ptye6AIcNP1qk1gcgg!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192), being used as a firefighter signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 08:48:24 PM
I noticed a bit of a signage quirk on this signal in Portsmouth NH (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0864312,-70.7875085,3a,36.9y,97.73h,94.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLPd0MK89Qy9RGnRuAWTvdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). These signals were replaced in 2019, replacing a 4-section right turn signal (with no yellow arrow) with its own all arrow R-Y-G right turn signal.

New Hampshire often post signs saying "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" on most of their protected only and FYA installs for the left-turn movement. It is noted that NH allows a right turn on a red arrow after a stop, so as long as there is no sign prohibiting the movement. However, at this intersection, it seems that was overseen as placing that sign there not only bars left on red arrow, but it technically bars a right on a red arrow. Given the placement of the sign, could this be an oversight by whoever designed the signal configuration by unintentionally barring right on red arrow, or did they plan to bar right on red arrow anyways?

This signal in Somersworth NH also used to have the same quirk as well, until the red arrow was replaced with a ball. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.227003,-70.8834905,3a,17.3y,6.99h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slayN3c4BNodQ9KpySMd3wA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) That signal had no right turn overlap in the first place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
My guess is that it was an oversight. I think if they intended to prohibit the right turn on red arrow, they would have put a sign on the right side as well. They probably didn't realize the unintended effect of the sign by the left-turn signal.

But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

I've never understood this practice, and it's various equivalents (such as "LEFT ON LEFT/GREEN ARROW ONLY"). Left from two-way to two-way is prohibited on red in every state; the only time they make sense is in WA/OR/MI where left turns onto one-way streets are OK on red arrows (example of prohibition in Clark County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4qqJ9XQ8GBdAoUKb6)).

The only case for any supplemental signage (IMO) might be when the signal does not use red arrows. This practiced isn't permitted anymore, so examples of this should be dwindling.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 08:18:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

Near Thornton Academy in Saco ME, this used to be the case, until the overhead flashing beacons were replaced with RRFB's. This is on US Route 1:

RRFBs with flashing beacons (Pre-August 2017) (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5060169,-70.4379975,3a,75y,38.3h,87.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4jkATfBOgXEiv_BPjM-wMA!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
RRFBs, both overhead and ground mounted (Current condition) (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5060259,-70.4379831,3a,75y,38.3h,87.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1se85qim2qmKIN2X6cLD3Teg!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

Thanks for the reply. I fully expect this installation to eventually become a near-replica of the new setup there in Saco. Many of these seem to be simple oversights.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 10:45:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

I've never understood this practice, and it's various equivalents (such as "LEFT ON LEFT/GREEN ARROW ONLY"). Left from two-way to two-way is prohibited on red in every state; the only time they make sense is in WA/OR/MI where left turns onto one-way streets are OK on red arrows (example of prohibition in Clark County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4qqJ9XQ8GBdAoUKb6)).

The only case for any supplemental signage (IMO) might be when the signal does not use red arrows. This practice isn't permitted anymore, so examples of this should be dwindling.

When signals at our new high school in Sanford ME were being designed, the signal configuration had protected-only left turns on the leading leg, and PPLT on the lagging leg. Although the sign was never installed, one traffic engineer told me that they were planning to put a "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign on the protected only-side entering the high school. The reason was to remind drivers about that turn into the high school being protected-only as the opposing direction had PPLT, which may result in drivers on the protected-only side being confused about why they can't proceed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 26, 2020, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 10:45:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

I've never understood this practice, and it's various equivalents (such as "LEFT ON LEFT/GREEN ARROW ONLY"). Left from two-way to two-way is prohibited on red in every state; the only time they make sense is in WA/OR/MI where left turns onto one-way streets are OK on red arrows (example of prohibition in Clark County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4qqJ9XQ8GBdAoUKb6)).

The only case for any supplemental signage (IMO) might be when the signal does not use red arrows. This practice isn't permitted anymore, so examples of this should be dwindling.

When signals at our new high school in Sanford ME were being designed, the signal configuration had protected-only left turns on the leading leg, and PPLT on the lagging leg. Although the sign was never installed, one traffic engineer told me that they were planning to put a "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign on the protected only-side entering the high school. The reason was to remind drivers about that turn into the high school being protected-only as the opposing direction had PPLT, which may result in drivers on the protected-only side being confused about why they can't proceed.
what intersection in Sanford is this?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 26, 2020, 10:44:18 PM
A couple of interesting signal setups I saw a couple of weeks ago, both in NY

Long visors and louvers on the same signal heads for visual separation.
(https://maps.app.goo.gl/EWoAa4pyxvVqg9Us5)

Giving buses a protected u turn across same-direction traffic on a main-service road setup (https://maps.app.goo.gl/k6wvR92aGuyLHpV67)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on March 26, 2020, 10:56:58 PM
Fixed links:

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 26, 2020, 10:44:18 PM
A couple of interesting signal setups I saw a couple of weeks ago, both in NY

Long visors and louvers on the same signal heads for visual separation.
(https://goo.gl/maps/EhVKao7juVtFAiws6)

Giving buses a protected u turn across same-direction traffic on a main-service road setup (https://goo.gl/maps/JYz4cX1M8qVuyjpM7)

Second link: a car in the bus-only lane, and a pedestrian standing on the island next to the no pedestrians sign
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 26, 2020, 11:07:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 26, 2020, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 10:45:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

I've never understood this practice, and it's various equivalents (such as "LEFT ON LEFT/GREEN ARROW ONLY"). Left from two-way to two-way is prohibited on red in every state; the only time they make sense is in WA/OR/MI where left turns onto one-way streets are OK on red arrows (example of prohibition in Clark County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4qqJ9XQ8GBdAoUKb6)).

The only case for any supplemental signage (IMO) might be when the signal does not use red arrows. This practice isn't permitted anymore, so examples of this should be dwindling.

When signals at our new high school in Sanford ME were being designed, the signal configuration had protected-only left turns on the leading leg, and PPLT on the lagging leg. Although the sign was never installed, one traffic engineer told me that they were planning to put a "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign on the protected only-side entering the high school. The reason was to remind drivers about that turn into the high school being protected-only as the opposing direction had PPLT, which may result in drivers on the protected-only side being confused about why they can't proceed.
what intersection in Sanford is this?


iPhone

Main St and Old Mill Rd / Alumni Blvd. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4200309,-70.7568594,3a,75y,81.14h,89.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4AOJTy-f3VqZiLOQuLmZpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) These signals were installed early January 2019 and activated on 26 Feb 2019. Google Maps doesn't have an up to date image so here is what the signals look like as of 15 March 2019 (still current as of today):

(https://i.ibb.co/3CJCt6n/Screenshot-2020-03-26-at-22-54-26.png) (https://ibb.co/W2T2S8L)
Intersection Phasing (sequential lead-lag) (https://i.ibb.co/nwDRYyX/Screenshot-2019-09-03-at-08-16-48.png)

The doghouse on the left will be replaced with a(n) FYA when Sanford replaces their traffic signals in 2020-2022.

EDIT: This is where the "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign was mentioned. (https://townhallstreams.com/stream.php?location_id=82&id=14739) City Council Meeting March 20, 2018. Skip to 47:35 for the signage explanation. 24:18 is where the entirety of the project begins.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on March 27, 2020, 06:57:49 PM
One of the first FYA signals in District 6:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8873981,-75.4023402,3a,15y,288.15h,98.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D349.79083%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This one happens to be two Econolite Buttonback 4-section signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 27, 2020, 07:04:54 PM
^^^
I like the near-side signals. Nice touch.

Speaking of: the near-side FYA looks to be a McCain? Am I seeing that right?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 27, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Saw this earlier today in this video. Is Caltrans adding yellow reflective tape on their new signal installations, or is this a just a city/town decision?


Redwood City near YouTube headquarters (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6274693,-122.4251252,3a,75y,319.03h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKduG_K-D7iMOZieEJscLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 28, 2020, 12:36:55 AM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 27, 2020, 06:57:49 PM
One of the first FYA signals in District 6:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8873981,-75.4023402,3a,15y,288.15h,98.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D349.79083%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This one happens to be two Econolite Buttonback 4-section signals.

Are these signals in PA?

I don't understand why a FYA was used in one direction but not the other. That can lead to yellow trap.

Putting in a 3 light FYA for the other side would prevent any issues.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:13:35 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 27, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Saw this earlier today in this video. Is Caltrans adding yellow reflective tape on their new signal installations, or is this a just a city/town decision?

Redwood City near YouTube headquarters (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6274693,-122.4251252,3a,75y,319.03h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKduG_K-D7iMOZieEJscLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

I've been seeing it sparingly, but doesn't appear to be coming from Caltrans. Other (https://goo.gl/maps/rUJEVhBJJEC5eyEt7) intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/LQaDAhk4C9ukyMUn8) nearby (https://goo.gl/maps/hz9rjop9DT381hQdA) (that were also recently updated) have them too.

For the record, Youtube's headquarters are in San Bruno (indeed near this intersection), not Redwood City.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 28, 2020, 12:45:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:13:35 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 27, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Saw this earlier today in this video. Is Caltrans adding yellow reflective tape on their new signal installations, or is this a just a city/town decision?

Redwood City near YouTube headquarters (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6274693,-122.4251252,3a,75y,319.03h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKduG_K-D7iMOZieEJscLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

I've been seeing it sparingly, but doesn't appear to be coming from Caltrans. Other (https://goo.gl/maps/rUJEVhBJJEC5eyEt7) intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/LQaDAhk4C9ukyMUn8) nearby (https://goo.gl/maps/hz9rjop9DT381hQdA) (that were also recently updated) have them too.

For the record, Youtube's headquarters are in San Bruno (indeed near this intersection), not Redwood City.

Oops my bad, meant to type San Bruno instead of Redwood City - running on little sleep this week!

The one on that Youtube video is at 4:50. It is in St Helena CA at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5053348,-122.4702566,3a,59y,215.36h,98.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3c7KN05Ouj0CO4Igcf-e2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). For some reason, they decided to keep the 8 inch (200 mm) signals. Wonder if that is a new installation, or if they just slapped on some reflective tape on the signals and kept the existing configuration like what some signals in New Hampshire are doing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7206541,-71.4428491,3a,77.4y,342.64h,95.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW2ohUv2_FC9TtVoS0mnG7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 28, 2020, 01:40:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
I think this is a decent-enough place to post this.

City of Tacoma recently installed a new RRFB outside Annie Wright School (https://goo.gl/maps/rsH2jJB7bfjR6z9a6) to better facilitate the heavy crossings that occur in this area during peak hours; it replaced(?) a permanent flashing beacon, of which I'm not a fan but which proliferate throughout Tacoma (and are probably the most common type of crossing). This RRFB was installed maybe six months ago, but the original beacon is still posted overhead and continues to flash.

Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

(https://i.imgur.com/lR6W3F9.jpg)

There is nothing in FHWA's Interim Approval 21 document prohibiting a continuously flashing beacon from operating above a crosswalk with RRFBs in this manner. However, part of the draw for installing RRFBs is that it is a pedestrian-activated warning device which is only going to flash when the warning condition is relevant ("hey, a pedestrian is crossing right now"). Contrast this to a continuously-flashing beacon ("hey, there could maybe be a pedestrian here").

I believe there are studies out that show continuously-flashing beacons at crosswalks lose effectiveness over time because drivers get used to the beacon warning of a condition that is not always present. So from that perspective, I don't think a continuously-flashing beacon should be used in conjunction with RRFBs–if the crosswalk/school crossing signs and pavement markings aren't enough to indicate the crosswalk exists, an overhead beacon isn't going to help much more. The RRFB flash pattern is incredibly attention-grabbing by itself, which (at least in my experience) invokes a high driver yield rate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 28, 2020, 12:45:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:13:35 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 27, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Saw this earlier today in this video. Is Caltrans adding yellow reflective tape on their new signal installations, or is this a just a city/town decision?

Redwood City near YouTube headquarters (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6274693,-122.4251252,3a,75y,319.03h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKduG_K-D7iMOZieEJscLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

I've been seeing it sparingly, but doesn't appear to be coming from Caltrans. Other (https://goo.gl/maps/rUJEVhBJJEC5eyEt7) intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/LQaDAhk4C9ukyMUn8) nearby (https://goo.gl/maps/hz9rjop9DT381hQdA) (that were also recently updated) have them too.

For the record, Youtube's headquarters are in San Bruno (indeed near this intersection), not Redwood City.

Oops my bad, meant to type San Bruno instead of Redwood City - running on little sleep this week!

The one on that Youtube video is at 4:50. It is in St Helena CA at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5053348,-122.4702566,3a,59y,215.36h,98.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3c7KN05Ouj0CO4Igcf-e2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). For some reason, they decided to keep the 8 inch (200 mm) signals. Wonder if that is a new installation, or if they just slapped on some reflective tape on the signals and kept the existing configuration like what some signals in New Hampshire are doing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7206541,-71.4428491,3a,77.4y,342.64h,95.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW2ohUv2_FC9TtVoS0mnG7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

All good! Not like Redwood City isn't known for being the headquarters for other groups as well.

For the record, I'm not able to watch the video. "Bad Drivers of [Napa Valley]" banned me years ago. I told him he was a shit driver a while ago, and that his videos were boring for including stuff that everyone does all the time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:52:28 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 28, 2020, 01:40:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
I think this is a decent-enough place to post this.

City of Tacoma recently installed a new RRFB outside Annie Wright School (https://goo.gl/maps/rsH2jJB7bfjR6z9a6) to better facilitate the heavy crossings that occur in this area during peak hours; it replaced(?) a permanent flashing beacon, of which I'm not a fan but which proliferate throughout Tacoma (and are probably the most common type of crossing). This RRFB was installed maybe six months ago, but the original beacon is still posted overhead and continues to flash.

Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

(https://i.imgur.com/lR6W3F9.jpg)

There is nothing in FHWA's Interim Approval 21 document prohibiting a continuously flashing beacon from operating above a crosswalk with RRFBs in this manner. However, part of the draw for installing RRFBs is that it is a pedestrian-activated warning device which is only going to flash when the warning condition is relevant ("hey, a pedestrian is crossing right now"). Contrast this to a continuously-flashing beacon ("hey, there could maybe be a pedestrian here").

I believe there are studies out that show continuously-flashing beacons at crosswalks lose effectiveness over time because drivers get used to the beacon warning of a condition that is not always present. So from that perspective, I don't think a continuously-flashing beacon should be used in conjunction with RRFBs–if the crosswalk/school crossing signs and pavement markings aren't enough to indicate the crosswalk exists, an overhead beacon isn't going to help much more. The RRFB flash pattern is incredibly attention-grabbing by itself, which (at least in my experience) invokes a high driver yield rate.

I can understand the lack of effectiveness. I suspect that those around schools are fairly well observed, due to the sheer number of regular crossings, but those that are in seemingly-random locations with even more random pedestrian arrivals are probably less effective due to the constantly-flashing beacon.

I did not test the effectiveness of the crosswalk without hitting the RRFB; as someone who walks almost more than I drive, it's hard for me to wait at a crossing for cars to stop. 99% of the time, I find a gap and dash through it. But one of these days, I'm going back to that crossing and will be doing some field testing on how long takes for me to stand there before someone stops without hitting the RRFB button.

One thing I'm not totally keen on, and which can be seen in my photo, is the placement of the new post-mounted crossing signs. These are lovely, of course, but I wish they were placed further back from the road. Right now, drivers approaching the crosswalk may not be able to see a smaller person behind the pole on their side of the street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on March 29, 2020, 01:32:53 PM
Isn't there a large Oracle complex near or in Redwood City?  Used to be when I lived in San Mateo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 29, 2020, 01:50:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:52:28 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 28, 2020, 01:40:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 05:03:25 PM
I think this is a decent-enough place to post this.

City of Tacoma recently installed a new RRFB outside Annie Wright School (https://goo.gl/maps/rsH2jJB7bfjR6z9a6) to better facilitate the heavy crossings that occur in this area during peak hours; it replaced(?) a permanent flashing beacon, of which I'm not a fan but which proliferate throughout Tacoma (and are probably the most common type of crossing). This RRFB was installed maybe six months ago, but the original beacon is still posted overhead and continues to flash.

Is it OK to combine RRFBs with permanent-flashing beacons? Or no? Part of me doesn't actually mind it, as it continues to remind passing drives that this is a crosswalk, so when it goes into rapid-flashing mode, drivers might be more prepared to stop.

(https://i.imgur.com/lR6W3F9.jpg)

There is nothing in FHWA's Interim Approval 21 document prohibiting a continuously flashing beacon from operating above a crosswalk with RRFBs in this manner. However, part of the draw for installing RRFBs is that it is a pedestrian-activated warning device which is only going to flash when the warning condition is relevant ("hey, a pedestrian is crossing right now"). Contrast this to a continuously-flashing beacon ("hey, there could maybe be a pedestrian here").

I believe there are studies out that show continuously-flashing beacons at crosswalks lose effectiveness over time because drivers get used to the beacon warning of a condition that is not always present. So from that perspective, I don't think a continuously-flashing beacon should be used in conjunction with RRFBs–if the crosswalk/school crossing signs and pavement markings aren't enough to indicate the crosswalk exists, an overhead beacon isn't going to help much more. The RRFB flash pattern is incredibly attention-grabbing by itself, which (at least in my experience) invokes a high driver yield rate.

I can understand the lack of effectiveness. I suspect that those around schools are fairly well observed, due to the sheer number of regular crossings, but those that are in seemingly-random locations with even more random pedestrian arrivals are probably less effective due to the constantly-flashing beacon.

I did not test the effectiveness of the crosswalk without hitting the RRFB; as someone who walks almost more than I drive, it's hard for me to wait at a crossing for cars to stop. 99% of the time, I find a gap and dash through it. But one of these days, I'm going back to that crossing and will be doing some field testing on how long takes for me to stand there before someone stops without hitting the RRFB button.

One thing I'm not totally keen on, and which can be seen in my photo, is the placement of the new post-mounted crossing signs. These are lovely, of course, but I wish they were placed further back from the road. Right now, drivers approaching the crosswalk may not be able to see a smaller person behind the pole on their side of the street.

Looking at the photo again and confirming with your street view link, it appears that this crosswalk was reconstructed with pedestrian bulb-outs. Having the crosswalk signs closer to the road helps increase the visibility of the crosswalk (which was one of your concerns), especially as there appears to be on-street parking on both sides of the road. Since the signposts also typically incorporate the actuation button, having the posts closer to the road minimizes the distance between the button and the actual crosswalk (which in turn allows the RRFB flash time to be shorter). But I don't think these posts are so thick that a kid would be completely hidden by them.

Speaking of the buttons: It appears the sign on the left does not have an actuation button, but the right side does. Odd...perhaps the installation wasn't finished yet at time of photo?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 29, 2020, 02:17:04 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 29, 2020, 01:50:14 PM
Looking at the photo again and confirming with your street view link, it appears that this crosswalk was reconstructed with pedestrian bulb-outs. Having the crosswalk signs closer to the road helps increase the visibility of the crosswalk (which was one of your concerns), especially as there appears to be on-street parking on both sides of the road. Since the signposts also typically incorporate the actuation button, having the posts closer to the road minimizes the distance between the button and the actual crosswalk (which in turn allows the RRFB flash time to be shorter). But I don't think these posts are so thick that a kid would be completely hidden by them.

Speaking of the buttons: It appears the sign on the left does not have an actuation button, but the right side does. Odd...perhaps the installation wasn't finished yet at time of photo?

I'm definitely for the bulb-outs, but I thought it was odd that the sign-posts weren't situated on the opposite sides of the curb ramp. I suppose it's a minor thing, but it was something I noticed.

The activation button is just out of view on the left. I have no idea why they decided to place it there.

Quote from: Rothman on March 29, 2020, 01:32:53 PM
Isn't there a large Oracle complex near or in Redwood City?  Used to be when I lived in San Mateo.

Huge, yeah (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5305273,-122.2629342,881m/data=!3m1!1e3).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 31, 2020, 12:37:07 AM
Does anyone have a clue why some intersections near Greater Boston use 4 section signals that look like they could be used for FYA when they are really only used for protected only phasing? These signals have been around before MA converted to FYA. This isn't to be confused with the new FYA signals that have popped up in Massachusetts statewide. These signals are RA-Y-YA-GA. The RA and GA are used like an FYA, but the SYA is where the FYA is and the spot where the SYA is isn't used. In fact, one intersection (marked with an *) I thought was a double protected/permissive left but it's really not.

Middlesex Tpke at 128 South* in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4793825,-71.2162445,3a,27.3y,151.62h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFSgYF5HHZo6ztL6pXp5IMQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Burlington Mall in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4807876,-71.2172349,3a,67.6y,0.37h,100.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spDULd5orv8Xqjy0htd-Oeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Burlington Mall Rd in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4843963,-71.2197271,3a,65.2y,146.46h,92.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgzbWN3-un90BRNm8ByvFjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Wheeler Rd in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4756447,-71.2138894,3a,67.6y,160.31h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL6RRp30lZoQr_bEomz3q9Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Route 28 at William St in Burlington MA. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4853915,-71.1002388,3a,71.1y,181.29h,91.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfieWBdztuPZttO8Ury4lcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) You can see the yellow ball and arrow light up at the same time. (https://youtu.be/iLtKu1ETNXY?t=906)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 31, 2020, 11:06:29 AM
^ My only guess is that they reused hardware from a previous installation or setup. Doesn't make sense otherwise, especially with two yellow indications in a protected-only phasing scheme.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 31, 2020, 11:41:41 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 31, 2020, 12:37:07 AM
Does anyone have a clue why some intersections near Greater Boston use 4 section signals that look like they could be used for FYA when they are really only used for protected only phasing? These signals have been around before MA converted to FYA. This isn't to be confused with the new FYA signals that have popped up in Massachusetts statewide. These signals are RA-Y-YA-GA. The RA and GA are used like an FYA, but the SYA is where the FYA is and the spot where the SYA is isn't used. In fact, one intersection (marked with an *) I thought was a double protected/permissive left but it's really not.

Middlesex Tpke at 128 South* in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4793825,-71.2162445,3a,27.3y,151.62h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFSgYF5HHZo6ztL6pXp5IMQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Burlington Mall in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4807876,-71.2172349,3a,67.6y,0.37h,100.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spDULd5orv8Xqjy0htd-Oeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Burlington Mall Rd in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4843963,-71.2197271,3a,65.2y,146.46h,92.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgzbWN3-un90BRNm8ByvFjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Middlesex Tpke at Wheeler Rd in Burlington MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4756447,-71.2138894,3a,67.6y,160.31h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL6RRp30lZoQr_bEomz3q9Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Route 28 at William St in Burlington MA. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4853915,-71.1002388,3a,71.1y,181.29h,91.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfieWBdztuPZttO8Ury4lcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) You can see the yellow ball and arrow light up at the same time. (https://youtu.be/iLtKu1ETNXY?t=906)
These are so common everywhere. In my town they show the yellow ball and yellow arrow at the same time. In other spots it's just the yellow arrow lighting up. One spot was a 4 section with RB RA YA GA, and the red ball lighted up when the crosswalk was on.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 31, 2020, 04:43:05 PM
In Richmond, BC, the yellow arrow and yellow orb come on at the same time (https://goo.gl/maps/kpLxVSbWGc5Lvbvd9). This occurs at three-section protected-only signals; the bottom arrow is a bimodal green/yellow arrow, and the other indications are orbs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 01, 2020, 12:05:41 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 26, 2020, 11:07:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 26, 2020, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 24, 2020, 10:45:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

I've never understood this practice, and it's various equivalents (such as "LEFT ON LEFT/GREEN ARROW ONLY"). Left from two-way to two-way is prohibited on red in every state; the only time they make sense is in WA/OR/MI where left turns onto one-way streets are OK on red arrows (example of prohibition in Clark County, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/4qqJ9XQ8GBdAoUKb6)).

The only case for any supplemental signage (IMO) might be when the signal does not use red arrows. This practice isn't permitted anymore, so examples of this should be dwindling.

When signals at our new high school in Sanford ME were being designed, the signal configuration had protected-only left turns on the leading leg, and PPLT on the lagging leg. Although the sign was never installed, one traffic engineer told me that they were planning to put a "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign on the protected only-side entering the high school. The reason was to remind drivers about that turn into the high school being protected-only as the opposing direction had PPLT, which may result in drivers on the protected-only side being confused about why they can't proceed.
what intersection in Sanford is this?


iPhone

Main St and Old Mill Rd / Alumni Blvd. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4200309,-70.7568594,3a,75y,81.14h,89.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4AOJTy-f3VqZiLOQuLmZpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) These signals were installed early January 2019 and activated on 26 Feb 2019. Google Maps doesn't have an up to date image so here is what the signals look like as of 15 March 2019 (still current as of today):

(https://i.ibb.co/3CJCt6n/Screenshot-2020-03-26-at-22-54-26.png) (https://ibb.co/W2T2S8L)
Intersection Phasing (sequential lead-lag) (https://i.ibb.co/nwDRYyX/Screenshot-2019-09-03-at-08-16-48.png)

The doghouse on the left will be replaced with a(n) FYA when Sanford replaces their traffic signals in 2020-2022.

EDIT: This is where the "NO TURN ON RED ARROW" sign was mentioned. (https://townhallstreams.com/stream.php?location_id=82&id=14739) City Council Meeting March 20, 2018. Skip to 47:35 for the signage explanation. 24:18 is where the entirety of the project begins.

Of course, having the lead signal protected left only is designed to prevent yellow trap.  the sign just reinforces it.

Yes, the sign is technically unnecessary with the red arrow signal, but we really don't want the cars here turning at any other time than green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 04, 2020, 08:11:01 PM
Definitely haven't seen a mast-mounted signal configured this way.

Division & I Sts, Tacoma, WA

(https://i.imgur.com/hAGWRP2.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 04, 2020, 08:40:30 PM
That's called a plumbizer mount and is standard in California and probably other Southwestern states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 05, 2020, 12:56:14 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 04, 2020, 08:40:30 PM
That's called a plumbizer mount and is standard in California and probably other Southwestern states.

I don't know if that's right. Most pole-mounted signals that I've seen in California use some kind of split-arm mounting mechanism, like this (https://goo.gl/maps/q8qUMcHpVXBpEAvaA). This is also the norm in WA (https://goo.gl/maps/tCh9S9dfdzBU7YKT8) (this is two blocks up from the image above), but this is an odd one from what I've seen.

Overhead signals are very often mounted using a plumbizer, but I don't believe it to be the standard for pole-/mast-mounted signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 05, 2020, 08:14:03 PM
It's possible that older pole-plumbizer mounts have been replaced with the style in your photos. In fact the first one I ever noticed in Walnut Creek, Calif. in the mid-1990's had been replaced by 2010. Also the one in your first photo in Tacoma, Wa. looks like an old one, with its faded green paint.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 05, 2020, 10:01:32 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 05, 2020, 08:14:03 PM
It's possible that older pole-plumbizer mounts have been replaced with the style in your photos. In fact the first one I ever noticed in Walnut Creek, Calif. in the mid-1990's had been replaced by 2010. Also the one in your first photo in Tacoma, Wa. looks like an old one, with its faded green paint.

Weirdly, the one in my original post (reply #2785) was only installed about ten years ago, after the original 8-8-8 signal was replaced. The original used the two-arm type assembly (https://goo.gl/maps/4wgWmJadjGooQUiX7) (whatever the hell it's called). The current pole-mounted signal (seen in my photo) was only installed in 2013 or 2014.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on April 05, 2020, 10:23:42 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on March 27, 2020, 06:57:49 PM
One of the first FYA signals in District 6:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8873981,-75.4023402,3a,15y,288.15h,98.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLVBFOAB_J8p78ngRvEXgSw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D349.79083%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This one happens to be two Econolite Buttonback 4-section signals.

There's a second intersection not too far away on US 1 with one facing each direction at the entrance to Thomas Chevrolet/Rocky Run YMCA that was installed within the last several months. It's too new to even be on street view (https://goo.gl/maps/UiEGFdTwqAuFXcji6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 05, 2020, 11:09:04 PM
Apparently San Francisco is phasing out the "8-inch (200mm) traffic signal in a circle assembly (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7786207,-122.4147537,3a,21.6y,33.17h,94.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1xMC1NZHKusYjryx-vCk5g!2e0!5s20171001T000000!7i16384!8i8192)" and installing new 12-inch (300mm) signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7786106,-122.4147663,3a,15y,38.76h,96.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLHIMEayV6-xFo4YQUF4j-Q!2e0!5s20190301T000000!7i16384!8i8192) mounted on a pole-plumbizer mount. I wonder why...

Quote from: Ian on April 05, 2020, 10:23:42 PM
There's a second intersection not too far away on US 1 with one facing each direction at the entrance to Thomas Chevrolet/Rocky Run YMCA that was installed within the last several months. It's too new to even be on street view (https://goo.gl/maps/UiEGFdTwqAuFXcji6).

Are the 8-inch (200mm) traffic signal on the sides meant for pedestrians, like what Connecticut does for ped signals at it's older installations (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4551163,-73.403131,3a,17.6y,18.14h,86.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1surYluEgS5QJYZ5K2SIE4ew!2e0!5s20140701T000000!7i13312!8i6656)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Ian on April 06, 2020, 12:22:05 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 05, 2020, 11:09:04 PM
Quote from: Ian on April 05, 2020, 10:23:42 PM
There's a second intersection not too far away on US 1 with one facing each direction at the entrance to Thomas Chevrolet/Rocky Run YMCA that was installed within the last several months. It's too new to even be on street view (https://goo.gl/maps/UiEGFdTwqAuFXcji6).

Are the 8-inch (200mm) traffic signal on the sides meant for pedestrians, like what Connecticut does for ped signals at it's older installations (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4551163,-73.403131,3a,17.6y,18.14h,86.17t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1surYluEgS5QJYZ5K2SIE4ew!2e0!5s20140701T000000!7i13312!8i6656)?

You are correct. Connecticut is actually the only other state that I've seen this done consistently.

(also, hello fellow Black Bear!)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 06, 2020, 10:27:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 05, 2020, 10:01:32 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 05, 2020, 08:14:03 PM
It's possible that older pole-plumbizer mounts have been replaced with the style in your photos. In fact the first one I ever noticed in Walnut Creek, Calif. in the mid-1990's had been replaced by 2010. Also the one in your first photo in Tacoma, Wa. looks like an old one, with its faded green paint.

Weirdly, the one in my original post (reply #2785) was only installed about ten years ago, after the original 8-8-8 signal was replaced. The original used the two-arm type assembly (https://goo.gl/maps/4wgWmJadjGooQUiX7) (whatever the hell it's called). The current pole-mounted signal (seen in my photo) was only installed in 2013 or 2014.

SignBridge:

Here's an example of what I find to be far more common. This is just up the street from my first image. It too was upgraded from 8-8-8 to 12-8-8 in 2013 or 2014, but used the same mounting mechanism as before (unlike my earlier image). I find this pole-mounting method to be far, far more common:

(https://i.imgur.com/dWJ9UbE.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 06, 2020, 10:34:25 PM
Right and that's definitely a better quality mounting. BTW, why does that city play around with 12-8-8 instead of just going with all 12-inch which is more common and better in my opinion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 07, 2020, 12:34:37 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 06, 2020, 10:34:25 PM
Right and that's definitely a better quality mounting. BTW, why does that city play around with 12-8-8 instead of just going with all 12-inch which is more common and better in my opinion.

Their game-plan a few years ago was to replace almost all incandescent signals with LEDs, and upgrade all red indications to 12-inch (any that hadn't yet been replaced or installed new). I assume they would have replaced all indications with proper funding.

New signals use all 12-inch indications (https://goo.gl/maps/XFH59MrWoHdPd95C6), with backplates and retroreflective borders. There was a period of time in the 2000s where backplates were installed without the retroreflective borders (https://goo.gl/maps/LUotbg4X1Wqd6WiS9) (this one dates to 2003). I believe the last 12-8-8 signal was installed in 2007, along S Hosmer St outside a new shopping center (https://goo.gl/maps/GzmVYqzka9xkDwzbA). Why exactly the new signal in 2003 got all 12-inch indications, yet the one in 2007 did not, I do not know nor understand. The city also no longer uses 4 or 5 section "yield on green" signals, opting for FYA signals now. This new practice replaces decades of "Tacoma Towers (https://goo.gl/maps/7ckBWnS4YxxyBwCz7)", which were basically just 5 section towers where two 12-inch arrows were tacked on to the bottom of the left-most signal. Newer 12-inch 5-section left turn signals used tower configuration (https://goo.gl/maps/BaS2bSz3yY9jM1R19)s, even when they weren't tacked on like before. Doghouses are very rare in Tacoma.

I don't know about the rest of the country, but 12-8-8 signals are very common in Pierce County, WA. I don't know why this is, but they are all over Tacoma and many (https://goo.gl/maps/5nnpavLW2gcYj1Pf7) surrounding (https://goo.gl/maps/rqNwr7qgCmBgcgn88) municipalities (https://goo.gl/maps/mmnPaW79g3aMz2MG9). Pierce County made them the standard signal until around the early or mid 2000s, but have been upgrading them to all 12-inch indications over the last ten years. Tacoma has literally thousands of 8-inch displays. It would take a long time to replace them all. Recent initiatives to upgrade these signals have taken place, by replacing many protected-only left turn signals with FYAs, but this has been slow to happen because new computers are required to run them.

(I hope you were looking for a giant response! I've done a lot of research on Tacoma and it's very strange signal history.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 07, 2020, 07:54:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 07, 2020, 12:34:37 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 06, 2020, 10:34:25 PM
Right and that's definitely a better quality mounting. BTW, why does that city play around with 12-8-8 instead of just going with all 12-inch which is more common and better in my opinion.

Their game-plan a few years ago was to replace almost all incandescent signals with LEDs, and upgrade all red indications to 12-inch (any that hadn't yet been replaced or installed new). I assume they would have replaced all indications with proper funding.

New signals use all 12-inch indications (https://goo.gl/maps/XFH59MrWoHdPd95C6), with backplates and retroreflective borders. There was a period of time in the 2000s where backplates were installed without the retroreflective borders (https://goo.gl/maps/LUotbg4X1Wqd6WiS9) (this one dates to 2003). I believe the last 12-8-8 signal was installed in 2007, along S Hosmer St outside a new shopping center (https://goo.gl/maps/GzmVYqzka9xkDwzbA). Why exactly the new signal in 2003 got all 12-inch indications, yet the one in 2007 did not, I do not know nor understand. The city also no longer uses 4 or 5 section "yield on green" signals, opting for FYA signals now. This new practice replaces decades of "Tacoma Towers (https://goo.gl/maps/7ckBWnS4YxxyBwCz7)", which were basically just 5 section towers where two 12-inch arrows were tacked on to the bottom of the left-most signal. Newer 12-inch 5-section left turn signals used tower configuration (https://goo.gl/maps/BaS2bSz3yY9jM1R19)s, even when they weren't tacked on like before. Doghouses are very rare in Tacoma.

I don't know about the rest of the country, but 12-8-8 signals are very common in Pierce County, WA. I don't know why this is, but they are all over Tacoma and many (https://goo.gl/maps/5nnpavLW2gcYj1Pf7) surrounding (https://goo.gl/maps/rqNwr7qgCmBgcgn88) municipalities (https://goo.gl/maps/mmnPaW79g3aMz2MG9). Pierce County made them the standard signal until around the early or mid 2000s, but have been upgrading them to all 12-inch indications over the last ten years. Tacoma has literally thousands of 8-inch displays. It would take a long time to replace them all. Recent initiatives to upgrade these signals have taken place, by replacing many protected-only left turn signals with FYAs, but this has been slow to happen because new computers are required to run them.

(I hope you were looking for a giant response! I've done a lot of research on Tacoma and it's very strange signal history.)

In my view, it makes sense for a city to prioritize replacing protected only lefts with FYAs because of the extra functionality that the new signal provides.  With a limited budget, I would certainly do that over changing 8-8-8 signals to 12-12-12.  And in many ways, converting 8-8-8 to 12-8-8 is a happy compromise.  It is a cheaper conversion.  It doesn't require changing the signal mounts in most cases.  And, it emphasizes the red.  Given the traffic calming trends in many places, it doesn't seem like DOTs want to convert signals to encourage people to drive faster, so no need to emphasize the green.

Of course, new signals are a different matter, as laws may require new installations of 12-12-12, but generally old signal hardware does not need to be converted under law unless there is a safety issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 07, 2020, 05:26:08 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 07, 2020, 07:54:06 AM
In my view, it makes sense for a city to prioritize replacing protected only lefts with FYAs because of the extra functionality that the new signal provides.  With a limited budget, I would certainly do that over changing 8-8-8 signals to 12-12-12.  And in many ways, converting 8-8-8 to 12-8-8 is a happy compromise.  It is a cheaper conversion.  It doesn't require changing the signal mounts in most cases.  And, it emphasizes the red.  Given the traffic calming trends in many places, it doesn't seem like DOTs want to convert signals to encourage people to drive faster, so no need to emphasize the green.

Of course, new signals are a different matter, as laws may require new installations of 12-12-12, but generally old signal hardware does not need to be converted under law unless there is a safety issue.

I can't help but think that the MUTCD still permits 8-inch signals because, at the distance from the stop line where it is permitted, it is sufficient. After all, lens sizes should be scaled appropriately for reach road. Low speed roads don't need huge signals, but freeways might benefit from signals even larger than 12 inches. Maybe.

Tacoma officials have told me, through school projects that I've been involved with, that they are not willing to widen any additional roads within city limits. To the extent necessary, they are focusing their efforts on improving intersection operations, and increasing multimodal connections through designating roads as primary routes for cycling, transit, freight, etc, or a combination of those. FYA signals have helped the city in this regard. Many of the FYAs that have been installed use leading pedestrian intervals, with automatic walk signals. The red arrow stays lit for about four seconds, before the FYA activates. The conversion of those 8-inch reds does meet the goal you mention. When you look at intersections like this one below, it seems to me that the 8-inch green signals are perfectly adequate for the low-speed environment (which describes most of Tacoma's roads):

(https://i.imgur.com/bcGOoAe.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 01:47:15 PM
Yellow signals? In California?
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7030995,-122.4858098,3a,39.2y,334.05h,97.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7R2T3iUgvaDP-fmGCg2UYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 11, 2020, 05:24:40 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 01:47:15 PM
Yellow signals? In California?
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7030995,-122.4858098,3a,39.2y,334.05h,97.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7R2T3iUgvaDP-fmGCg2UYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That's definitely strange. Reminds me that I've not seen any yellow signals in Oregon either. Washington, on the other hand...

Fire station signals tend to be a little more unique than the average setup. I think they're one of the few situations where some municipalities call for red-colored signal housings. But California doesn't call for yellow signal housings in any particular situation that I've seen, so this is almost certainly a one-off setup. Well found.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 11, 2020, 05:59:41 PM
Speaking of California: something that seems ridiculously rare in California but is otherwise pretty common elsewhere:

Double left turn with two overhead left turn signals (https://goo.gl/maps/AVCshSjDp8UkYMFK6) (Burlingame).

Many would say, "why Jake, that's completely normal!" Not in California; the state pretty much universally uses '# of lanes minus one' for determining overhead signals. Hell, they have triple left turns with only one overhead signal, such as southbound Galleria at Roseville Parkway (https://goo.gl/maps/B1TTBLmnKuErcik89) (in Roseville).

Now, to be clear, I've seen California use two overhead left turn signals for two lanes, but it seems largely reserved for situations where the double left is the primary movement, or when the double left turn is segregated away from the mainlines. Neither are the case at the Burlingame intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
So how common are doghouse signals post-mounted (or even mounted in the median)? Usually, if post mounted signals are posted, a bimodal 4-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5010176,-70.4437816,3a,16.4y,76.1h,91.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DzDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D90.963165%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or vertical 5-section signal stack (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4654857,-70.7965145,3a,35.7y,222.25h,93.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEnaBbMTVP7UnE-jGCI3O9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is used instead...

Median-mounted doghouse:
Centre St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4251969,-71.0679975,3a,19.4y,83.44h,91.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXvaseP-n6ufyKs_meisbiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Post-mounted doghouse:
Centre St and Commercial St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4257325,-71.0740917,3a,57.6y,104.88h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7AePfXMxlObftPG-Or86yQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Nevada Street and Francis Ave, Spokane WA (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.715152,-117.3953272,3a,75y,183.05h,81.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIC-zC1xNRjjiu8FgvCHT8w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 08:01:33 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
So how common are doghouse signals post-mounted (or even mounted in the median)? Usually, if post mounted signals are posted, a bimodal 4-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5010176,-70.4437816,3a,16.4y,76.1h,91.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DzDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D90.963165%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or vertical 5-section signal stack (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4654857,-70.7965145,3a,35.7y,222.25h,93.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEnaBbMTVP7UnE-jGCI3O9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is used instead...

Median-mounted doghouse:
Centre St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4251969,-71.0679975,3a,19.4y,83.44h,91.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXvaseP-n6ufyKs_meisbiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Post-mounted doghouse:
Centre St and Commercial St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4257325,-71.0740917,3a,57.6y,104.88h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7AePfXMxlObftPG-Or86yQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Nevada Street and Francis Ave, Spokane WA (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.715152,-117.3953272,3a,75y,183.05h,81.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIC-zC1xNRjjiu8FgvCHT8w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

MA loves doghouses on the bottom, I could count 20+ locations with them. Spokane is a fan of them too. Also that's not Dallas phasing, just an eagle intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 12:05:41 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 08:01:33 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
So how common are doghouse signals post-mounted (or even mounted in the median)? Usually, if post mounted signals are posted, a bimodal 4-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5010176,-70.4437816,3a,16.4y,76.1h,91.13t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DzDdoVbxPg5oloE6gNOsbyw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D90.963165%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or vertical 5-section signal stack (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4654857,-70.7965145,3a,35.7y,222.25h,93.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEnaBbMTVP7UnE-jGCI3O9g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is used instead...

Median-mounted doghouse:
Centre St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4251969,-71.0679975,3a,19.4y,83.44h,91.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXvaseP-n6ufyKs_meisbiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Post-mounted doghouse:
Centre St and Commercial St, Malden MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4257325,-71.0740917,3a,57.6y,104.88h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7AePfXMxlObftPG-Or86yQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Nevada Street and Francis Ave, Spokane WA (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.715152,-117.3953272,3a,75y,183.05h,81.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIC-zC1xNRjjiu8FgvCHT8w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

MA loves doghouses on the bottom, I could count 20+ locations with them. Spokane is a fan of them too. Also that's not Dallas phasing, just an eagle intersection.

I would also call them a seagull. I think the green up arrows make it not Dallas phasing.

Spokane is the place that comes to mind when I think of post-mounted doghouses, though they do utilise 4-section protected/permissive left turns for lagging lefts (example here (https://goo.gl/maps/X36Fhr6aMhG6QcrTA)).

Spokane has installed a substantial number of flashing yellow arrows over the last few years, so I think the era of the post-mounted doghouse is coming to end in this part of the world.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 12, 2020, 02:25:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 12:05:41 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 08:01:33 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Also that's not Dallas phasing, just an eagle intersection.

I would also call them a seagull. I think the green up arrows make it not Dallas phasing.

Dallas Phasing specifically refers to the practice of using 5-section displays with the circular yellow and green indications being visibility-limited, to allow the circular displays of the left turn face to operate independently from the adjacent through signals–specifically to allow permissive left turns to proceed on circular while adjacent through traffic display red, to allow implementation of lead-lag left turn phasing in efforts to achieve better signal coordination along an arterial.

"Seagull" intersection is such a weird phrase for this setup–not sure why there's such a prevalence for trying to name certain traffic control treatments after birds... In Nevada, this is referred to as a "High-T" intersection (whether signalized or not).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 04:29:17 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 12, 2020, 02:25:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 12:05:41 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 08:01:33 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Also that's not Dallas phasing, just an eagle intersection.

I would also call them a seagull. I think the green up arrows make it not Dallas phasing.

Dallas Phasing specifically refers to the practice of using 5-section displays with the circular yellow and green indications being visibility-limited, to allow the circular displays of the left turn face to operate independently from the adjacent through signals–specifically to allow permissive left turns to proceed on circular while adjacent through traffic display red, to allow implementation of lead-lag left turn phasing in efforts to achieve better signal coordination along an arterial.

"Seagull" intersection is such a weird phrase for this setup–not sure why there's such a prevalence for trying to name certain traffic control treatments after birds... In Nevada, this is referred to as a "High-T" intersection (whether signalized or not).

I've always seen "Dallas Phasing" used to refer to intersections where the left turn and through lanes have separate circular indications. This wouldn't be the case at this intersection because the through lanes use all-arrow indications. Japan does something similar: when they don't want to allow permissive turns, they keep the light red, but activate green arrows in all directions where they allow traffic to move.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 12, 2020, 06:41:37 PM
Here's an example of Dallas Phasing I found in Austin TX:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49766238718_d7ebfab38d_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iPEYWA)Dallas Phasing (https://flic.kr/p/2iPEYWA) by Petru Sofio (https://www.flickr.com/photos/155056147@N08/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 13, 2020, 10:42:47 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 04:29:17 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 12, 2020, 02:25:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 12, 2020, 12:05:41 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 08:01:33 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2020, 06:17:19 PM
Mill Road and Hastings Road, Spokane WA (Dallas Phasing as well?) (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7683895,-117.4226551,3a,32.3y,203.56h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTuqaal4_5w26CkjILeD0tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Also that's not Dallas phasing, just an eagle intersection.

While I don't often advocate changing doghouses into FYA signals, given what could be a somewhat confusing situation, I believe this would be a good candidate for the replacement.

Many of these intersections have a cyclops green arrow for straight thru traffic.  It's interesting to see RYG signal heads.  The reason for this is that there is still a pedestrian crossing, so if a ped wants to cross, these signals will turn red.  But no need for them to turn red just for cross traffic, which will turn left into the other lane.


I would also call them a seagull. I think the green up arrows make it not Dallas phasing.

Dallas Phasing specifically refers to the practice of using 5-section displays with the circular yellow and green indications being visibility-limited, to allow the circular displays of the left turn face to operate independently from the adjacent through signals–specifically to allow permissive left turns to proceed on circular while adjacent through traffic display red, to allow implementation of lead-lag left turn phasing in efforts to achieve better signal coordination along an arterial.

"Seagull" intersection is such a weird phrase for this setup–not sure why there's such a prevalence for trying to name certain traffic control treatments after birds... In Nevada, this is referred to as a "High-T" intersection (whether signalized or not).

I've always seen "Dallas Phasing" used to refer to intersections where the left turn and through lanes have separate circular indications. This wouldn't be the case at this intersection because the through lanes use all-arrow indications. Japan does something similar: when they don't want to allow permissive turns, they keep the light red, but activate green arrows in all directions where they allow traffic to move.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 13, 2020, 03:25:20 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 13, 2020, 10:42:47 AM
While I don't often advocate changing doghouses into FYA signals, given what could be a somewhat confusing situation, I believe this would be a good candidate for the replacement.

Many of these intersections have a cyclops green arrow for straight thru traffic.  It's interesting to see RYG signal heads.  The reason for this is that there is still a pedestrian crossing, so if a ped wants to cross, these signals will turn red.  But no need for them to turn red just for cross traffic, which will turn left into the other lane.

Based on what I know about Spokane, it probably will be replaced by an FYA signal in the future. They've become a lot more common.

One of the common complaints of the Seagull intersection (the term I prefer, just because visually it looks like a seagull's wings to me) is that it's not pedestrian friendly. Regular intersections aren't that great anyway, when considering crossing distances, signal timings, etc, but they go from "fine" to "not that great" the second you start adding in continuous flow movements. There are some acceptable situations of this, such as slip lanes where the angle is such that the crossing is more visible relative to older slip lane designs, but a continuous flow across the top of a T-intersection can become problematic since, more often than not, the continuous movement does not feature RYG signals to allow for pedestrian crossings. This is understandable in quiet areas with few pedestrians, but these intersections really ought to include RYG signals for the through movement to accommodate those pedestrians, even in quiet areas. If we don't modify the intersection to suit the pedestrian, the pedestrian will simply utilize the intersection in a way that meets their needs, irrespective of the apparent design. Adding in a crosswalk with RYG signals seems like a minor change to me; I don't understand why they aren't more common.


Slightly off-topic:

This talk of continuous flow movements reminds me of an interchange I designed (for myself, primarily) a while back. In the bottom right corner of the image, you can see a continuous flow movement that I've designed that would incorporate a pedestrian crossing. There seems to be two schools of thought on this: either put the crossing so that right-turning traffic must yield, or put it to the left so that left-turning traffic must yield. The vast majority of these intersections place it on the right, allowing left turns to proceed without yielding, but this might not be optimal if the heaviest movement is the left turn from the top of the "T" towards the stem, as it would be in this situation. This would permit left turns onto the on-ramp, and right turns from the off-ramp, to proceed at the same time, fully protected (although in my case, there is no right turn from the off-ramp, as that movement is accommodated by other ramps). This might not be ideal if the left turn from the off-ramp were heavy, but would be great if the primary movement was that left turn onto the on-ramp. The through traffic (along the top of the "T") would need to stop, with left turns having a green arrow, which is fairly unusual for these seagull intersections, but it's an operational advantage over a crosswalk that is on the right side of the "T". Alternatively, it could still be operated where the left turn from the off-ramp has to yield.

As well, the crossing had been designed so that the continuous movement (along the top of the "T") actually yielded to pedestrians using a zebra crossing and pedestrian crossing signs, rather than a signal. My thinking being that the movement was no different than a right-turn slip lane, except with much better visibility, so why not design it so that cars simply yield to pedestrians? I did scrap this plan, because I couldn't make the seagull island large enough to accommodate pedestrians waiting for a "WALK" signal due to limited ROW, and that the added lane needed to join with the other lane as soon as possible due to impending turns along the arterial.

Quote from: jakeroot on January 24, 2019, 04:44:07 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Kt6gf8n.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on April 13, 2020, 10:40:01 PM
Flashing red arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/ec3zKXf6r2C8VoFG9), Bellingham, Washington
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2020, 02:17:42 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 13, 2020, 10:40:01 PM
Flashing red arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/ec3zKXf6r2C8VoFG9), Bellingham, Washington

But no indication (approaching from the opposite direction) that this approach has a stop sign. I don't get it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on April 14, 2020, 04:13:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2020, 01:47:15 PM
Yellow signals? In California?
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7030995,-122.4858098,3a,39.2y,334.05h,97.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7R2T3iUgvaDP-fmGCg2UYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm not sure if other cities in California do the same, but Long Beach has yellow bike signals:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7693271,-118.1876992,3a,71.4y,84.23h,93.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMEB50AAWkxYUzRcDzA5cqg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 14, 2020, 07:46:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2020, 02:17:42 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 13, 2020, 10:40:01 PM
Flashing red arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/ec3zKXf6r2C8VoFG9), Bellingham, Washington

But no indication (approaching from the opposite direction) that this approach has a stop sign. I don't get it.

There's a stop sign here approaching in this direction: https://goo.gl/maps/txhySnsMf1gXRN4w8

In the opposing direction, along with the cross street, they both have traffic lights.  So in effect, the direction with the right flashing red arrows is saying you gotta stop, then you can go when safe.  For the other 2 directions, you have the right of way when it's green. 

Why can't the direction with the flashing red arrows turn left though just have a regular traffic light, and have the option to turn left...just like at any other conventional intersection?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 14, 2020, 11:15:42 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 14, 2020, 07:46:52 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2020, 02:17:42 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 13, 2020, 10:40:01 PM
Flashing red arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/ec3zKXf6r2C8VoFG9), Bellingham, Washington

But no indication (approaching from the opposite direction) that this approach has a stop sign. I don't get it.

There's a stop sign here approaching in this direction: https://goo.gl/maps/txhySnsMf1gXRN4w8

In the opposing direction, along with the cross street, they both have traffic lights.  So in effect, the direction with the right flashing red arrows is saying you gotta stop, then you can go when safe.  For the other 2 directions, you have the right of way when it's green. 

Why can't the direction with the flashing red arrows turn left though just have a regular traffic light, and have the option to turn left...just like at any other conventional intersection?

The only thing I can think of is that since there is only one lane on Holly, they don't want traffic backed up with a car making a left that can block the traffic behind it.  From looking at a map of the area, it seems like Holly is a relatively important street and most southbound traffic will make a right on Bay and then a left on Chestnut to continue in that direction.

The only question I have is why is it allowed (or if allowed why is it a good idea) to have a stop sign when the three other directions are controlled by signal?  I can see imposing something along the lines of a solid red when Bay has green, which is a normal turn, and then maybe a flashing yellow arrow when Holly northbound has green to encourage yielding to pedestrians (and maybe yielding as well to Holly traffic that turns left onto Bay).  A single cyclops flashing red arrow does not provide the nuance of letting drivers on southbound Holly know what signal cross traffic and opposing traffic is facing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on April 16, 2020, 11:54:55 PM
Saw these on display at the Big Top Curiosity Shop in South Park, Seattle.  Somebody preserved some of the really old incandescent ped signals Seattle used to use and which I thought were gone forever.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49782663928_b7c6732411_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iR8azS)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 12:37:49 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 16, 2020, 11:54:55 PM
Saw these on display at the Big Top Curiosity Shop in South Park, Seattle.  Somebody preserved some of the really old incandescent ped signals Seattle used to use and which I thought were gone forever.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49782663928_b7c6732411_z.jpg

Odd that they are switched? Maybe that was the norm or no one cared?

There is something beautifully elegant about round pedestrian signals. Really too bad they aren't more common now. I think there are a few examples left in the US (somewhere in Florida, IIRC), but they are exceptionally rare. Perhaps extinct in the wild at this point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 03:30:13 AM
Could anyone make sense of this signal in Grapevine, Texas?...

https://goo.gl/maps/oSQHHPm4wyXLsYC79

5-section tower, but the solid green is on the bottom lens rather than center. Both directions along Hwy 26.

It's almost like they took the regular 5-section horizontal signal (where the solid green is on the far-right), and flipped it 90-degrees clockwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 02:11:07 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

At least for the second link, it looks plenty visible when approaching the bridge (https://goo.gl/maps/pRbE3S9WaDoqoUcPA). Maybe it was just meant to be a supplemental signal? Not used to seeing them placed like that, to be fair.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 05:12:01 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

I would agree.  Perhaps, they know that there are occasions when one side is closed, so the other is used for two-way traffic, yet we still have to stop traffic when the drawbridge is opened.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 05:26:50 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 05:12:01 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

I would agree.  Perhaps, they know that there are occasions when one side is closed, so the other is used for two-way traffic, yet we still have to stop traffic when the drawbridge is opened.

I don't think this is the case. The signals are only visible when on the correct side of the road. If the signals were for contraflow, the signal should be visible when the street view camera is turned around, but it's not (https://goo.gl/maps/hu9eLJV1swZ7ajte7). The signal is only visible to traffic proceeding in the correct direction. Ergo, it's almost certainly just a supplemental signal. A weird one, sure, but still more likely than for contraflow situations, since, as I just said, it wouldn't be visible when driving "the wrong way".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 07:37:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 05:26:50 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 05:12:01 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

I would agree.  Perhaps, they know that there are occasions when one side is closed, so the other is used for two-way traffic, yet we still have to stop traffic when the drawbridge is opened.

I don't think this is the case. The signals are only visible when on the correct side of the road. If the signals were for contraflow, the signal should be visible when the street view camera is turned around, but it's not (https://goo.gl/maps/hu9eLJV1swZ7ajte7). The signal is only visible to traffic proceeding in the correct direction. Ergo, it's almost certainly just a supplemental signal. A weird one, sure, but still more likely than for contraflow situations, since, as I just said, it wouldn't be visible when driving "the wrong way".

The signal head is visible in the contraflow direction, just off.  (at least that's what it looks like to me).

Of course, the signal will only be placed ahead of the drawbridge, as there is no point in stopping traffic coming off the drawbridge.



Here is another example of a contraflow drawbridge signal, in Hampton Roads VA.  (Looks like it also has the function of lane control as the contraflow signals are red).


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-eaPYErcRFIY/UM8-e-x96-I/AAAAAAAAEpU/RJbR0OL1Ejc/s640/IMG_0431.JPG
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-W7r9GysancI/UM8-fFKSvQI/AAAAAAAAEpk/v0N6C6yTYjw/s640/IMG_0432.JPG
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-kXWLxv2Ch00/UM8-gc6HF5I/AAAAAAAAEp4/7GQFK1rk7bs/s640/IMG_0441.JPG



The opposite-facing signals on the other carriageway are for contraflow situations, such as a hurricane evacuation.

https://lightsflashingbright.blogspot.com/2012/12/?m=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 17, 2020, 09:49:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 03:30:13 AM
Could anyone make sense of this signal in Grapevine, Texas?...

https://goo.gl/maps/oSQHHPm4wyXLsYC79

5-section tower, but the solid green is on the bottom lens rather than center. Both directions along Hwy 26.

It's almost like they took the regular 5-section horizontal signal (where the solid green is on the far-right), and flipped it 90-degrees clockwise.
The solid green and green arrow indications are flipped around.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.9324197,-97.0607891,3a,47.1y,332.55h,98.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5TMPddxv33E0bQOQ_OU2tg!2e0!5s20150401T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 10:55:24 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 07:37:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 05:26:50 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 17, 2020, 05:12:01 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

I would agree.  Perhaps, they know that there are occasions when one side is closed, so the other is used for two-way traffic, yet we still have to stop traffic when the drawbridge is opened.

I don't think this is the case. The signals are only visible when on the correct side of the road. If the signals were for contraflow, the signal should be visible when the street view camera is turned around, but it's not (https://goo.gl/maps/hu9eLJV1swZ7ajte7). The signal is only visible to traffic proceeding in the correct direction. Ergo, it's almost certainly just a supplemental signal. A weird one, sure, but still more likely than for contraflow situations, since, as I just said, it wouldn't be visible when driving "the wrong way".

The signal head is visible in the contraflow direction, just off.  (at least that's what it looks like to me).

Of course, the signal will only be placed ahead of the drawbridge, as there is no point in stopping traffic coming off the drawbridge.
[clipped]

I see now. I got lucky and found a street view link (posted in my quote) that shows the far-left overhead signal as visible to regular traffic, alongside the other three signals, but all other street view images show it turned off.

I wonder if it was installed while they were doing construction, and thus some occasional contraflow, and just never removed it? That would line up with why the only street view imagery of it turned on, is in 2014, apparently right after construction. They possibly hadn't got around to turning it off or removing it, instead opting to just disable the signal. I can't see why there would be any need for contraflow signals along this bridge. It's not part of evacuation route (well, I don't think it is).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 18, 2020, 02:01:13 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on April 17, 2020, 09:49:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 03:30:13 AM
Could anyone make sense of this signal in Grapevine, Texas?...

https://goo.gl/maps/oSQHHPm4wyXLsYC79

5-section tower, but the solid green is on the bottom lens rather than center. Both directions along Hwy 26.

It's almost like they took the regular 5-section horizontal signal (where the solid green is on the far-right), and flipped it 90-degrees clockwise.
The solid green and green arrow indications are flipped around.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.9324197,-97.0607891,3a,47.1y,332.55h,98.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5TMPddxv33E0bQOQ_OU2tg!2e0!5s20150401T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Actually, they're not. Standard order in a 5-section vertical stack for left turns:

[R]
[Y]
[G]
[<Y]
[<G]

I think Jake's right and they just used a display meant to be horizontal and rotated the arrow lenses. Standard order in a 5-section horizontal for left turns:

[R][Y][<Y][<G][G]
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on April 18, 2020, 02:14:20 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 18, 2020, 02:01:13 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on April 17, 2020, 09:49:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 17, 2020, 03:30:13 AM
Could anyone make sense of this signal in Grapevine, Texas?...

https://goo.gl/maps/oSQHHPm4wyXLsYC79

5-section tower, but the solid green is on the bottom lens rather than center. Both directions along Hwy 26.

It's almost like they took the regular 5-section horizontal signal (where the solid green is on the far-right), and flipped it 90-degrees clockwise.
The solid green and green arrow indications are flipped around.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.9324197,-97.0607891,3a,47.1y,332.55h,98.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5TMPddxv33E0bQOQ_OU2tg!2e0!5s20150401T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Actually, they're not. Standard order in a 5-section vertical stack for left turns:

[R]
[Y]
[G]
[<Y]
[<G]

I think Jake's right and they just used a display meant to be horizontal and rotated the arrow lenses. Standard order in a 5-section horizontal for left turns:

[R][Y][<Y][<G][G]

Is this discrepancy just because of the rule of "green is always on the far right" for horizontal signals?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2020, 08:31:15 PM
Weird slip lane signals.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.244021,-71.810655,3a,28.6y,315.32h,108.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6AlIXYTC25uWTn31Qz1G7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on April 18, 2020, 08:58:38 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 17, 2020, 10:21:31 AM
So I wonder what the purpose of these PV signals facing the wrong direction on the Malden Bridge on Route 99 in Boston/Everett... it looks like at one time they were used when all traffic was shifted on the other deck but now it looks like they just stay dormant.

1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3888036,-71.0716726,3a,20.9y,32.78h,93.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVDUayhT4y0cypAz_ZgyVvw!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3900518,-71.0706519,3a,75y,208.62h,98.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sMHushbH7bc9q2PV63reZOw!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

Contraflow signals installed in 1998 (https://goo.gl/maps/WWoGb9xNBxEUptMZ6) on the new First Avenue Bridge span while they rehabbed the old span, and never removed them.  Also included is a flashing Draw Bridge signal, (https://goo.gl/maps/8FCG784sgLd2PmXMA) and I think I actually saw that flash when I was waiting on the bridge.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on April 19, 2020, 06:14:54 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2020, 08:31:15 PM
Weird slip lane signals.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.244021,-71.810655,3a,28.6y,315.32h,108.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6AlIXYTC25uWTn31Qz1G7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The slip lane gets a green ball at the same time as both directions of through traffic (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2438514,-71.8107013,3a,50.9y,283.08h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stSF2iZf4gwvdvuxRSKNdeQ!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which I think means it should be treated like a regular right turn lane, but there doesn't seem to be any indication of this for traffic turning left onto Northbound Southbridge. It looks like there could be conflicts if a car that just turned left onto Southbridge immediately changes lanes to the right (which I'm pretty sure is legal). They should put up some white plastic pylons between the lanes to prevent that. Or, if they want slip lane traffic to yield to left turns (which they might, otherwise there's no point in having a green arrow phase) a "right turn yield on green" (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1337587,-122.9010753,3a,44.4y,353.44h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sff7YhQBzWcOnS-MlkdAgSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign might work or maybe some flashing yellow arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 10:15:40 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 19, 2020, 06:14:54 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2020, 08:31:15 PM
Weird slip lane signals.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.244021,-71.810655,3a,28.6y,315.32h,108.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6AlIXYTC25uWTn31Qz1G7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The slip lane gets a green ball at the same time as both directions of through traffic (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2438514,-71.8107013,3a,50.9y,283.08h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stSF2iZf4gwvdvuxRSKNdeQ!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which I think means it should be treated like a regular right turn lane, but there doesn't seem to be any indication of this for traffic turning left onto Northbound Southbridge. It looks like there could be conflicts if a car that just turned left onto Southbridge immediately changes lanes to the right (which I'm pretty sure is legal). They should put up some white plastic pylons between the lanes to prevent that. Or, if they want slip lane traffic to yield to left turns (which they might, otherwise there's no point in having a green arrow phase) a "right turn yield on green" (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1337587,-122.9010753,3a,44.4y,353.44h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sff7YhQBzWcOnS-MlkdAgSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign might work or maybe some flashing yellow arrows.

I don't think USA has an equivalent to the right turn on green signs.

It seems to me that the best approach would be to keep the normal connotations, as much as possible.

When straight-through traffic has a green, you're right that there could be a conflict with opposing left turn traffic.  The most appropriate signal notation for this, as you noted, is the flashing yellow arrow, so that the right turners are to yield to any left turners who are coming through the point where the street meets the slip lane.

When cross traffic has the green, a red ball is what is currently employed, but a solid red arrow could also be used instead, especially given the NTOR sign.

And of course during the concurrent left turn, use a green arrow to denote the protected right turn.

The steady yellow arrow can be used to terminate the flashing yellow arrow or the green arrow.  If the flashing yellow arrow immediately precedes the green arrow, a solid yellow arrow isn't necessary to terminate the flashing yellow arrow.

So I'd recommend a four aspect FYA signal:

Red ball w/NTOR sign or red arrow
steady yellow arrow
flashing yellow arrow
steady green arrow.

In many ways, a signal for a slip lane can be more efficient than a yield sign.  Particularly if the concurrent left turn is long enough, a green arrow would be more efficient than if every car slowed to yield to make sure the coast is clear.  Unless there are u-turns, there are no conflicting movements for right turns during the concurrent left turn, so a green arrow is appropriate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?


That intersection you referenced had another oddity.

U-turn yield to right turn.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9039269,-88.0433273,3a,75y,75.04h,80.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si2iQWvAHTDGvExkdSnVGQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But then,

Right turn on red must yield to U-turn

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9042887,-88.0430363,3a,75y,219.82h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYZcTYx39-uW0666_K0XFJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'll defer to an IL person to answer your question more definitively, but IMO it seems that by seeing the green ball, a right turner would have the right of way over the opposing left turner, even though this is a slip lane.  On green ball, a right turner would only yield to pedestrians, but the crosswalk is on the other side of the street anyway.

On red ball, it is a stop then yield situation for right turners.  yielding to cross traffic or to left turning traffic when they (left turners) have the protected green arrow.

Some states are more strict than others about right turning vehicles turning into the rightmost lane and left turning vehicles turning into the left most lane.  If that is the case here, then the left turning and right turning vehicles will not impede each other.

In fact, there is an intersection only a few miles away where that is the only possibility as left turn and right turn green arrows display simultaneously on opposing sides.  A probable MUTCD violation, but safe if every vehicle turns only into the closest lane.  I-290 median off and on ramps at harlem Ave in Oak Park:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8737141,-87.804365,3a,75y,226.95h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stb3HO20e2RrEKyKIntIHTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 19, 2020, 03:52:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?


That intersection you referenced had another oddity.

U-turn yield to right turn.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9039269,-88.0433273,3a,75y,75.04h,80.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si2iQWvAHTDGvExkdSnVGQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But then,

Right turn on red must yield to U-turn

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9042887,-88.0430363,3a,75y,219.82h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYZcTYx39-uW0666_K0XFJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'll defer to an IL person to answer your question more definitively, but IMO it seems that by seeing the green ball, a right turner would have the right of way over the opposing left turner, even though this is a slip lane.  On green ball, a right turner would only yield to pedestrians, but the crosswalk is on the other side of the street anyway.

On red ball, it is a stop then yield situation for right turners.  yielding to cross traffic or to left turning traffic when they (left turners) have the protected green arrow.

Some states are more strict than others about right turning vehicles turning into the rightmost lane and left turning vehicles turning into the left most lane.  If that is the case here, then the left turning and right turning vehicles will not impede each other.

In fact, there is an intersection only a few miles away where that is the only possibility as left turn and right turn green arrows display simultaneously on opposing sides.  A probable MUTCD violation, but safe if every vehicle turns only into the closest lane.  I-290 median off and on ramps at harlem Ave in Oak Park:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8737141,-87.804365,3a,75y,226.95h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stb3HO20e2RrEKyKIntIHTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That kinda reminds me of an intersection in South Portland which I've never understood for years on end:

Westbrook St and Broadway, South Portland ME. All movements on Westbrook are split phased, and single protected only lead for EB Broadway movements:
Green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.630637,-70.3117495,3a,87.7y,161.31h,79.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1som_z5so1IRhVHI3wli5R4A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307081,-70.3116696,3a,25.2y,184.8h,88.03t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssk1sOuYc8TZNiEQPuD6qtQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball + green right turn arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307436,-70.3118787,3a,22y,145.59h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLrtFjHjKNENyLNaOudmHMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The "free" right movement from SB Westbrook to WB Broadway has always confused me because not only is there a 4-section PPRT signal, but not too far from that, a YIELD sign close to the signal lights. I've never understood which one took precedent, the 4-section PPRT signal or the YIELD sign, especially because there is NO marked stop/limit line... there is also NO crosswalk on this slip lane as well.

There's also a similar setup in Mountain View CA (https://www.google.com/maps/place/S+Shoreline+Blvd+%26+W+El+Camino+Real,+Mountain+View,+CA+94041,+USA/@37.3884434,-122.0881537,3a,19.9y,206.63h,89.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sapr4jMxRf6PUgFx7vQYhfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fb0cc36bcb8e7:0x6d37ba3369367635!8m2!3d37.3880005!4d-122.0882676), which, according to the Mercury News in this article (warning, (AdBlock) paywall after X amount of articles) (https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/08/21/roadshow-there-really-is-a-free-right-turn-on-red/), some people have even failed their drive tests for failure to stop for a red light...

The bottom line is, for "free" right turns at intersections like the South Portland ME and Moutain View CA examples, which takes priority? The signal, or the YIELD sign?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 19, 2020, 04:22:41 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 10:15:40 AM
When straight-through traffic has a green, you're right that there could be a conflict with opposing left turn traffic.  The most appropriate signal notation for this, as you noted, is the flashing yellow arrow, so that the right turners are to yield to any left turners who are coming through the point where the street meets the slip lane.

Except a right turn movement with a flashing yellow arrow would have the right of way over a concurrent and conflicting left turn movement with its own flashing yellow arrow, unless there is a 'right turn yield on flashing yellow arrow' sign.  This is why I would like to see a flashing green arrow or some other indication for turning movements that have the right away but conflicting movements are only required to yield - it would keep the flashing yellow arrow as a pure yield indication.


For signalized slip lanes in Illinois, the right turn movement with a green ball is supposed to have the right of way over an opposing left turn movement with its own green ball or flashing yellow arrow indication.  This is not always the way it works in practice - I can think of at least one intersection which has a recurring issue of the left turn failing to yield on a green ball to the opposing right turn.

It might be a legal requirement in Illinois for the right turn to turn into the closest lane, but this rarely happens in practice, and I can think of one location where the guide striping does not follow this - it would force one of the two right turn lanes into a new right turn only lane and not a through lane.

EDIT:
For the IL 64/Swift Road intersection - I think the 'Right Turn on Red Must Yield to U-Turn' sign was either installed in error, or the right turn overlap is not used anymore at that intersection.  The U-turn would be only supposed to occur while the concurrent left turn green arrow is up.  If there is a right turn overlap, the right turn would have the green arrow and in theory have right of way over the conflicting U-turn movement (another 'it's not always how it works in the field' case).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 19, 2020, 10:07:48 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 10:15:40 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 19, 2020, 06:14:54 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2020, 08:31:15 PM
Weird slip lane signals.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.244021,-71.810655,3a,28.6y,315.32h,108.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6AlIXYTC25uWTn31Qz1G7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The slip lane gets a green ball at the same time as both directions of through traffic (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2438514,-71.8107013,3a,50.9y,283.08h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stSF2iZf4gwvdvuxRSKNdeQ!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which I think means it should be treated like a regular right turn lane, but there doesn't seem to be any indication of this for traffic turning left onto Northbound Southbridge. It looks like there could be conflicts if a car that just turned left onto Southbridge immediately changes lanes to the right (which I'm pretty sure is legal). They should put up some white plastic pylons between the lanes to prevent that. Or, if they want slip lane traffic to yield to left turns (which they might, otherwise there's no point in having a green arrow phase) a "right turn yield on green" (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1337587,-122.9010753,3a,44.4y,353.44h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sff7YhQBzWcOnS-MlkdAgSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign might work or maybe some flashing yellow arrows.

I don't think USA has an equivalent to the right turn on green signs.

It seems to me that the best approach would be to keep the normal connotations, as much as possible.

When straight-through traffic has a green, you're right that there could be a conflict with opposing left turn traffic.  The most appropriate signal notation for this, as you noted, is the flashing yellow arrow, so that the right turners are to yield to any left turners who are coming through the point where the street meets the slip lane.

When cross traffic has the green, a red ball is what is currently employed, but a solid red arrow could also be used instead, especially given the NTOR sign.

And of course during the concurrent left turn, use a green arrow to denote the protected right turn.

The steady yellow arrow can be used to terminate the flashing yellow arrow or the green arrow.  If the flashing yellow arrow immediately precedes the green arrow, a solid yellow arrow isn't necessary to terminate the flashing yellow arrow.

So I'd recommend a four aspect FYA signal:

Red ball w/NTOR sign or red arrow
steady yellow arrow
flashing yellow arrow
steady green arrow.

In many ways, a signal for a slip lane can be more efficient than a yield sign.  Particularly if the concurrent left turn is long enough, a green arrow would be more efficient than if every car slowed to yield to make sure the coast is clear.  Unless there are u-turns, there are no conflicting movements for right turns during the concurrent left turn, so a green arrow is appropriate.
Oh we do have Right Turn Yield on greens:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200420/539487ccf363c6189cd36d416c3d6f36.jpg)
This interesection is at Western Av @ Leo M Birmingham Parkway in Boston MA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 19, 2020, 10:09:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?
They're also known for red light camera trap slip lanes, like this awful one in Crestwood IL:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200420/59fb1a43d343eaf43d381caa87eb07f1.jpg)
There is no right turn signal in the cone of vision, yet running the red light is a ticket.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 11:08:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 19, 2020, 03:52:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?


That intersection you referenced had another oddity.

U-turn yield to right turn.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9039269,-88.0433273,3a,75y,75.04h,80.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si2iQWvAHTDGvExkdSnVGQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But then,

Right turn on red must yield to U-turn

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9042887,-88.0430363,3a,75y,219.82h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYZcTYx39-uW0666_K0XFJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'll defer to an IL person to answer your question more definitively, but IMO it seems that by seeing the green ball, a right turner would have the right of way over the opposing left turner, even though this is a slip lane.  On green ball, a right turner would only yield to pedestrians, but the crosswalk is on the other side of the street anyway.

On red ball, it is a stop then yield situation for right turners.  yielding to cross traffic or to left turning traffic when they (left turners) have the protected green arrow.

Some states are more strict than others about right turning vehicles turning into the rightmost lane and left turning vehicles turning into the left most lane.  If that is the case here, then the left turning and right turning vehicles will not impede each other.

In fact, there is an intersection only a few miles away where that is the only possibility as left turn and right turn green arrows display simultaneously on opposing sides.  A probable MUTCD violation, but safe if every vehicle turns only into the closest lane.  I-290 median off and on ramps at harlem Ave in Oak Park:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8737141,-87.804365,3a,75y,226.95h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stb3HO20e2RrEKyKIntIHTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That kinda reminds me of an intersection in South Portland which I've never understood for years on end:

Westbrook St and Broadway, South Portland ME. All movements on Westbrook are split phased, and single protected only lead for EB Broadway movements:
Green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.630637,-70.3117495,3a,87.7y,161.31h,79.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1som_z5so1IRhVHI3wli5R4A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307081,-70.3116696,3a,25.2y,184.8h,88.03t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssk1sOuYc8TZNiEQPuD6qtQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball + green right turn arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307436,-70.3118787,3a,22y,145.59h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLrtFjHjKNENyLNaOudmHMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The "free" right movement from SB Westbrook to WB Broadway has always confused me because not only is there a 4-section PPRT signal, but not too far from that, a YIELD sign close to the signal lights. I've never understood which one took precedent, the 4-section PPRT signal or the YIELD sign, especially because there is NO marked stop/limit line... there is also NO crosswalk on this slip lane as well.

There's also a similar setup in Mountain View CA (https://www.google.com/maps/place/S+Shoreline+Blvd+%26+W+El+Camino+Real,+Mountain+View,+CA+94041,+USA/@37.3884434,-122.0881537,3a,19.9y,206.63h,89.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sapr4jMxRf6PUgFx7vQYhfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fb0cc36bcb8e7:0x6d37ba3369367635!8m2!3d37.3880005!4d-122.0882676), which, according to the Mercury News in this article (warning, (AdBlock) paywall after X amount of articles) (https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/08/21/roadshow-there-really-is-a-free-right-turn-on-red/), some people have even failed their drive tests for failure to stop for a red light...

The bottom line is, for "free" right turns at intersections like the South Portland ME and Moutain View CA examples, which takes priority? The signal, or the YIELD sign?

Didn't click on the article, but I can tell you as a CA native that the driving instructors are wrong.  The yield sign controls the right turn, not the traffic signal.  CA is very good about not having signs and signals in conflict, usually.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 19, 2020, 10:07:48 PM

Oh we do have Right Turn Yield on greens:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200420/539487ccf363c6189cd36d416c3d6f36.jpg)
This interesection is at Western Av @ Leo M Birmingham Parkway in Boston MA


iPhone

This looks like a weird corner.  Can you tell us who has the right of way when this signal is green?

It seems to me that if there is no point in the signal cycle that provides a protected turn, then maybe this should be a stop sign or possibly a flashing yellow arrow.

It is a little reminiscent of this entrance to Dupont Circle in Washington DC.  At the time of this GSV, you can see that there is no turn on red.  The signal is RED-YELLOW-FLASHING YELLOW ARROW.  no green.  Basically, you have an absolute red when peds cross and are not allowed to turn.  But because the island is so narrow, peds around the circle and across the circle have WALK at the same time.  So this means that there is no protected turn for right turners and they always have to look for a gap in circle traffic.  (And the time when the circle traffic has a red, NH Ave traffic can't enter the circle because they also have a red.)

I believe this may have been fixed more recently and now there are green arrows, but I don't know for sure.  I bet they realized it would be safer for all if the traffic has a small protected phase for turning.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9102419,-77.0429882,3a,75y,180.98h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgAuPc95-mfyLBAC-_NBwwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 20, 2020, 12:12:43 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 11:08:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 19, 2020, 03:52:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?


That intersection you referenced had another oddity.

U-turn yield to right turn.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9039269,-88.0433273,3a,75y,75.04h,80.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si2iQWvAHTDGvExkdSnVGQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But then,

Right turn on red must yield to U-turn

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9042887,-88.0430363,3a,75y,219.82h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYZcTYx39-uW0666_K0XFJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'll defer to an IL person to answer your question more definitively, but IMO it seems that by seeing the green ball, a right turner would have the right of way over the opposing left turner, even though this is a slip lane.  On green ball, a right turner would only yield to pedestrians, but the crosswalk is on the other side of the street anyway.

On red ball, it is a stop then yield situation for right turners.  yielding to cross traffic or to left turning traffic when they (left turners) have the protected green arrow.

Some states are more strict than others about right turning vehicles turning into the rightmost lane and left turning vehicles turning into the left most lane.  If that is the case here, then the left turning and right turning vehicles will not impede each other.

In fact, there is an intersection only a few miles away where that is the only possibility as left turn and right turn green arrows display simultaneously on opposing sides.  A probable MUTCD violation, but safe if every vehicle turns only into the closest lane.  I-290 median off and on ramps at harlem Ave in Oak Park:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8737141,-87.804365,3a,75y,226.95h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stb3HO20e2RrEKyKIntIHTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That kinda reminds me of an intersection in South Portland which I've never understood for years on end:

Westbrook St and Broadway, South Portland ME. All movements on Westbrook are split phased, and single protected only lead for EB Broadway movements:
Green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.630637,-70.3117495,3a,87.7y,161.31h,79.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1som_z5so1IRhVHI3wli5R4A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307081,-70.3116696,3a,25.2y,184.8h,88.03t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssk1sOuYc8TZNiEQPuD6qtQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball + green right turn arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307436,-70.3118787,3a,22y,145.59h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLrtFjHjKNENyLNaOudmHMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The "free" right movement from SB Westbrook to WB Broadway has always confused me because not only is there a 4-section PPRT signal, but not too far from that, a YIELD sign close to the signal lights. I've never understood which one took precedent, the 4-section PPRT signal or the YIELD sign, especially because there is NO marked stop/limit line... there is also NO crosswalk on this slip lane as well.

There's also a similar setup in Mountain View CA (https://www.google.com/maps/place/S+Shoreline+Blvd+%26+W+El+Camino+Real,+Mountain+View,+CA+94041,+USA/@37.3884434,-122.0881537,3a,19.9y,206.63h,89.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sapr4jMxRf6PUgFx7vQYhfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fb0cc36bcb8e7:0x6d37ba3369367635!8m2!3d37.3880005!4d-122.0882676), which, according to the Mercury News in this article (warning, (AdBlock) paywall after X amount of articles) (https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/08/21/roadshow-there-really-is-a-free-right-turn-on-red/), some people have even failed their drive tests for failure to stop for a red light...

The bottom line is, for "free" right turns at intersections like the South Portland ME and Moutain View CA examples, which takes priority? The signal, or the YIELD sign?

Didn't click on the article, but I can tell you as a CA native that the driving instructors are wrong.  The yield sign controls the right turn, not the traffic signal.  CA is very good about not having signs and signals in conflict, usually.

By not clicking on the article, you missed out on the issue. There isn't a yield or stop sign there, but it is separated by an island.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on April 20, 2020, 03:30:12 AM
I found an intersection in Illinois (https://www.google.ca/maps/@41.7488377,-88.1148225,3a,61y,295.77h,92.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8_DV2-sr6udB9Bhq-2u_Tg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that is pretty much exactly the same as the intersection in MA and has all the same issues. Just like the MA intersection, the slip lanes also have a protected green arrow phase, even though a green ball should theoretically give right turns the right of way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Verlanka on April 20, 2020, 05:36:24 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 19, 2020, 10:09:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?
They're also known for red light camera trap slip lanes, like this awful one in Crestwood IL:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200420/59fb1a43d343eaf43d381caa87eb07f1.jpg)
There is no right turn signal in the cone of vision, yet running the red light is a ticket.


iPhone
It might help to put up and additional signal there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 20, 2020, 07:44:15 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 20, 2020, 12:12:43 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 11:08:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 19, 2020, 03:52:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 19, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2020, 02:34:14 PM
This talk of signalized slip lanes reminds me of Illinois, a state that is well-known for at least two things:

1) slip lanes
2) slip lanes with signals

In many scenarios where permissive left turns are employed, the right turn slip lane sees a concurrent green orb signal. See an example here (https://goo.gl/maps/HGUELvbHLpRmY4QR8).

It seems to me that you'd have to yield to both oncoming traffic and those vehicles turning right via the slip lane. That would seem to limit the capacity of the left turn pretty dramatically, at least compared to a slip lane with a yield sign or FYAs.

Are there any Illinois drivers out there who can speak to how these things operate?


That intersection you referenced had another oddity.

U-turn yield to right turn.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9039269,-88.0433273,3a,75y,75.04h,80.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si2iQWvAHTDGvExkdSnVGQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But then,

Right turn on red must yield to U-turn

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9042887,-88.0430363,3a,75y,219.82h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYZcTYx39-uW0666_K0XFJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'll defer to an IL person to answer your question more definitively, but IMO it seems that by seeing the green ball, a right turner would have the right of way over the opposing left turner, even though this is a slip lane.  On green ball, a right turner would only yield to pedestrians, but the crosswalk is on the other side of the street anyway.

On red ball, it is a stop then yield situation for right turners.  yielding to cross traffic or to left turning traffic when they (left turners) have the protected green arrow.

Some states are more strict than others about right turning vehicles turning into the rightmost lane and left turning vehicles turning into the left most lane.  If that is the case here, then the left turning and right turning vehicles will not impede each other.

In fact, there is an intersection only a few miles away where that is the only possibility as left turn and right turn green arrows display simultaneously on opposing sides.  A probable MUTCD violation, but safe if every vehicle turns only into the closest lane.  I-290 median off and on ramps at harlem Ave in Oak Park:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8737141,-87.804365,3a,75y,226.95h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stb3HO20e2RrEKyKIntIHTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That kinda reminds me of an intersection in South Portland which I've never understood for years on end:

Westbrook St and Broadway, South Portland ME. All movements on Westbrook are split phased, and single protected only lead for EB Broadway movements:
Green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.630637,-70.3117495,3a,87.7y,161.31h,79.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1som_z5so1IRhVHI3wli5R4A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307081,-70.3116696,3a,25.2y,184.8h,88.03t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssk1sOuYc8TZNiEQPuD6qtQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Red ball + green right turn arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6307436,-70.3118787,3a,22y,145.59h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLrtFjHjKNENyLNaOudmHMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

The "free" right movement from SB Westbrook to WB Broadway has always confused me because not only is there a 4-section PPRT signal, but not too far from that, a YIELD sign close to the signal lights. I've never understood which one took precedent, the 4-section PPRT signal or the YIELD sign, especially because there is NO marked stop/limit line... there is also NO crosswalk on this slip lane as well.

There's also a similar setup in Mountain View CA (https://www.google.com/maps/place/S+Shoreline+Blvd+%26+W+El+Camino+Real,+Mountain+View,+CA+94041,+USA/@37.3884434,-122.0881537,3a,19.9y,206.63h,89.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sapr4jMxRf6PUgFx7vQYhfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fb0cc36bcb8e7:0x6d37ba3369367635!8m2!3d37.3880005!4d-122.0882676), which, according to the Mercury News in this article (warning, (AdBlock) paywall after X amount of articles) (https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/08/21/roadshow-there-really-is-a-free-right-turn-on-red/), some people have even failed their drive tests for failure to stop for a red light...

The bottom line is, for "free" right turns at intersections like the South Portland ME and Moutain View CA examples, which takes priority? The signal, or the YIELD sign?

Didn't click on the article, but I can tell you as a CA native that the driving instructors are wrong.  The yield sign controls the right turn, not the traffic signal.  CA is very good about not having signs and signals in conflict, usually.

By not clicking on the article, you missed out on the issue. There isn't a yield or stop sign there, but it is separated by an island.

They must have fixed the issue post article because the GSV link above clearly shows a yield sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 20, 2020, 08:39:58 AM
Red left arrow and green diagonal-right (thru?) arrow at this rotary intersection in Keene NH. Funny how left on red is illegal in NH, but they sign it so the turn is OK after stop from the U-turn lane. Some states that completely prohibit turns on arrows ban the use of the R10-17 sign completely (CA for example)...

Central Square, Keene NH (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9338324,-72.2787967,3a,21.4y,109.77h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0TkWmte45c7OwJgXfpzdAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1)

The signal kind of reminds me of one of jakeroot's videos where the red arrow + green arrow lights up at the same time for the right turn filter, similar in operation to a 4 section bimodal right turn signal, shown below:

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 20, 2020, 08:41:56 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 20, 2020, 08:39:58 AM
Red left arrow and green diagonal-right (thru?) arrow at this rotary intersection in Keene NH. Funny how left on red is illegal in NH, but they sign it so the turn is OK after stop from the U-turn lane. Some states that completely prohibit turns on arrows ban the use of the R10-17 sign completely (CA for example)...

Central Square, Keene NH (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9338324,-72.2787967,3a,21.4y,109.77h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0TkWmte45c7OwJgXfpzdAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1)

The signal kind of reminds me of one of jakeroot's videos where the red arrow + green arrow lights up at the same time for the right turn filter, similar in operation to a 4 section bimodal right turn signal, shown below:


Lovely New England. They've got to separate those signals into two.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 20, 2020, 10:05:09 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 19, 2020, 06:14:54 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2020, 08:31:15 PM
Weird slip lane signals.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.244021,-71.810655,3a,28.6y,315.32h,108.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6AlIXYTC25uWTn31Qz1G7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The slip lane gets a green ball at the same time as both directions of through traffic (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2438514,-71.8107013,3a,50.9y,283.08h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stSF2iZf4gwvdvuxRSKNdeQ!2e0!5s20110701T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which I think means it should be treated like a regular right turn lane, but there doesn't seem to be any indication of this for traffic turning left onto Northbound Southbridge. It looks like there could be conflicts if a car that just turned left onto Southbridge immediately changes lanes to the right (which I'm pretty sure is legal). They should put up some white plastic pylons between the lanes to prevent that. Or, if they want slip lane traffic to yield to left turns (which they might, otherwise there's no point in having a green arrow phase) a "right turn yield on green" (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1337587,-122.9010753,3a,44.4y,353.44h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sff7YhQBzWcOnS-MlkdAgSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign might work or maybe some flashing yellow arrows.
The green arrow phase of these signals occur when southbound Southbridge St has a protected left turn.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2439085,-71.8105231,3a,17.1y,312.97h,99.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slCJ4x64exXojon719Pf9tA!2e0!5s20170901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
But yeah this is a pretty odd slip lane signal setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 20, 2020, 10:23:19 AM
I'll send links for those two intersections:

Right turn yield on green: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3616484,-71.1454091,3a,28.4y,329.59h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbBnP2FiVLZavr164JIcksQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Right turn slip lane trap:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6535845,-87.738479,3a,75y,204.87h,91.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPV5qdno1yGC375P9mQzI9Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on April 20, 2020, 10:17:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 20, 2020, 10:23:19 AM
Right turn slip lane trap:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6535845,-87.738479,3a,75y,204.87h,91.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPV5qdno1yGC375P9mQzI9Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I recall reading about a lawsuit over that right turn movement since it's photo enforced and does not have any supplemental heads.  I don't suppose anyone knows if that case is still pending or was dismissed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 20, 2020, 10:23:34 PM
It might be possible to beat a ticket on the grounds that the installation does not meet MUTCD specs. As mentioned by someone earlier, the one visible signal head is well outside the cone-of-vision at the stop line.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 20, 2020, 11:34:04 PM
The funniest thing to me is how well signalized the intersection otherwise is. All three corners are covered by supplemental signals for each approach (IL only requires near and far-left corners normally), and there is an overhead signal for each approach as well. They just spectacularly dropped the ball with the slip lane. Which is really unlike Illinois, as they normally have one on both sides of a slip lane, and usually one in the median across from the stop line.

If I recall correctly, primary signal faces cannot be on the near-side of an intersection. Thus the primary signal faces for that slip lane would have to be the through signals on the far side of the through approach, way off to the left and far out of the cone of vision. The question is whether signalized slip lanes are required to have their own primary signal faces, separate from the main intersection. If not, the primary far-side signals should be within the cone of vision of the slip lane's stop line. If that's not the case either, how is a driver even supposed to know that there is a signal controlling the slip lane?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 21, 2020, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 20, 2020, 11:34:04 PM
The funniest thing to me is how well signalized the intersection otherwise is. All three corners are covered by supplemental signals for each approach (IL only requires near and far-left corners normally), and there is an overhead signal for each approach as well. They just spectacularly dropped the ball with the slip lane. Which is really unlike Illinois, as they normally have one on both sides of a slip lane, and usually one in the median across from the stop line.

If I recall correctly, primary signal faces cannot be on the near-side of an intersection. Thus the primary signal faces for that slip lane would have to be the through signals on the far side of the through approach, way off to the left and far out of the cone of vision. The question is whether signalized slip lanes are required to have their own primary signal faces, separate from the main intersection. If not, the primary far-side signals should be within the cone of vision of the slip lane's stop line. If that's not the case either, how is a driver even supposed to know that there is a signal controlling the slip lane?

Yeah, a primary signal face must be at least 40 feet beyond the stop line, and with 20° left or right from a point measured 10 feet behind the center of the approach. This right turn appears to accomplish neither of these. Not sure if a slip lane has to have it's own primary signal face, but given it's a full-on dedicated turn lane, then my hunch tells me that it would need a primary right turn signal face (with whatever control type they wanted). So if they want that movement to be signalized then there ought to be at least one signal head somewhere in the vicinity.

That slip lane needs a yield sign, plain and simple. I'd definitely argue any red light ticket on that one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 21, 2020, 01:29:27 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 21, 2020, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 20, 2020, 11:34:04 PM
The funniest thing to me is how well signalized the intersection otherwise is. All three corners are covered by supplemental signals for each approach (IL only requires near and far-left corners normally), and there is an overhead signal for each approach as well. They just spectacularly dropped the ball with the slip lane. Which is really unlike Illinois, as they normally have one on both sides of a slip lane, and usually one in the median across from the stop line.

If I recall correctly, primary signal faces cannot be on the near-side of an intersection. Thus the primary signal faces for that slip lane would have to be the through signals on the far side of the through approach, way off to the left and far out of the cone of vision. The question is whether signalized slip lanes are required to have their own primary signal faces, separate from the main intersection. If not, the primary far-side signals should be within the cone of vision of the slip lane's stop line. If that's not the case either, how is a driver even supposed to know that there is a signal controlling the slip lane?

Yeah, a primary signal face must be at least 40 feet beyond the stop line, and with 20° left or right from a point measured 10 feet behind the center of the approach. This right turn appears to accomplish neither of these. Not sure if a slip lane has to have it's own primary signal face, but given it's a full-on dedicated turn lane, then my hunch tells me that it would need a primary right turn signal face (with whatever control type they wanted). So if they want that movement to be signalized then there ought to be at least one signal head somewhere in the vicinity.

That slip lane needs a yield sign, plain and simple. I'd definitely argue any red light ticket on that one.
Earlier this year, South Portland converted a yield slip lane to a right turn 3-section FYA, which only turns to red arrow if a pedestrian requests to cross the slip lane. Is there any difference between a yield v. FYA for the slip lane, particularly safety and operation?   
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 21, 2020, 05:39:33 PM
This is weird to see in NYC.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7164707,-73.9956929,3a,75y,349.91h,84.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVVofgmeqXOjV5sFL9qSnKQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 21, 2020, 08:14:43 PM
I'm wondering if that slip-lane was originally a stop or yield sign until some brilliant city official got the bright idea that all they have to do is change the sign to stop here on red, and they could collect additional red-light camera revenue. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on April 21, 2020, 09:27:07 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 21, 2020, 01:29:27 PM
Earlier this year, South Portland converted a yield slip lane to a right turn 3-section FYA, which only turns to red arrow if a pedestrian requests to cross the slip lane. Is there any difference between a yield v. FYA for the slip lane, particularly safety and operation?   
I wouldn't think they would be much difference in operations, assuming pedestrian crossings are relatively low.  Safety (for pedestrians) should be higher, as the signal should ensure that drivers are stopping for pedestrians, rather than just occasionally yielding for pedestrians.

There is a similar signal in my hometown of Santa Cruz, CA, at Laurel Street / Broadway / San Lorenzo Boulevard.  No flashing yellow arrow, but same concept -- red arrow when pedestrian wants to cross.  https://goo.gl/maps/NYVn8zuEhtgqhory8 (https://goo.gl/maps/NYVn8zuEhtgqhory8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 21, 2020, 09:54:15 PM
California traffic signaling is so thorough and complete. They put the Northeastern states to shame.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 22, 2020, 01:11:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 21, 2020, 09:54:15 PM
California traffic signaling is so thorough and complete. They put the Northeastern states to shame.

Hell, they put a good chunk of the country to shame. Maybe even everyone. If only they weren't so apt to use "green arrow only" left turns all the time.

EDIT: Spelling
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 22, 2020, 07:32:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 22, 2020, 01:11:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 21, 2020, 09:54:15 PM
California traffic signaling is so thorough and complete. They put the Northeastern states to shame.

Hell, the put a good chunk of the country to shame. Maybe even everyone. If only they weren't so apt to use "green arrow only" left turns all the time.

Agreed.  Signal placement is second to none.  Signals on both poles, left and right.  At least two signal faces for every signal present, including arrow signals.  Overhead signals placed in proper location.  And no overkill of signals.  Even wide streets manage well with one well placed signal. 

And the signals are aesthetically pleasing.  Solid tubular mast arms are now the standard.  Very few signals on wire.

However, signal timing is usually not very good.  Many cities do OK on one way streets, but two way streets fail.  At least the signal cycles tend to be shorter than in some Northeastern cities where it seems you can wait at red signals for upwards of two minutes at a time.

And of course, as Jake said, the overuse of protected left / red arrow signals.  Practically everywhere there is a dedicated left turn lane, other than a few select cities.

The one silver lining though is that it would seem to be easier to convert a RA-YA-GA signal to a FYA signal.  Perhaps Caltrans could be convinced to institute time of day signaling in more locations, even if they can't give up protected only left turns completely.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on April 22, 2020, 08:54:58 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 21, 2020, 05:39:33 PM
This is weird to see in NYC.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7164707,-73.9956929,3a,75y,349.91h,84.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVVofgmeqXOjV5sFL9qSnKQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

For those not familiar with that intersection, the light in question is G,Y, flashing R, solid R. The hanging light has flashing R to the right of solid R.

In NYC it's no turn on red by default, so adding flashing red and the sign is smart. Also no need for a right arrow to indicate NTOR at this light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 09:16:06 AM
I've been planning a Pittsburgh area trip, and I keep noticing these weird small lights with a clear lens, some even have reflective tape around it. I keep wondering, what is the purpose! I think maybe emergency vehicle preemption but idk: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5192832,-80.1660072,3a,31.1y,295.27h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sezk4cRILdESaAuDeqveSPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 22, 2020, 10:49:46 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 22, 2020, 07:32:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 22, 2020, 01:11:27 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on April 21, 2020, 09:54:15 PM
California traffic signaling is so thorough and complete. They put the Northeastern states to shame.

Hell, the put a good chunk of the country to shame. Maybe even everyone. If only they weren't so apt to use "green arrow only" left turns all the time.

Agreed.  Signal placement is second to none.  Signals on both poles, left and right.  At least two signal faces for every signal present, including arrow signals.  Overhead signals placed in proper location.  And no overkill of signals.  Even wide streets manage well with one well placed signal. 

And the signals are aesthetically pleasing.  Solid tubular mast arms are now the standard.  Very few signals on wire.

However, signal timing is usually not very good.  Many cities do OK on one way streets, but two way streets fail.  At least the signal cycles tend to be shorter than in some Northeastern cities where it seems you can wait at red signals for upwards of two minutes at a time.

And of course, as Jake said, the overuse of protected left / red arrow signals.  Practically everywhere there is a dedicated left turn lane, other than a few select cities.

The one silver lining though is that it would seem to be easier to convert a RA-YA-GA signal to a FYA signal.  Perhaps Caltrans could be convinced to institute time of day signaling in more locations, even if they can't give up protected only left turns completely.

I concur with all of this.

Signal head placement is very good on average. Number of overhead signal heads tends to be "number of lanes minus one" for multi-lane approaches, which is generally what the national MUTCD recommends for 45mph+ (I prefer signal head per lane as current Nevada standard, but older Nevada standard I grew up with followed the California approach so I'm okay with it). And at least two signal heads for every signalized movement–I don't understand how some jurisdictions don't implement this redundancy.

But CA would improve *a lot* if they'd convert much of their protected-only single left turn lanes to FYA protected/permitted setups (even if the FYAs were only used during off-peak times).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tylert120 on April 22, 2020, 10:57:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 09:16:06 AM
I've been planning a Pittsburgh area trip, and I keep noticing these weird small lights with a clear lens, some even have reflective tape around it. I keep wondering, what is the purpose! I think maybe emergency vehicle preemption but idk: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5192832,-80.1660072,3a,31.1y,295.27h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sezk4cRILdESaAuDeqveSPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You are correct. That is an indicator light for emergency preemption.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 11:33:50 AM
Quote from: tylert120 on April 22, 2020, 10:57:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 09:16:06 AM
I've been planning a Pittsburgh area trip, and I keep noticing these weird small lights with a clear lens, some even have reflective tape around it. I keep wondering, what is the purpose! I think maybe emergency vehicle preemption but idk: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5192832,-80.1660072,3a,31.1y,295.27h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sezk4cRILdESaAuDeqveSPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You are correct. That is an indicator light for emergency preemption.
What a strange way to do this! I prefer our system in New England:https://www.google.com/maps/@43.049081,-70.7711635,3a,15y,73.87h,107t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slLKPzvABV3j_EJkFqamSAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tylert120 on April 22, 2020, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 11:33:50 AM
Quote from: tylert120 on April 22, 2020, 10:57:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 22, 2020, 09:16:06 AM
I've been planning a Pittsburgh area trip, and I keep noticing these weird small lights with a clear lens, some even have reflective tape around it. I keep wondering, what is the purpose! I think maybe emergency vehicle preemption but idk: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5192832,-80.1660072,3a,31.1y,295.27h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sezk4cRILdESaAuDeqveSPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You are correct. That is an indicator light for emergency preemption.
What a strange way to do this! I prefer our system in New England:https://www.google.com/maps/@43.049081,-70.7711635,3a,15y,73.87h,107t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slLKPzvABV3j_EJkFqamSAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That red light is distracting in my opinion. And in certain lighting conditions, it may be hard to see if it is lit.

The indicator you alluded to in Pittsburgh is a white light that either is constant or blinks during preemption and then goes off.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 23, 2020, 10:05:55 AM
I found one of those 4-way signals mounted on a pole in the middle of the road in East Liverpool, Ohio: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6221708,-80.5769356,3a,75y,118.55h,80.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg0WCOUorbRC5K663hE438g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on April 27, 2020, 01:41:37 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on April 23, 2020, 10:05:55 AM
I found one of those 4-way signals mounted on a pole in the middle of the road in East Liverpool, Ohio: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6221708,-80.5769356,3a,75y,118.55h,80.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg0WCOUorbRC5K663hE438g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Nice to see an old Eagle 4-way beacon still in service. I'd prefer if it were high up on a span wire as opposed to being in the middle of the road on that dummy pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 29, 2020, 04:07:15 PM
I think awhile ago people were sending pics of crosswalk signals with same housings as the normal traffic lights, so here you go! (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200429/4c5ae53bab6936591d265991e200a6e1.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 20, 2020, 09:09:26 PM
Saw this one in Lancaster, Ohio, earlier this month...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49821417118_f8452eb824_c.jpg)

A doghouse light +1?
This is located on OH 188, in front of Fairfield Memorial Hospital, and according to the response I got on IG for this photo, its a nasty intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 20, 2020, 11:26:46 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 20, 2020, 09:09:26 PM
Saw this one in Lancaster, Ohio, earlier this month...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49821417118_f8452eb824_c.jpg)

A doghouse light +1?
This is located on OH 188, in front of Fairfield Memorial Hospital, and according to the response I got on IG for this photo, its a nasty intersection.

Is the straight green arrow on at all times that the green ball is on, or just when the left green arrow is on?

It would appear that this isn't necessary here at all.  There are two lefts in succession.  While traffic needs to go into the left turn lane for both turns, there is no reason why traffic that is heading straight in the left turn lane (to make a left at the second intersection) shouldn't be controlled by the green ball.  Also, to the extent that there are people making the first left, traffic heading for the second left may use the right lane through the first intersection and then merge into the left turn lane after passing the first intersection.  I suppose the signage restricts that, but drivers would do it anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 21, 2020, 12:11:04 AM
Quote from: mrsman on May 20, 2020, 11:26:46 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 20, 2020, 09:09:26 PM
Saw this one in Lancaster, Ohio, earlier this month...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49821417118_f8452eb824_c.jpg)

A doghouse light +1?
This is located on OH 188, in front of Fairfield Memorial Hospital, and according to the response I got on IG for this photo, its a nasty intersection.

Is the straight green arrow on at all times that the green ball is on, or just when the left green arrow is on?

It would appear that this isn't necessary here at all.  There are two lefts in succession.  While traffic needs to go into the left turn lane for both turns, there is no reason why traffic that is heading straight in the left turn lane (to make a left at the second intersection) shouldn't be controlled by the green ball.  Also, to the extent that there are people making the first left, traffic heading for the second left may use the right lane through the first intersection and then merge into the left turn lane after passing the first intersection.  I suppose the signage restricts that, but drivers would do it anyway.

That example reminds me of this intersection in Portland ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6723045,-70.285032,3a,38.6y,142.62h,85.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNUAdCRUxWIU4Zp7zPuV1MA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DNUAdCRUxWIU4Zp7zPuV1MA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D159.79652%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192). The only difference is that they only use one left arrow for both left turns, and I believe the turn from 302 to Vannah (far left) is actually prohibited (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6719009,-70.2846242,3a,15y,143.74h,90.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPlnx8iLKzzXoR5fsPJ8VIQ!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) during the AM (7-9am) and PM (3-6pm) rush hour.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 11:34:10 AM
This ought to be called a Tetris Signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 21, 2020, 04:32:24 PM
This is weird even for Massachusetts:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3652496,-71.1841559,3a,15y,206.17h,109.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9s2eqvqENcpUlqaSkuoZbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 08:32:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 21, 2020, 04:32:24 PM
This is weird even for Massachusetts:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3652496,-71.1841559,3a,15y,206.17h,109.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9s2eqvqENcpUlqaSkuoZbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Other than in some countries where these are completely normal, I swear I've seen this done at least one other time somewhere in the US. Maybe Pennsylvania, but I cannot recall with certainty.

Looking at the rest of the intersection....what is up with Mass? That state has some weird stuff going on. One of the other directions has the red arrow at the second-to-top position. Of course it's far from the weirdest thing I've seen come out of Mass, but still, it's like their engineers intentionally like to screw around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 21, 2020, 10:43:04 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 24, 2020, 09:28:45 PM
My guess is that it was an oversight. I think if they intended to prohibit the right turn on red arrow, they would have put a sign on the right side as well. They probably didn't realize the unintended effect of the sign by the left-turn signal.

But why do New Hampshire traffic engineers even bother posting that sign next to a red left-turn arrow? It's not required by the Manual, and it's not needed. So in this case by posting an unnecessary/redundant sign, they outsmarted themselves and caused more confusion.

Found this contradicting example in Hudson today. "NO TURN ON RED ARROW", but "RIGHT ON RED AFTER STOP"?
(https://i.ibb.co/Kr6fMSD/Screenshot-2020-05-21-at-22-40-17.png) (https://ibb.co/RD2sxdN)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Even for us here we say the same. Our new traffic lights are of the best though I would have to say. Top 10 tier for sure. MassDot has gone all out in support of FYA signals; even for 3 section ones! But with these old lights I'm not even sure where to begin. This light needs a total redesigns. The signal placement and timing is abysmal. Even a radio talk show host from Boston commented on this intersection awhile back. So weird! I'd go as far to say that this is the worst signal in Massachusetts.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5907812,-72.3096552,3a,23.9y,14.46h,90.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRVpSMPDDn86YzBvUAggw0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3951338,-71.1195326,3a,26.8y,43.85h,93.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3QYPkqYA-r7YeMmjMMS8NQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3582254,-71.1615937,3a,29.9y,233.68h,90.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSmBREPOFX9hMCdB59saCXw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1016091,-72.6267693,3a,20y,245.44h,99.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSLwO1BNjp293t_-mLvALBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0905963,-72.6263715,3a,35y,33.98h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF8Zc_Ul9bFZgMf45nzxLxQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on May 22, 2020, 03:13:14 PM
Signal that I found in Lancaster, NH: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.487116,-71.569628,3a,75y,351.98h,94.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjnS5tm9I7dw3MkGXqAEB9g!2e0!5s20120901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:24:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Even for us here we say the same. Our new traffic lights are of the best though I would have to say. Top 10 tier for sure. MassDot has gone all out in support of FYA signals; even for 3 section ones! But with these old lights I'm not even sure where to begin. This light needs a total redesigns. The signal placement and timing is abysmal. Even a radio talk show host from Boston commented on this intersection awhile back. So weird! I'd go as far to say that this is the worst signal in Massachusetts.

I do appreciate their attempt to approach each intersection individually, addressing each based on their relative needs. But some of the older individual projects do seem to be lacking in terms of consistency and placement.

One thing Mass has, that a fair number of New England states have, but not many western states have, is some pretty complex intersections. So I will give credit for at least finding ways to signalize them at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:27:24 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This one definitely reminds me of this intersection in Seattle. Must wait for a green arrow to turn left:

https://goo.gl/maps/unH41zWZp3WkbM3J6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 22, 2020, 06:01:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:27:24 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This one definitely reminds me of this intersection in Seattle. Must wait for a green arrow to turn left:

https://goo.gl/maps/unH41zWZp3WkbM3J6

At the very least, one could say that the Seattle example would have a higher cost to put in a RA-YA-GA signal to enforce left on arrow only.  For the Boston example, you already have 4 signal faces at the intersection, so it shouldn't be terribly difficult to convert the left corner signal and the left most signal on the mast arm to RA-YA-GA.

Also, it's unfortunate that from the point of view of the side street at the Boston intersection that there is no right turn arrow during the time of the corresponding left turn arrow.  Unless u-turns are heavy, right turns should be allowed at this time, but they are not because of the no turn on red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 11:37:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:24:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Even for us here we say the same. Our new traffic lights are of the best though I would have to say. Top 10 tier for sure. MassDot has gone all out in support of FYA signals; even for 3 section ones! But with these old lights I'm not even sure where to begin. This light needs a total redesigns. The signal placement and timing is abysmal. Even a radio talk show host from Boston commented on this intersection awhile back. So weird! I'd go as far to say that this is the worst signal in Massachusetts.

I do appreciate their attempt to approach each intersection individually, addressing each based on their relative needs. But some of the older individual projects do seem to be lacking in terms of consistency and placement.

One thing Mass has, that a fair number of New England states have, but not many western states have, is some pretty complex intersections. So I will give credit for at least finding ways to signalize them at all.
Maybe it's just because I'm from MA, but other places don't design lights based on each specific intersection?!?!? Why! That makes way more sense and improves our traffic flow!


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 11:38:12 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 22, 2020, 06:01:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:27:24 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This one definitely reminds me of this intersection in Seattle. Must wait for a green arrow to turn left:

https://goo.gl/maps/unH41zWZp3WkbM3J6

At the very least, one could say that the Seattle example would have a higher cost to put in a RA-YA-GA signal to enforce left on arrow only.  For the Boston example, you already have 4 signal faces at the intersection, so it shouldn't be terribly difficult to convert the left corner signal and the left most signal on the mast arm to RA-YA-GA.

Also, it's unfortunate that from the point of view of the side street at the Boston intersection that there is no right turn arrow during the time of the corresponding left turn arrow.  Unless u-turns are heavy, right turns should be allowed at this time, but they are not because of the no turn on red.
U turns aren't common here, there should be a right turn signal.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 23, 2020, 12:49:12 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 11:37:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:24:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Even for us here we say the same. Our new traffic lights are of the best though I would have to say. Top 10 tier for sure. MassDot has gone all out in support of FYA signals; even for 3 section ones! But with these old lights I'm not even sure where to begin. This light needs a total redesigns. The signal placement and timing is abysmal. Even a radio talk show host from Boston commented on this intersection awhile back. So weird! I'd go as far to say that this is the worst signal in Massachusetts.

I do appreciate their attempt to approach each intersection individually, addressing each based on their relative needs. But some of the older individual projects do seem to be lacking in terms of consistency and placement.

One thing Mass has, that a fair number of New England states have, but not many western states have, is some pretty complex intersections. So I will give credit for at least finding ways to signalize them at all.
Maybe it's just because I'm from MA, but other places don't design lights based on each specific intersection?!?!? Why! That makes way more sense and improves our traffic flow!

Practically every traffic signal everywhere is designed based on the particular intersection it's being constructed for. I think what jakeroot is alluding to is that MA seems to have a lot of complex, atypical intersection designs and turning movements, such that a lot of odd or unique signalization schemes have been developed to address these scenarios.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 23, 2020, 03:07:23 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 21, 2020, 11:34:10 AM
This ought to be called a Tetris Signal.

A little off topic, but I was going to say pentominoes since a typical doghouse has 5 parts (the P piece in Puyo Puyo Tetris (https://youtu.be/8B-gZr1T0YQ?t=201) kinda looks like an offset doghouse (https://highwaydivides.com/wiki/images/thumb/0/01/Offsetdoghousepyth.jpg/300px-Offsetdoghousepyth.jpg)), but since the signal has 6 parts, would the Tetris pieces be called hexominoes instead?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 23, 2020, 04:57:22 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 23, 2020, 12:49:12 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 11:37:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 22, 2020, 03:24:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 12:09:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2020, 11:08:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.

No doubt, and I can confirm from my 'Street View' drives around Massachusetts that they are likely second only to New Jersey in terms of their signalization standards (compared to other New England States). But they have a lot of really odd stuff too. Not odd enough to offset all the good they generally do, but it's all stuff that makes me ask, simply, "why?"
Even for us here we say the same. Our new traffic lights are of the best though I would have to say. Top 10 tier for sure. MassDot has gone all out in support of FYA signals; even for 3 section ones! But with these old lights I'm not even sure where to begin. This light needs a total redesigns. The signal placement and timing is abysmal. Even a radio talk show host from Boston commented on this intersection awhile back. So weird! I'd go as far to say that this is the worst signal in Massachusetts.

I do appreciate their attempt to approach each intersection individually, addressing each based on their relative needs. But some of the older individual projects do seem to be lacking in terms of consistency and placement.

One thing Mass has, that a fair number of New England states have, but not many western states have, is some pretty complex intersections. So I will give credit for at least finding ways to signalize them at all.
Maybe it's just because I'm from MA, but other places don't design lights based on each specific intersection?!?!? Why! That makes way more sense and improves our traffic flow!

Practically every traffic signal everywhere is designed based on the particular intersection it's being constructed for. I think what jakeroot is alluding to is that MA seems to have a lot of complex, atypical intersection designs and turning movements, such that a lot of odd or unique signalization schemes have been developed to address these scenarios.

Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. Look out west at Nevada, California, or Arizona, and you see a lot of intersections that are all remarkably similar, in terms of the traffic they handle and their expectations from both the road agencies and highway users. As such, every intersection looks just like the others around it, with the only variation being in the number of lanes and how the turns are handled. High levels of standardization have been achieved thanks to relatively simple and straightforward intersections. That's just not the case in Massachusetts, where the roads are laid out as though they might have been cow paths at one point. Western states appear to have been built by the Romans in comparison.

In California, by and large this means (much to my chagrin) applying protected lefts at all virtually all intersections without giving it extra thought. You just don't see that level of standardization in Massachusetts, from what I've seen. Applying the same logic over and over again wouldn't work there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 23, 2020, 07:39:29 PM
Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, MassDOT doesn't do a lot of protected lefts, which is nice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 23, 2020, 08:25:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 23, 2020, 07:39:29 PM
Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, MassDOT doesn't do a lot of protected lefts, which is nice.

Totally, and I know certain nearby states have an undeniable fancy for them. So props to Mass for that, especially because it would be easy to justify protected lefts at "odd" intersections.

To preface what I was saying, I want to acknowledge that there is still going to be a high level of standardization even in Massachusetts (the engineers aren't just screwing around), but there's more room for [what could be perceived as] innovation because of the unusual road layouts and uneven traffic patterns. That's just less often the case out west, although you see some agencies like those in Utah doing some really unique work, despite the fairly regular grid.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 23, 2020, 11:06:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 23, 2020, 08:25:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 23, 2020, 07:39:29 PM
Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, MassDOT doesn't do a lot of protected lefts, which is nice.

Totally, and I know certain nearby states have an undeniable fancy for them. So props to Mass for that, especially because it would be easy to justify protected lefts at "odd" intersections.

To preface what I was saying, I want to acknowledge that there is still going to be a high level of standardization even in Massachusetts (the engineers aren't just screwing around), but there's more room for [what could be perceived as] innovation because of the unusual road layouts and uneven traffic patterns. That's just less often the case out west, although you see some agencies like those in Utah doing some really unique work, despite the fairly regular grid.
Many people would think it's confusing, but the odd intersections around here are really fun! Left turns can be weird at some spots like here: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200524/74c7f9179529a61000cc593bb7db7996.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 24, 2020, 01:07:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 28, 2020, 12:45:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2020, 04:13:35 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 27, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Saw this earlier today in this video. Is Caltrans adding yellow reflective tape on their new signal installations, or is this a just a city/town decision?

Redwood City near YouTube headquarters (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6274693,-122.4251252,3a,75y,319.03h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKduG_K-D7iMOZieEJscLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

I've been seeing it sparingly, but doesn't appear to be coming from Caltrans. Other (https://goo.gl/maps/rUJEVhBJJEC5eyEt7) intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/LQaDAhk4C9ukyMUn8) nearby (https://goo.gl/maps/hz9rjop9DT381hQdA) (that were also recently updated) have them too.

For the record, Youtube's headquarters are in San Bruno (indeed near this intersection), not Redwood City.

Oops my bad, meant to type San Bruno instead of Redwood City - running on little sleep this week!

The one on that Youtube video is at 4:50. It is in St Helena CA at this intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5053348,-122.4702566,3a,59y,215.36h,98.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3c7KN05Ouj0CO4Igcf-e2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). For some reason, they decided to keep the 8 inch (200 mm) signals. Wonder if that is a new installation, or if they just slapped on some reflective tape on the signals and kept the existing configuration like what some signals in New Hampshire are doing (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7206541,-71.4428491,3a,77.4y,342.64h,95.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW2ohUv2_FC9TtVoS0mnG7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

All good! Not like Redwood City isn't known for being the headquarters for other groups as well.

For the record, I'm not able to watch the video. "Bad Drivers of [Napa Valley]" banned me years ago. I told him he was a shit driver a while ago, and that his videos were boring for including stuff that everyone does all the time.

Well, it seems like Caltrans is adding yellow borders on some of its signalised intersections statewide...

http://californialtap.org/index.cfm?pid=1080
https://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/downtown-placerville-traffic-signals-framed-in-yellow-to-improve-visibility/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 24, 2020, 03:47:23 PM
This is the first I've heard of the retroreflective border being used to help colorblind drivers "frame" a traffic signal (to aid identification of which lens is which).

The first install of retroreflective borders in North America was along McKenzie Avenue in Victoria, BC (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/miska_02.pdf) in 1998. The study was conducted by the Ministry of Transportation and the Insurance Corporation of BC (ICBC) to improve recognition of the signal under varying lighting conditions (primarily night hours). There's no mention of colour blindness in their initial research. Any benefit beyond recognition during dark conditions would have been beyond the scope of the study that made these things common.

Still, the research was very conclusive in terms of aiding recognition, hence why it quickly spread to the rest of BC, and why we now see it all over North America, even in *gasp* relatively conservative California, even if they cite additional research that I'm not familiar with.

EDIT: the article also says that California chose yellow because of its association with "caution or advisory" situations. Uhhhh, I don't think California had any say in the color. I'm 99% sure that North American only uses yellow because the backplates along the first study route in Victoria were all all yellow, as is standard in BC and much of Canada. If the study had been American, I think white might have been the preferred choice to contrast with the black color of American backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on May 26, 2020, 12:33:59 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 21, 2020, 09:12:56 PM
Older signals in Massachusetts can be a little nutty. But I've found that newer installations usually meet current standards and are usually good quality, at least in the south suburbs of Boston. In that area even the older signals were generally good.
MassDOT has a fetish for:

-Single pole-mounted installations, that is, one signal face per direction (particularly in old-timey towns)
-Flashing green balls (a local ordeal)
-Channelized protected left turns
-Neglected incandescent installations from the 1980s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on May 26, 2020, 12:37:55 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If I'm reading the sign correctly, no arrow means stop?
Then why not add another signal for protected left turns?  How does that sign not cause accidents?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 26, 2020, 03:23:16 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on May 26, 2020, 12:37:55 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If I'm reading the sign correctly, no arrow means stop?
Then why not add another signal for protected left turns?  How does that sign not cause accidents?

At the beginning of the cycle, the only movement permitted is straight-ahead, hence the up arrow. Left turns do not yet have a signal indicating that it is OK to turn. At the end of the cycle, a green left arrow activates, and left turns can proceed.

Is this a bit silly and outdated? Yes, but I'm sure it works OK. There are other signals like this around the country (such as the Seattle example I linked to above, reply #2879), and the accompanying sign is fairly straightforward (LEFT ON ARROW ONLY), although a symbolic "LEFT ON [green arrow symbol] ONLY" would be better.

In all, this is definitely a candidate for a dedicated left turn signal (FYA or protected only), or even a standard 4/5 section "yield on green" signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 26, 2020, 08:20:35 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 26, 2020, 03:23:16 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on May 26, 2020, 12:37:55 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 22, 2020, 02:08:51 PM
Some more MA things:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.374929,-71.1395656,3a,34.3y,281.26h,94.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sreMwlsVqI2qlOT66Vt88ww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
If I'm reading the sign correctly, no arrow means stop?
Then why not add another signal for protected left turns?  How does that sign not cause accidents?

At the beginning of the cycle, the only movement permitted is straight-ahead, hence the up arrow. Left turns do not yet have a signal indicating that it is OK to turn. At the end of the cycle, a green left arrow activates, and left turns can proceed.

Is this a bit silly and outdated? Yes, but I'm sure it works OK. There are other signals like this around the country (such as the Seattle example I linked to above, reply #2879), and the accompanying sign is fairly straightforward (LEFT ON ARROW ONLY), although a symbolic "LEFT ON [green arrow symbol] ONLY" would be better.

In all, this is definitely a candidate for a dedicated left turn signal (FYA or protected only), or even a standard 4/5 section "yield on green" signal.

As I said earlier, this seems an easy candidate to replace the two left most signal faces with dedicated left turn signals.  A 4 section FYA signal will allow for most flexibility, including time of day signaling.  A 3 section RA-YA-GA signal would very clearly enforce the left on green arrow only rule that the DOT seems to require.

While I have not driven by here to know what actual conditions are, this appears to be an intersection with good sightlines and should allow for permissive left turns, IMO.  Perhaps it originally did, and when the DOT decided to restrict turns they just added a sign and did not bother with updating the signal for RA-YA-GA.  If they decide to allow permissive turns, there is no problem with the current R-Y-G-GA signal as it used to be the standard face for lagging permissive left turns.  As it is a lagging signal, the green arrow and green orb end at the same time so the yellow orb acts as the termination signal for both the green org and the green arrow.  The latest MUTCD would require a 5 section signal under such circumstances, but doesn't require a retrofit for older signals.  IMO, a 5 sections signal of bimodal green/yellow arrow is just not necessary for a lagging signal.

In short, my preference would be to just remove the sign and allow permissive turns with a lagging protected left with the existing signal equipment.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 27, 2020, 03:05:08 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4581256,-121.4284152,3a,27.8y,154.08h,106.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_NKEQiaO7k49DWhk__GdZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

What's the point of programable signals if you're gonna install louvers as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
I noticed that two of the four protected left turns at this intersection in Chicago have two blankout signs (for both left turn signals) reading "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". Any idea why this would need to be a blankout sign? The other two approaches use 5-section protective/permissive displays; as far as I can tell, the intersection was only built within the last five years or so.

S Torrence Ave / E 130th St (https://goo.gl/maps/bx687XtoKedGPMXUA) (facing the other two signals at this intersection; image below is other two blankout signs):

(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 09:58:07 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2594611,-77.4015287,3a,30y,262.78h,96.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skvRtPTP0BJLRZ3z2w-lB2w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In Colonial Heights, VA. There is a similar thing for a yielding left. This was taken out though in 2017 when a roundabout was installed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 02, 2020, 12:00:23 PM
"Left turn yield on green" . To who? The right turn overlap? The only left here is into a fire station.  Manchester NH at NH-28 (S Willow St) and Perimeter Rd.  (https://goo.gl/maps/7UG9c523n9caNcjg9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 02, 2020, 12:14:07 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 02, 2020, 12:00:23 PM
"Left turn yield on green" . To who? The right turn overlap? The only left here is into a fire station.  Manchester NH at NH-28 (S Willow St) and Perimeter Rd.  (https://goo.gl/maps/7UG9c523n9caNcjg9)

Probably the fire station.   ?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 02, 2020, 05:27:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
I noticed that two of the four protected left turns at this intersection in Chicago have two blankout signs (for both left turn signals) reading "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". Any idea why this would need to be a blankout sign? The other two approaches use 5-section protective/permissive displays; as far as I can tell, the intersection was only built within the last five years or so.

S Torrence Ave / E 130th St (https://goo.gl/maps/bx687XtoKedGPMXUA) (facing the other two signals at this intersection; image below is other two blankout signs):

(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

For these turning movements where they've installed standard all-arrow turn signal heads, a sign is not required, whether it be blankout or static...

I could potentially see using this with the five-section towers on the other approaches at this intersection. There's other areas in Chicago (some major street I don't recall) where five section towers are used with static "left turn on green arrow only" signs, which is a confusing and non-intuitive way to prohibit permissive left turns on circular green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 09:59:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 02, 2020, 05:27:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
I noticed that two of the four protected left turns at this intersection in Chicago have two blankout signs (for both left turn signals) reading "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". Any idea why this would need to be a blankout sign? The other two approaches use 5-section protective/permissive displays; as far as I can tell, the intersection was only built within the last five years or so.

S Torrence Ave / E 130th St (https://goo.gl/maps/bx687XtoKedGPMXUA) (facing the other two signals at this intersection; image below is other two blankout signs):

(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

For these turning movements where they've installed standard all-arrow turn signal heads, a sign is not required, whether it be blankout or static...

I could potentially see using this with the five-section towers on the other approaches at this intersection. There's other areas in Chicago (some major street I don't recall) where five section towers are used with static "left turn on green arrow only" signs, which is a confusing and non-intuitive way to prohibit permissive left turns on circular green.

More than anything, I was posting this here to confirm that I wasn't losing my mind. I was a bit confused exactly why they would use these blankouts, since there is no obvious need (a red arrow is usually clear enough in its meaning). Guess it's still not quite obvious.

Most of those 5-section tower "green arrow only" signals in Chicago are downtown along Michigan Avenue, although there are others. Definitely not a wise call, although I think they were originally used to increase the number of through signals. That's just a hunch, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 03, 2020, 09:12:39 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 02, 2020, 12:00:23 PM
"Left turn yield on green" . To who? The right turn overlap? The only left here is into a fire station.  Manchester NH at NH-28 (S Willow St) and Perimeter Rd.  (https://goo.gl/maps/7UG9c523n9caNcjg9)

Perhaps the left turners need to yield to the folks crossing at the crosswalk.  Do you know when those folks get the walk signal?  Is it at the same time as green ball on this approach.

If that is the case, I would prefer a more clear sign of the need to yield to pedestrians.  And given the geometry of the intersection it does not seem safe to allow the peds to cross at the same time as this green ball being on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 03, 2020, 09:17:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 09:59:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 02, 2020, 05:27:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
I noticed that two of the four protected left turns at this intersection in Chicago have two blankout signs (for both left turn signals) reading "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". Any idea why this would need to be a blankout sign? The other two approaches use 5-section protective/permissive displays; as far as I can tell, the intersection was only built within the last five years or so.

S Torrence Ave / E 130th St (https://goo.gl/maps/bx687XtoKedGPMXUA) (facing the other two signals at this intersection; image below is other two blankout signs):

(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

For these turning movements where they've installed standard all-arrow turn signal heads, a sign is not required, whether it be blankout or static...

I could potentially see using this with the five-section towers on the other approaches at this intersection. There's other areas in Chicago (some major street I don't recall) where five section towers are used with static "left turn on green arrow only" signs, which is a confusing and non-intuitive way to prohibit permissive left turns on circular green.

More than anything, I was posting this here to confirm that I wasn't losing my mind. I was a bit confused exactly why they would use these blankouts, since there is no obvious need (a red arrow is usually clear enough in its meaning). Guess it's still not quite obvious.

Most of those 5-section tower "green arrow only" signals in Chicago are downtown along Michigan Avenue, although there are others. Definitely not a wise call, although I think they were originally used to increase the number of through signals. That's just a hunch, though.

I agree that it seems superfluous.  The only justification I can see is perhaps the traffic operations changed "recently".  (GSV shows same operations as early as 2015, though so maybe I am mistaken).  If they used to allow permissive left turns here, the electronic sign can highlight the change in rules.  But once people get used to the new configuration, these signs should be removed. 

Occasionally, I see a signal ahead sign with a "new" banner to highlight new signals in my area.  Those are left for a while though and I believe if the sightlines are OK, both signs ("new" and "signal ahead") should be removed after being in place for 6 months.  There is no need for extra signage, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 03, 2020, 02:06:40 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 03, 2020, 09:12:39 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 02, 2020, 12:00:23 PM
"Left turn yield on green" . To who? The right turn overlap? The only left here is into a fire station.  Manchester NH at NH-28 (S Willow St) and Perimeter Rd.  (https://goo.gl/maps/7UG9c523n9caNcjg9)

Perhaps the left turners need to yield to the folks crossing at the crosswalk.  Do you know when those folks get the walk signal?  Is it at the same time as green ball on this approach.

If that is the case, I would prefer a more clear sign of the need to yield to pedestrians.  And given the geometry of the intersection it does not seem safe to allow the peds to cross at the same time as this green ball being on.

A majority of the signals in New Hampshire use the "exclusive ped" phasing for pedestrians, which also includes Manchester as well.  My best guess of the purpose of the "yield on green" sign is for traffic turning into the fire station or making a U-turn onto the other direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 03, 2020, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 03, 2020, 09:17:57 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 09:59:47 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 02, 2020, 05:27:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
I noticed that two of the four protected left turns at this intersection in Chicago have two blankout signs (for both left turn signals) reading "LEFT ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". Any idea why this would need to be a blankout sign? The other two approaches use 5-section protective/permissive displays; as far as I can tell, the intersection was only built within the last five years or so.

S Torrence Ave / E 130th St (https://goo.gl/maps/bx687XtoKedGPMXUA) (facing the other two signals at this intersection; image below is other two blankout signs):

(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

For these turning movements where they've installed standard all-arrow turn signal heads, a sign is not required, whether it be blankout or static...

I could potentially see using this with the five-section towers on the other approaches at this intersection. There's other areas in Chicago (some major street I don't recall) where five section towers are used with static "left turn on green arrow only" signs, which is a confusing and non-intuitive way to prohibit permissive left turns on circular green.

More than anything, I was posting this here to confirm that I wasn't losing my mind. I was a bit confused exactly why they would use these blankouts, since there is no obvious need (a red arrow is usually clear enough in its meaning). Guess it's still not quite obvious.

Most of those 5-section tower "green arrow only" signals in Chicago are downtown along Michigan Avenue, although there are others. Definitely not a wise call, although I think they were originally used to increase the number of through signals. That's just a hunch, though.

I agree that it seems superfluous.  The only justification I can see is perhaps the traffic operations changed "recently".  (GSV shows same operations as early as 2015, though so maybe I am mistaken).  If they used to allow permissive left turns here, the electronic sign can highlight the change in rules.  But once people get used to the new configuration, these signs should be removed. 

Occasionally, I see a signal ahead sign with a "new" banner to highlight new signals in my area.  Those are left for a while though and I believe if the sightlines are OK, both signs ("new" and "signal ahead") should be removed after being in place for 6 months.  There is no need for extra signage, in my opinion.

The intersection is brand new, circa 2015. Brainard Ave used to turn north at Saginaw Ave, and traffic was forced to turn left to continue down E 130th St. This eliminated a nearby at-grade rail crossing, but necessitated an elevation lowering that we see here today. The double left turn, therefore, is brand new.

Part of me was wondering if, late at night, the double left turn operates with a permissive phase, and the sign changes to allow yielding on a flashing yellow or something. I think this is pretty unlikely, but Chicago does have other intersections that use dual left turns with permissive phasing, so it doesn't seem that insane of a possibility.

The other possibility that I'm considering, and it's probably a bit more likely, is that they wanted a lit version of the standard sign. There's no intention of ever turning off the blankout sign, or changing its message. It's only there for the illumination. As effective as retroreflective signage is, there is still something to be said about digital matrix displays. Not just at night, but also during the day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 03, 2020, 05:09:56 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4016882,-71.04152,3a,61.9y,94.75h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK2Ij0QApwg2B_fGpLWX4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:11:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

Now if they could just get some damn backplates on... :angry:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 07, 2020, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 03, 2020, 05:09:56 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4016882,-71.04152,3a,61.9y,94.75h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK2Ij0QApwg2B_fGpLWX4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Massachusetts has a very special way of installing signals. It's called IDGAF.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 04:54:09 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:11:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2020, 03:47:58 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/DjQ83dA.png)

Unrelated: excellent signal placement as usual. Nicely done, Chicago.

Now if they could just get some damn backplates on... :angry:

I don't know if it's necessary for pole-mounted signals. Illinois seems to require them overhead because of issues with sun glare, but not so much on posts since the sun is less often an issue that low. Plus, backplates on pole-mounted signals tend to make things a bit busy and crowded.

I think how they've installed the signals here is very clean, and not busy at all despite the added functionality of the extra post-mounted signals. Honestly, it's exactly how I'd setup an intersection if I were in charge of signalization.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:41:25 PM
Quote from: plain on June 07, 2020, 01:11:59 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 03, 2020, 05:09:56 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4016882,-71.04152,3a,61.9y,94.75h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK2Ij0QApwg2B_fGpLWX4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Massachusetts has a very special way of installing signals. It's called IDGAF.
Good thing our new signals are nice!
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4038968,-71.0359086,3a,75y,230.91h,93.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQBdOkAZ7qiHXUoBkEF7xGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 07, 2020, 03:11:26 PM
Similar to this light here. Often times the gate is closed so left turns aren't possible here into the closed property.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/7AR5jwb31ASxQ6oNA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 06:38:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.
It looks like that has been the primary use even when the bridge was open (or at least in 2007) when the bridge was a one way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 07, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.

Despite all of this, I would still think that it would be a good practice at the point of the left turn lane to somehow put in a sign that says U-turn only.  For those who are unfamiliar, when you see a green arrow, they may very likely just go and make the left turn and it would be quite a surprise to either go the wrong way down the street or to hit a closed bridge.

There are many places with u-turn only left turn lanes and signals and this could be modified to accommodate that design as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 07, 2020, 07:57:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 07, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.

Despite all of this, I would still think that it would be a good practice at the point of the left turn lane to somehow put in a sign that says U-turn only.  For those who are unfamiliar, when you see a green arrow, they may very likely just go and make the left turn and it would be quite a surprise to either go the wrong way down the street or to hit a closed bridge.

There are many places with u-turn only left turn lanes and signals and this could be modified to accommodate that design as well.

If they're unfamiliar with the area, why would they feel the need to make a left turn in the first place?

This is also one of those things where i'll say it's exisited for over 5 years. Just because you leaned about is 5 minutes ago doesn't make it a dangerous condition.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:33:03 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 07, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.

Despite all of this, I would still think that it would be a good practice at the point of the left turn lane to somehow put in a sign that says U-turn only.  For those who are unfamiliar, when you see a green arrow, they may very likely just go and make the left turn and it would be quite a surprise to either go the wrong way down the street or to hit a closed bridge.

There are many places with u-turn only left-turn lanes and signals and this could be modified to accommodate that design as well.
It could work, but I'm not sure if MassDOT feels the need.
I would like something like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3069313,-71.2928574,3a,32.8y,243.46h,91.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqq6CQwnxnvwBqWpwjBYnjA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
See, MA new signals are really good!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:34:46 PM
Sadly not everything MassDOT even new is perfect.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4032614,-71.0564923,3a,29.8y,245.79h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYIljREea17afs14Z8pYZVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
I wonder how no one noticed how dumb this was, on a signal with a right turn arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:41:31 PM
Lots of MassDOT stuff from me today, but anyways looks like MassDOT has been upgrading signals to hit the signal per lane strategy:
Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4049591,-71.0814574,3a,65.2y,287.4h,86.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbdTgU_vXjDQcye94tSijTA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4049273,-71.0814629,3a,32.2y,283.96h,93.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz2ZGzEvr7T2_dR8jq9tYmg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4052521,-71.0823958,3a,75y,235.8h,93.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOoLBIvruElnTaApZE2qGpg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4052389,-71.0824034,3a,75y,232.62h,85.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUTonWz40CkX5ahFlGKfMzQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

And also adding in more lights for visibility:
Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4017054,-71.0681019,3a,75y,319.18h,88.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHKg5VAxfD_dZuOgXR5cP8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4017201,-71.0680557,3a,75y,319.18h,88.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbdTcP2C8seIdharjm-XQLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 07, 2020, 10:20:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 07, 2020, 07:57:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 07, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.

Despite all of this, I would still think that it would be a good practice at the point of the left turn lane to somehow put in a sign that says U-turn only.  For those who are unfamiliar, when you see a green arrow, they may very likely just go and make the left turn and it would be quite a surprise to either go the wrong way down the street or to hit a closed bridge.

There are many places with u-turn only left turn lanes and signals and this could be modified to accommodate that design as well.

If they're unfamiliar with the area, why would they feel the need to make a left turn in the first place?

This is also one of those things where i'll say it's exisited for over 5 years. Just because you leaned about is 5 minutes ago doesn't make it a dangerous condition.

My question is does the U-turn count under the "left on red (arrow) after stop" law that MA has, since it's a one way to another one way?
For turns on red, MA (and NH*) law does not differentiate between balls and arrows, despite the MUTCD saying red arrow = no turn on red:

Quote from: MA Legislature - Chapter 89: Section 8 Right-of-way at intersecting ways; turning on red signalsAt any intersection on ways, as defined in section one of chapter ninety, in which vehicular traffic is facing a steady red indication in a traffic control signal, the driver of a vehicle which is stopped as close as practicable at the entrance to the crosswalk or the near side of the intersections or, if none, then at the entrance to the intersection in obedience to such red or stop signal, may make either (1) a right turn or (2) if on a one-way street may make a left turn to another one-way street, but shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and other traffic proceeding as directed by the signal at said intersection, except that a city or town, subject to section two of chapter eighty-five, by rules, orders, ordinances, or by-laws, and the department of highways on state highways or on ways at their intersections with a state highway, may prohibit any such turns against a red or stop signal at any such intersection, and such prohibition shall be effective when a sign is erected at such intersection giving notice thereof. Any person who violates the provisions of this paragraph shall be punished by a fine of not less than thirty-five dollars.

*NH does not allow left on red, the right on red arrow law NH has is only for right turns.

EDIT: If you look at the GSV on reply 2219, you can see that there is a NO TURN ON RED sign for the U-turning traffic. Probably MassDOT is aware of the "left turn on red (arrow)" law as well?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 07, 2020, 10:35:20 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 02, 2020, 12:00:23 PM
"Left turn yield on green" . To who? The right turn overlap? The only left here is into a fire station.  Manchester NH at NH-28 (S Willow St) and Perimeter Rd.  (https://goo.gl/maps/7UG9c523n9caNcjg9)
Probably there for u-turners.  Incidentally I see a lot of drivers make U-turns on red balls and arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 08, 2020, 01:57:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 03, 2020, 05:09:56 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4016882,-71.04152,3a,61.9y,94.75h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK2Ij0QApwg2B_fGpLWX4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The left turn arrow you linked in that direction is bimodal (https://youtu.be/hQWRjDrGU10?t=772). Not sure how the phasing is or if the other side also has a bimodal arrow. Looks like it runs lead-lag phasing. Hopefully MassDOT (or whoever maintains these signals) gets these replaced like the one further upstream.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:34:46 PM
Sadly not everything MassDOT even new is perfect.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4032614,-71.0564923,3a,29.8y,245.79h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYIljREea17afs14Z8pYZVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
I wonder how no one noticed how dumb this was, on a signal with a right turn arrow.

Based on experience, that new signal may have been there to replace a broken one and it's still probable that this intersection is still on the original controller. Not sure if the remaining signals are going to be modernised on the Revere Beach Parkway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 08, 2020, 05:48:07 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 08, 2020, 01:57:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 03, 2020, 05:09:56 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4016882,-71.04152,3a,61.9y,94.75h,98.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syK2Ij0QApwg2B_fGpLWX4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The left turn arrow you linked in that direction is bimodal (https://youtu.be/hQWRjDrGU10?t=772). Not sure how the phasing is or if the other side also has a bimodal arrow. Looks like it runs lead-lag phasing. Hopefully MassDOT (or whoever maintains these signals) gets these replaced like the one further upstream.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:34:46 PM
Sadly not everything MassDOT even new is perfect.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4032614,-71.0564923,3a,29.8y,245.79h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYIljREea17afs14Z8pYZVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
I wonder how no one noticed how dumb this was, on a signal with a right turn arrow.

Based on experience, that new signal may have been there to replace a broken one and it's still probable that this intersection is still on the original controller. Not sure if the remaining signals are going to be modernised on the Revere Beach Parkway.

The fact that it is bimodal makes it weirder to me somehow. Seems like a rare signal set up anyways.

In the second link you mentioned, I was discussing the "no turns" sign when clearly right turns are allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 08, 2020, 07:23:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 08:33:03 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 07, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2020, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 07, 2020, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 06, 2020, 11:30:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 02, 2020, 06:11:03 PM
Bruh MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4039225,-71.0078742,3a,15.3y,204.48h,94.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqtHji-IZPYdVeE7kcSdDxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There are so many things wrong here. The icing on the cake is the bridge that's been closed for 5 or so years. Guess that red left arrow's been red for a while.
looks like someone was using it: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4035401,-71.0080116,3a,75y,27.63h,95.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sse8hGdsf6u6x8ZJ_16g8uA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm gonna guess that it's being used primarily for U-turns now? Going off the tire marks on the ground. There appears to be several driveways in the background, facing the street, where drivers would need to make a U-turn to head the other way. This basically being the perfect spot.

Despite all of this, I would still think that it would be a good practice at the point of the left turn lane to somehow put in a sign that says U-turn only.  For those who are unfamiliar, when you see a green arrow, they may very likely just go and make the left turn and it would be quite a surprise to either go the wrong way down the street or to hit a closed bridge.

There are many places with u-turn only left-turn lanes and signals and this could be modified to accommodate that design as well.
It could work, but I'm not sure if MassDOT feels the need.
I would like something like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3069313,-71.2928574,3a,32.8y,243.46h,91.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqq6CQwnxnvwBqWpwjBYnjA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
See, MA new signals are really good!

This is a really cool example and a nice implementation of a Michigan left, albeit with signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 08, 2020, 09:40:22 PM
Yellow lights on-ramp meters:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5574864,-117.6734141,3a,27.9y,179.17h,89.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGfCwC90W-tS16nsBFKBYAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5573935,-117.673404,3a,75y,179.67h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svORWtKH23iTexHaz2XBB_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 08, 2020, 09:47:14 PM
Yeah Calif. goes first-class. In New York State, the ramp-meters are only red/green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 08, 2020, 10:43:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 08, 2020, 09:47:14 PM
Yeah Calif. goes first-class. In New York State, the ramp-meters are only red/green.

MO doesn't even have ramp meters. Chicago may (I'm not sure).
We should make a list of states/cities with ramp meters.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 09, 2020, 07:24:31 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 08, 2020, 10:43:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 08, 2020, 09:47:14 PM
Yeah Calif. goes first-class. In New York State, the ramp-meters are only red/green.

MO doesn't even have ramp meters. Chicago may (I'm not sure).
We should make a list of states/cities with ramp meters.

CA was (I believe) the first state to have them.  Originally, they converted walk/don't walk pedestrian signals to serve as the warning that the meter signal was on.  (There was no guidance at the time of how to warn of their operation and over time CA converted these to the now standard flashing yellow light at the onramp entrance.)  Many of the older meter signals in CA that I remember had R-Y-G on the top light but only R-G at the bottom.  In original operation, it was standard to go R-G-R-G-R-G to form a pulse of vehicles at the entrance, but the yellow signal was used as a way of warning to red only after a long green.

I remember specifically the operation of a ramp meter at La Cienega onto I-405 south in Inglewood, CA that my father used to get to work (as I remember it back in the 80's).  Some times of day it was off.  In the early morning hours it was on, but the signal was largely green and rarely red.  But in the mid-day and afternoon, it was R-G stop and go.  At this on-ramp, all traffic merged from two lanes to one lane and then that one lane formed the auxiliary lane which forced an exit onto Century Blvd one exit later.  Century Blvd was the main exit to LAX before I-105 was built.  While the metering made merging from the onramp to the mainline easier, it also made it easier for mainline traffic to make it to the right lane for the Airport exit.  Usually, traffic for the airport exit was busier mid-day than it was during morning rush hour so the normal stop-go operation occurred in mid-day but in the early morning it was largely green.  My father usually started work late and when he came early he marveled because he was not used to seeing a meter signal that was green the entire time.  In that instance, the yellow light was used to transition from green to red-green operation at about 10 a.m. on weekdays.

Another thing to marvel is how widespread the ramp meters are in CA.  They are practically in every major city and suburban area.  In other states, the meters are reserved for the busiest zones.  Also, in most other areas metering signals are only on during the rush hour.  CA's rush hour is practically all day even on weekends and those meters are on for most hours of the day.

In my current area (MD near Washington DC) there is some news that I-270 will soon get ramp meters as part of a project to handle congestion.  This is new for MD as there are currently no meters in suburban Washington or in Baltimore.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on June 09, 2020, 08:53:51 PM
Ohio was also an early experimenter with ramp meter lights.  There was a stretch of I-71 in Columbus somewhere between downtown and the north side of I-270 where they had 2-segment signals as far back as the 60s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 09, 2020, 09:49:19 PM
IIRC, some of the traffic signals (some removed) along the Tip O'Neill and Ted Williams Tunnel were supposed to become ramp meters on the ramps into the tunnels, and some mainline meters on the approaches to the tunnel from I-90 and 93. Not sure what killed them off.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 10, 2020, 12:02:00 AM
A New York City flashing right arrow has been converted to a steady right arrow, or it's a malfunction.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 10, 2020, 09:51:21 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 10, 2020, 12:02:00 AM
A New York City flashing right arrow has been converted to a steady right arrow, or it's a malfunction.



Yeah wth @9:16
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 10, 2020, 12:39:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 10, 2020, 09:51:21 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 10, 2020, 12:02:00 AM
A New York City flashing right arrow has been converted to a steady right arrow, or it's a malfunction.



Yeah wth @9:16

IIRC, that's right by Trump Tower.  It seems that they closed 56th for security and forced all traffic to turn right onto 5th Ave.  This is different from many intersections where there is a separate signal for turns and a separate signal for straight traffic.  In those cases, the separate signal for turns will have a red arrow to allow for a leading pedestrian interval and the FYA will indicate a permitted turn that yields to peds.  Here, though, since the only allowed movement is turning right, you will always have to yield.

In most cases where a side street must turn in one direction onto an avenue (like at a T intersection) a green ball is used instead.  Like at 61st and 5th.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7655164,-73.9721454,3a,75y,305.95h,88.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sEFZCgoM_jUellYE8nB1XNw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DEFZCgoM_jUellYE8nB1XNw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D17.507532%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Other T intersections will have separate phases for the right turn (green arrow) and the parallel crossing peds.  Like here at Broadway and 35th, although the peds are crossing illegally as is common in Manhattan.  This intersection was a new T intersection when they closed certain blocks of Broadway to make a pedestrian plaza near Herald Square.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7508089,-73.9878365,3a,75y,201.34h,89.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skpEibz2XjTqiYnRJUIuLPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Agreed that it should be a flashing yellow at 56th and 5th, but I'm unsure if it ever was a flashing yellow arrow that broke or whether they just cheaply converted the signal from green ball (when traffic was allowed to drive on the block) to yellow arrow and never updated the timing of the signal (to allow for flashing).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on June 11, 2020, 11:06:32 PM
Did the City of Beacon get rid of their dummy light at Main and East Main Streets?
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5026639,-73.9628526,3a,75y,222.13h,70.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4BhjR6fpD2veaL81D1h0rA!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5026639,-73.9628526,3a,75y,222.13h,70.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4BhjR6fpD2veaL81D1h0rA!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:29:55 AM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on June 11, 2020, 11:06:32 PM
Did the City of Beacon get rid of their dummy light at Main and East Main Streets?
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5026639,-73.9628526,3a,75y,222.13h,70.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4BhjR6fpD2veaL81D1h0rA!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5026639,-73.9628526,3a,75y,222.13h,70.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4BhjR6fpD2veaL81D1h0rA!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)

That looks like it might be confused for real, given its placement in the intersection.  If the city want to keep it there, they should make the intersection an all-way stop.  That way unpowered signal = all way stop and there would be no confusion.  The intersection seems very quiet and probably doesn't warrant a signal anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Anyway, I'm trying to make a left turn when traffic clears.  The car in front of me won't budge.  I'm honking and she's not moving.  I go up to her and say, why don't you go traffic is clear and I want to make a left while there is still a clearance of traffic.  She refuses to go because the light is red!  I tried to explain to her that the signal does not control the intersection and that it's basically red all the time unless someone operates the gate to enter the parking lot.  She eventually got the drift, but by the time she went, I had to wait another full cycle of the next intersection's (Archer/Sutphin) signal before I could find a clearing.

I see similar signals at government building parking lots in the DC area, but those are not usually places at intersections so there is little confusion for traffic on the public streets..
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
Several blatant MUTCD violations in this setup Hudson, NY

Zoom in to the pole signal if its hard to see, and pan around a bit

https://maps.app.goo.gl/obNXxuJsi37T4AKPA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 14, 2020, 10:16:58 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
Several blatant MUTCD violations in this setup Hudson, NY

Zoom in to the pole signal if its hard to see, and pan around a bit

https://maps.app.goo.gl/obNXxuJsi37T4AKPA

Can we list them all?
- That 5 section signal that is protective permissive I guess.
- One signal per lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on June 14, 2020, 10:33:08 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Anyway, I'm trying to make a left turn when traffic clears.  The car in front of me won't budge.  I'm honking and she's not moving.  I go up to her and say, why don't you go traffic is clear and I want to make a left while there is still a clearance of traffic.  She refuses to go because the light is red!  I tried to explain to her that the signal does not control the intersection and that it's basically red all the time unless someone operates the gate to enter the parking lot.  She eventually got the drift, but by the time she went, I had to wait another full cycle of the next intersection's (Archer/Sutphin) signal before I could find a clearing.
This could be addressed by posting the MUTCD W3-3i "IRRELEVANT SIGNAL AHEAD" sign in advance of the intersection...

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 10:44:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 14, 2020, 10:16:58 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
Several blatant MUTCD violations in this setup Hudson, NY

Zoom in to the pole signal if its hard to see, and pan around a bit

https://maps.app.goo.gl/obNXxuJsi37T4AKPA

Can we list them all?
- That 5 section signal that is protective permissive I guess.
- One signal per lane.

The red ball/straight arrow thing bothers me the most. And forget about one signal per lane, they only bothered with one signal per direction!

Bonus: the right turn signal for traffic coming from the left had the bottom section (of 5) covered by a no turn on red sign
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on June 15, 2020, 12:34:47 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
There's no "presumably" there. That's exactly who that parking lot is for.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jamaica_LIRR_Station;_Employee_Parking_Lot-1.jpg

Zoom in on the logos of every car and SUV there.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 15, 2020, 12:35:49 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 10:44:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 14, 2020, 10:16:58 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
Several blatant MUTCD violations in this setup Hudson, NY

Zoom in to the pole signal if its hard to see, and pan around a bit

https://maps.app.goo.gl/obNXxuJsi37T4AKPA

Can we list them all?
- That 5 section signal that is protective permissive I guess.
- One signal per lane.

The red ball/straight arrow thing bothers me the most. And forget about one signal per lane, they only bothered with one signal per direction!

Bonus: the right turn signal for traffic coming from the left had the bottom section (of 5) covered by a no turn on red sign

Yellow trap by any chance? Not sure if that configuration delays the permissive left turn, or if it is a purely protected only turn.

About that NTOR sign covering the bottom section of the arrow. Is that arrow bimodal? Seems like they could have repurposed the signal into R-Y-G-YA-GA for the right turn overlap.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 17, 2020, 09:04:27 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Anyway, I'm trying to make a left turn when traffic clears.  The car in front of me won't budge.  I'm honking and she's not moving.  I go up to her and say, why don't you go traffic is clear and I want to make a left while there is still a clearance of traffic.  She refuses to go because the light is red!  I tried to explain to her that the signal does not control the intersection and that it's basically red all the time unless someone operates the gate to enter the parking lot.  She eventually got the drift, but by the time she went, I had to wait another full cycle of the next intersection's (Archer/Sutphin) signal before I could find a clearing.

I see similar signals at government building parking lots in the DC area, but those are not usually places at intersections so there is little confusion for traffic on the public streets..

Went through the light here (https://goo.gl/maps/8miKtzo3Zy4mP1Po8) but then someone two cars in front saw the red light controlling the main road, and stopped for that.  I had to honk past the car in front and they got the message.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 17, 2020, 10:21:34 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 17, 2020, 09:04:27 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Anyway, I'm trying to make a left turn when traffic clears.  The car in front of me won't budge.  I'm honking and she's not moving.  I go up to her and say, why don't you go traffic is clear and I want to make a left while there is still a clearance of traffic.  She refuses to go because the light is red!  I tried to explain to her that the signal does not control the intersection and that it's basically red all the time unless someone operates the gate to enter the parking lot.  She eventually got the drift, but by the time she went, I had to wait another full cycle of the next intersection's (Archer/Sutphin) signal before I could find a clearing.

I see similar signals at government building parking lots in the DC area, but those are not usually places at intersections so there is little confusion for traffic on the public streets..

Went through the light here (https://goo.gl/maps/8miKtzo3Zy4mP1Po8) but then someone two cars in front saw the red light controlling the main road, and stopped for that.  I had to honk past the car in front and they got the message.

Lol I go through that light all the time. I usually spy on the through traffic's signal to know when it's good to go, but never seen anyone get confused. Still, the signal placement could use some work.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 18, 2020, 11:07:47 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 17, 2020, 10:21:34 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 17, 2020, 09:04:27 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 12, 2020, 08:39:39 AM
That last post reminds me of a story.

I was once at this intersection, 146th and Archer in Queens, NY.  It's a T-intersection where 146th ends at Archer with a stop sign.  Across the street there is a parking lot (for LIRR employees presumably) where a signal is used to control the operation of the gate.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7003139,-73.8087162,3a,75y,154.75h,76.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1DrIuO6B10A9t0xzMstUxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Anyway, I'm trying to make a left turn when traffic clears.  The car in front of me won't budge.  I'm honking and she's not moving.  I go up to her and say, why don't you go traffic is clear and I want to make a left while there is still a clearance of traffic.  She refuses to go because the light is red!  I tried to explain to her that the signal does not control the intersection and that it's basically red all the time unless someone operates the gate to enter the parking lot.  She eventually got the drift, but by the time she went, I had to wait another full cycle of the next intersection's (Archer/Sutphin) signal before I could find a clearing.

I see similar signals at government building parking lots in the DC area, but those are not usually places at intersections so there is little confusion for traffic on the public streets..

Went through the light here (https://goo.gl/maps/8miKtzo3Zy4mP1Po8) but then someone two cars in front saw the red light controlling the main road, and stopped for that.  I had to honk past the car in front and they got the message.

Lol I go through that light all the time. I usually spy on the through traffic's signal to know when it's good to go, but never seen anyone get confused. Still, the signal placement could use some work.

Surprised that there's so much confusion with a signal that has lovers, but it does seem that the signal faces are not properly faced.  If you're coming off the off-ramp are all the signal faces visible in your line of sight, or just the right most one?

[Because in my mind a simple fix would be to remove the right most of the signal faces there so that there is no confusion for off-ramp traffic.]
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 19, 2020, 07:41:58 PM
https://youtu.be/gmQm6G5w4bM?t=32

the timing there doesn't look so smart to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 19, 2020, 08:38:39 PM
Love those California style traffic lights!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 19, 2020, 08:41:26 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 19, 2020, 07:41:58 PM
https://youtu.be/gmQm6G5w4bM?t=32

the timing there doesn't look so smart to me.

Get the damn bikes out of the median! Stripe a shoulder or something; far less money. But that's beside the point I guess...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 20, 2020, 03:29:37 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 19, 2020, 08:41:26 PM
Get the damn bikes out of the median! Stripe a shoulder or something; far less money. But that's beside the point I guess...

Yeah, a bike lane on the shoulder would be cheaper, but a separated bike facility is inherently safer for bicyclists than a bike lane.

This is more innovative than I've seen elsewhere, as it being in the median dramatically reduces bicycle conflict points with smaller intersections and driveways. And it probably was far less to implement this way than to construct a two-way cycle track on one side of the street or the other, given the existing layout.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 20, 2020, 08:11:28 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 19, 2020, 08:38:39 PM
Love those California style traffic lights!
mhm but go to 0:31
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 20, 2020, 08:22:18 PM
mhm?..........What about 0:31?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 20, 2020, 09:20:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 20, 2020, 08:22:18 PM
mhm?..........What about 0:31?

The left turn and the bike signals are both showing "go" signals (yellow left arrow, green bike symbol).

The placement, however, is still excellent as usual.

Quote from: roadfro on June 20, 2020, 03:29:37 PM
This is more innovative than I've seen elsewhere, as it being in the median dramatically reduces bicycle conflict points with smaller intersections and driveways. And it probably was far less to implement this way than to construct a two-way cycle track on one side of the street or the other, given the existing layout.

The classic case study is usually Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. The wide median was formerly parking, but was converted to a two-way cycle track about ten years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 20, 2020, 09:32:56 PM
You're right Jakeroot. The bicycle signal should not have gone to green until the left-turn signal was red. Looks like a programming error maybe?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 21, 2020, 11:24:56 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 20, 2020, 09:20:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 20, 2020, 08:22:18 PM
mhm?..........What about 0:31?

The left turn and the bike signals are both showing "go" signals (yellow left arrow, green bike symbol).

The placement, however, is still excellent as usual.

Quote from: roadfro on June 20, 2020, 03:29:37 PM
This is more innovative than I've seen elsewhere, as it being in the median dramatically reduces bicycle conflict points with smaller intersections and driveways. And it probably was far less to implement this way than to construct a two-way cycle track on one side of the street or the other, given the existing layout.

The classic case study is usually Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. The wide median was formerly parking, but was converted to a two-way cycle track about ten years ago.

The median on Pennsylvania was not legal parking, at least in the years that I've been working nearby.  I remember that before the bike lane was insalled, all you had was a wide painted median.  Taxi drivers would make illegal midblock u-turns through this median all the time.
Because of Inauguration related activities, Pennsylvania Ave is somewhat unique.  Double white lines instead of yellow to separate traffic!  Also, in order to allow for the presidential parade, there is no cement island along the street.  During normal oprations, there are singals placed in the median, because the street is so wide.  Since the signal faces are there, there is no ability to turn this into a regular lane. 

While there are some safety concerns with a median bike lane, the one in washignton is done really well.  No lane of traffic was removed for its placement.  Occasional thru lanes were converted to left turn lanes at certain intersections, although most left turns between the Captiol and hte White House are prohibited.  While no cement median to protet the bikers, there are removable "armadillos" that at least make it difficult for cars to enter the bike lanes.  I can tell you that pre-COVID this was a really popular bike route.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8941066,-77.0243159,3a,75y,191.76h,85.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6NyTgXDzJIQ004vug87EYQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 21, 2020, 01:20:26 PM
^ Also quite interesting. Although that definitely should be a double yellow between the bike lanes...

I'm not sure that I would feel as comfortable using these median bike lanes as opposed to the previous example from California. They seem a bit less protected for my liking. (Although I'm saying this having not ridden a bike on any major street in quite some time.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 21, 2020, 02:43:34 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 21, 2020, 11:24:56 AM
The median on Pennsylvania was not legal parking, at least in the years that I've been working nearby.  I remember that before the bike lane was insalled, all you had was a wide painted median.  Taxi drivers would make illegal midblock u-turns through this median all the time.

I think I was misappropriating some of the existing median parking near the eastern end of the street as something that occurred along the entire stretch, although historic street view clearly shows that the median was not used for parking at any point. That said, historic satellite imagery suggests that it was informally used by some cars for parking, although the imagery isn't clear enough to show what these vehicles might have been doing in the median. For all I know, it was just police vehicles hanging out, and they get to do what they want, I guess lol

Quote from: roadfro on June 21, 2020, 01:20:26 PM
I'm not sure that I would feel as comfortable using these median bike lanes as opposed to the previous example from California. They seem a bit less protected for my liking. (Although I'm saying this having not ridden a bike on any major street in quite some time.)

I would have to agree with mrsman's sentiments. It's actually quite well done. It seems poorly protected, although the black and white armadillos seem to deter 95%+ of illegal U-turns. I've ridden scooters and bikes up and down this stretch quite a lot over the last couple years, at it's usually quite pleasant. Especially compared to other bike lanes in the city, particularly around the mall, as cars like to park in them, and pedestrians frequently wander into them. The only issue with the track along Pennsylvania Ave is at intersections, where pedestrians end up right in the middle of the cycle track waiting to cross the second half of the street. The signals are long enough to cross in one fell swoop, but "pedestrian wandering" is extremely common in DC, and people hang out in medians waiting to cross all the time, especially if they started crossing with only a couple seconds left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 21, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
Unrelated, but related to both Pennsylvania Ave and traffic signals: the double permissive right turn from Pennsylvania Ave to southbound 9th has been removed, in favour of a protected-only turn. I know the city has been removing double permissive lefts, although I didn't know they were tackling the double rights as well. I saw them modifying the signal when I was there last summer, although it had been in limbo and I wasn't sure if they were actually going through with the change. A "no turn on red arrow" sign was installed, but the signal was still all orb displays:

(https://i.imgur.com/olgTxqj.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 21, 2020, 08:03:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 21, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
Unrelated, but related to both Pennsylvania Ave and traffic signals: the double permissive right turn from Pennsylvania Ave to southbound 9th has been removed, in favour of a protected-only turn. I know the city has been removing double permissive lefts, although I didn't know they were tackling the double rights as well. I saw them modifying the signal when I was there last summer, although it had been in limbo and I wasn't sure if they were actually going through with the change. A "no turn on red arrow" sign was installed, but the signal was still all orb displays:

(https://i.imgur.com/olgTxqj.jpg)

This picture was taken probably days before they implemented the arrow signal.  If you see in the distance there is a signal face to the right of the further green signal next to the Archives building that is covered in tarp.  That is now a RA-YA-GA signal.  The near side signal facing backwards that is the most prominent signal in the photo is now also a RA-YA-GA signal.  In this way both straight traffic and right turning traffic have two signal faces.  For whatever reason, the sign was put up before the arrow signal came into effect.  [It probably should have been covered up until the arrow signal was ready to be displayed.]

This is part of a project in the name of pedestrian safety to eliminate pedestrian conflict at any existing dual turn.  I mentioned this a few months ago on the "double left turn thread":

Quote from: mrsman on March 10, 2020, 11:19:32 AM
DC is going through a process of adjusting the signals on all double turns to avoid conflict with pedestrians.  I don't believe there were any double lefts permissive against opposing traffic [which is the main emphasis of this thread], but there were double lefts and double rights against pedestrians that are now going to become protected only turns to separate turning traffic from pedestrians.

In the name of Vision Zero.

https://ddot.dc.gov/page/intersections-dual-turn-lanes


[Right before my office closed, I took advantage of walking around DC to check out specific examples from the list on the link.  In some cases, a dual turn lane became a single turn lane.  In other cases, pedestrian separation of a double turn has occurred - just as the example at 9th and Penn that Jake Root posted.  9th and Penn is really close to my office and when I saw the changes, I decided to learn more and used the extra time I had to do some extended walking around Downtown DC.  Many of the changes already occurred in the blocks near the White House.]

With respect to this corner, recently it was two lanes with the non-curb lane being an option/right lane.  With the addition of the RA-YA-GA signal, it was transformed into two right turn lanes.  This is a busy turn as it leads to the 9th street tunnel that gets right to I-395 to Virginia.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 22, 2020, 03:13:58 PM
Weirdest fire station signal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3986871,-71.1742741,3a,15y,282.29h,97.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbZwW8kgga6UKEJAR9_y4Ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's with the red lens?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 22, 2020, 03:21:02 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 22, 2020, 03:13:58 PM
Weirdest fire station signal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3986871,-71.1742741,3a,15y,282.29h,97.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbZwW8kgga6UKEJAR9_y4Ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's with the red lens?

Bad diodes?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 22, 2020, 03:53:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 22, 2020, 03:21:02 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 22, 2020, 03:13:58 PM
Weirdest fire station signal:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3986871,-71.1742741,3a,15y,282.29h,97.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbZwW8kgga6UKEJAR9_y4Ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's with the red lens?

Bad diodes?

Most likely.  Depending on the LEDs and lenses installed, they can have this effect when they go bad.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 25, 2020, 01:53:15 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They seem a little too thick to me. I don't mind some heft, although I'm more bothered by mast arms that are too long.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 08:26:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
They're nice, wish they used FYAs though smh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 25, 2020, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 08:26:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
They're nice, wish they used FYAs though smh.

It's NJ. Baby steps.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 02:43:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 25, 2020, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 08:26:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
They're nice, wish they used FYAs though smh.

It's NJ. Baby steps.

https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.5333028,-74.4194717,3a,26.4y,198.01h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgqw481rS8VoiDYIoC5TCiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 25, 2020, 06:58:42 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 02:43:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 25, 2020, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 25, 2020, 08:26:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
They're nice, wish they used FYAs though smh.

It's NJ. Baby steps.

https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.5333028,-74.4194717,3a,26.4y,198.01h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgqw481rS8VoiDYIoC5TCiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
That's more like it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 08:59:17 PM
Those thick mast-arms are New York State DOT style. Increasingly common on Long Island. First time I've seen them used in New Jersey. And BTW, is that intersection the whole downtown Vineland business district or is there an actual village somewhere near there? LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on June 25, 2020, 10:47:58 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 25, 2020, 08:59:17 PM
Those thick mast-arms are New York State DOT style. Increasingly common on Long Island. First time I've seen them used in New Jersey. And BTW, is that intersection the whole downtown Vineland business district or is there an actual village somewhere near there? LOL
There's plenty of downtown businesses heading east on Landis Ave.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 25, 2020, 11:15:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 25, 2020, 01:53:15 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They seem a little too thick to me. I don't mind some heft, although I'm more bothered by mast arms that are too long.

They installed them along NJ 38 several years ago.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/9QEGJJ3QNVwohjth8

Here's an interesting case though...they revised most of the intersection at NJ 73 and Fellowship road. NJ 73 South and Fellowship Road North/South received long but moderate-width masts to span up to 5 lanes.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Yam99PuQg7xX519p7

But for NJ 73 North, they never touched what existed, so they left the light as is, which is more of the traditional Jersey simple setup. For those at the stop line, that leaves 1 light for the left turn lane, and for the 3 thru lanes, they get just one overhead signal, and one side mounted signal to the right!

https://maps.app.goo.gl/UVX5Di6AHjSj6XV2A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 29, 2020, 12:06:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I see that both directions have a doghouse. Does it activate based on time of day? Maybe it was formerly split-phased?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 29, 2020, 08:21:47 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2020, 12:06:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I see that both directions have a doghouse. Does it activate based on the time of day? Maybe it was formerly split-phased?

I'm not even sure. There is no left turn lane so they probably give a red with a green left in both directions. I don't know the info well enough about here though
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 09:26:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm just surprised to see a side-mounted doghouse. In my part of the country only inline-5s are side mounted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 29, 2020, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 09:26:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm just surprised to see a side-mounted doghouse. In my part of the country only inline-5s are side mounted.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/O13sy7roKX82FGHwzKDsAWP2j1r_RWcpgqtv4-HXtJ9A6JLwYsKFiFECloHeoBt9KbfDM7nrVYynwa9taFOv4XyickYDJmkgSHrTVAoaWoNrfAtaetHy9oy1hg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 29, 2020, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 09:26:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm just surprised to see a side-mounted doghouse. In my part of the country only inline-5s are side mounted.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/O13sy7roKX82FGHwzKDsAWP2j1r_RWcpgqtv4-HXtJ9A6JLwYsKFiFECloHeoBt9KbfDM7nrVYynwa9taFOv4XyickYDJmkgSHrTVAoaWoNrfAtaetHy9oy1hg

It says error 403 (forbidden)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 30, 2020, 08:08:24 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 29, 2020, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 29, 2020, 09:26:34 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 28, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
What is wrong here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7004417,-70.3004964,3a,75y,96.6h,82.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ym8ckXvN7tPvRlpB0Ex5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I'm just surprised to see a side-mounted doghouse. In my part of the country only inline-5s are side mounted.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/O13sy7roKX82FGHwzKDsAWP2j1r_RWcpgqtv4-HXtJ9A6JLwYsKFiFECloHeoBt9KbfDM7nrVYynwa9taFOv4XyickYDJmkgSHrTVAoaWoNrfAtaetHy9oy1hg

It says error 403 (forbidden)

Oh, it just shows this: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8798442,-70.8836459,3a,18.1y,219.66h,92.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saIRr3qXDkI2gDHFBItxHAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 30, 2020, 08:51:46 PM
Uncharacteristically thick mast arm in Virginia, RIC's Broad Rd: https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.6605382,-77.6392178,3a,70.5y,97.95h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szREKF135mVej3XOMaRvgVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on June 30, 2020, 11:32:49 PM
^^ Those thick mast arms are typical WisDOT installations
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 30, 2020, 11:51:18 PM
Quote from: Big John on June 30, 2020, 11:32:49 PM
^^ Those thick mast arms are typical WisDOT installations

I would say this is a tad thicker.
Aforementioned VA install:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.6605382,-77.6392178,3a,19.9y,130.39h,99.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szREKF135mVej3XOMaRvgVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Newer WI install:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.031947,-88.1774308,3a,49y,59.4h,101.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skF3mUmF-trPmnJl6SK9CIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 01, 2020, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7480802,-122.4035651,3a,15y,351.89h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sceKtcAPwQwQMZgpUJhZTKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is clearly a flasher.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 01, 2020, 01:07:06 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 01, 2020, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7480802,-122.4035651,3a,15y,351.89h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sceKtcAPwQwQMZgpUJhZTKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is clearly a flasher.

Speaking of flashers/beacons, is this a legal use of red flashing beacons at this sign assembly? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXq8vkzwW0&t=3m3s) There is a STOP sign at the end of the road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 01, 2020, 01:11:11 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

That's just a flashing caution signal that alternates between the top and bottom lights.  There's no metering sign, there's only one light for two lanes, and if it was a metering light you couldn't tell which lane it was for.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 01, 2020, 01:16:21 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 01, 2020, 01:07:06 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 01, 2020, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7480802,-122.4035651,3a,15y,351.89h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sceKtcAPwQwQMZgpUJhZTKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is clearly a flasher.

Speaking of flashers/beacons, is this a legal use of red flashing beacons at this sign assembly? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXq8vkzwW0&t=3m3s) There is a STOP sign at the end of the road.

They look like amber flashers, not red.

As for the driver on that video who overly nitpicks everything everyone does on the roadway, I couldn't help but notice he didn't stop at the stop line, but rather over the pedestrian crossing line.  I guess he only observes what he believes is an infraction when he doesn't make one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on July 01, 2020, 01:31:14 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 01, 2020, 01:16:21 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 01, 2020, 01:07:06 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 01, 2020, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7480802,-122.4035651,3a,15y,351.89h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sceKtcAPwQwQMZgpUJhZTKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is clearly a flasher.

Speaking of flashers/beacons, is this a legal use of red flashing beacons at this sign assembly? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXq8vkzwW0&t=3m3s) There is a STOP sign at the end of the road.

They look like amber flashers, not red.

As for the driver on that video who overly nitpicks everything everyone does on the roadway, I couldn't help but notice he didn't stop at the stop line, but rather over the pedestrian crossing line.  I guess he only observes what he believes is an infraction when he doesn't make one.
Yup - That's the first thing I noticed too.  I didn't even bother turning on the sound, so I was wondering if he was hypocritically nitpicking or just saying "Look, I can barrel across the stop bar too!"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 01, 2020, 05:45:29 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 01, 2020, 01:16:21 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 01, 2020, 01:07:06 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 01, 2020, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 01, 2020, 07:51:11 AM
Very odd traffic signal here on Bayshore Blvd in San Francisco.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7481054,-122.4036337,3a,75y,11.84h,96.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNrsaKRlme7JFyNwU4Mbn6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This may be a metering light for the freeway entrance, but it is very unusual to have a meter at the very beginning of the ramp where it will certainly impact surface traffic.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7480802,-122.4035651,3a,15y,351.89h,87.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sceKtcAPwQwQMZgpUJhZTKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is clearly a flasher.

Speaking of flashers/beacons, is this a legal use of red flashing beacons at this sign assembly? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXq8vkzwW0&t=3m3s) There is a STOP sign at the end of the road.

They look like amber flashers, not red.

As for the driver on that video who overly nitpicks everything everyone does on the roadway, I couldn't help but notice he didn't stop at the stop line, but rather over the pedestrian crossing line.  I guess he only observes what he believes is an infraction when he doesn't make one.

They definitely look red in this GSV view. (https://goo.gl/maps/qs9s84h3ZW7gnU9c8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Green:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,15y,312.21h,94.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yellow:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1207626,-71.1807208,3a,15y,37.94h,98.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK5U_ZC9JKnEHWjL3SAckiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 06, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This looks more like green (FYG, specifically) than white.

I've only seen white in Pennsylvania: example here (https://goo.gl/maps/s2xNwSu6XhEDFWyM8).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 06, 2020, 11:20:39 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Green:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,15y,312.21h,94.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yellow:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1207626,-71.1807208,3a,15y,37.94h,98.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK5U_ZC9JKnEHWjL3SAckiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The green and white the same color. They just look different as you move closer/further or how the light affects them. A few meters down Chestnut St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1209673,-71.1802377,3a,24.1y,288.21h,95.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8KHmWySIJfB53avjnuZh6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) will show you this.
The yellow seems random though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 12:46:58 AM
Yep my bad. Still the green is odd.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 06, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This looks more like green (FYG, specifically) than white.

I've only seen white in Pennsylvania: example here (https://goo.gl/maps/s2xNwSu6XhEDFWyM8).
It is also found in Culpeper VA. Check the intersection of Main @ Davis in downtown. Very very weird! I would send street view but I'm using my phone.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 07, 2020, 12:49:56 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 06, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This looks more like green (FYG, specifically) than white.

I've only seen white in Pennsylvania: example here (https://goo.gl/maps/s2xNwSu6XhEDFWyM8).
It is also found in Culpeper VA. Check the intersection of Main @ Davis in downtown. Very very weird! I would send street view but I'm using my phone.


iPhone

I've seen it brought up in other threads before, a Euro-style curved backplate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: stevashe on July 07, 2020, 06:43:05 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 07, 2020, 12:49:56 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 06, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This looks more like green (FYG, specifically) than white.

I've only seen white in Pennsylvania: example here (https://goo.gl/maps/s2xNwSu6XhEDFWyM8).
It is also found in Culpeper VA. Check the intersection of Main @ Davis in downtown. Very very weird! I would send street view but I'm using my phone.


iPhone

I've seen it brought up in other threads before, a Euro-style curved backplate.

Here's a streetview link https://goo.gl/maps/qKNxak7XvatFSELw7

Definitely very weird! Looks straight out of Europe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 10:06:56 PM
Quote from: stevashe on July 07, 2020, 06:43:05 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 07, 2020, 12:49:56 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 12:48:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 06, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 06, 2020, 09:55:17 PM
Um... what the fuck Sharon. Trying out different backplates, all at one intersection:

White:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1210303,-71.1804342,3a,21.6y,288.61h,116.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9JLrQRtS2QgALMSHDZoX5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This looks more like green (FYG, specifically) than white.

I've only seen white in Pennsylvania: example here (https://goo.gl/maps/s2xNwSu6XhEDFWyM8).
It is also found in Culpeper VA. Check the intersection of Main @ Davis in downtown. Very very weird! I would send street view but I'm using my phone.


iPhone

I've seen it brought up in other threads before, a Euro-style curved backplate.

Here's a streetview link https://goo.gl/maps/qKNxak7XvatFSELw7

Definitely very weird! Looks straight out of Europe.

Here too:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4729835,-77.994614,3a,75y,146.82h,91.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTH61Cidy_aZPGr9t4xNYQw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 07, 2020, 10:07:37 PM
What's wrong here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8417578,-71.7033934,3a,27.2y,3.38h,89.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siNTrBy-Eq0biKj8idROpHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 07, 2020, 10:38:18 PM
^^
1. No provision for a right turn though it is not prohibited (absence of a no right turn sign)
2. the through arrow is supposed to be above the left turn arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 07, 2020, 11:58:54 PM
^^

3. Lack of a second signal face for the straight through movement.
4. Yellow signal is in conflict with the green straight arrow -- they both should show the same indication.
5. The mast arm assembly should be on the far side corner and not on the near side corner so that traffic in the intersection should know what the signal displays. The signal should be just after Elm, not just before it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 08, 2020, 12:26:32 AM
#5 isn't a requirement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 08, 2020, 11:03:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 08, 2020, 12:26:32 AM
#5 isn't a requirement.

Maybe that's why he said "should" and not "shall"...?   :bigass:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 08, 2020, 12:17:54 PM
I was poking round downtown Denver on Colfax Ave and some of these pre-2010 signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7400462,-104.9929243,3a,66.4y,122.64h,96.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-NSme5QNtYdMngmFbiwAog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en/) are pretty interesting--plenty of 60s-70s 12-8-8 stuff, oversized arrows, trombone arms, etc. Pretty much all of it is now replaced with those standard uniform CO mast arms complete with those weirdly-shaped Colo doghouses (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7401574,-105.0053023,3a,15.2y,89.63h,100.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4IymWMTJORj9emgMkEQuHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 08, 2020, 01:06:58 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3652497,-71.1841558,3a,21.7y,207.37h,105.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9s2eqvqENcpUlqaSkuoZbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What on earth
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 08, 2020, 01:35:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 08, 2020, 01:06:58 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3652497,-71.1841558,3a,21.7y,207.37h,105.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9s2eqvqENcpUlqaSkuoZbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What on earth

Saw that one a few pages back (or maybe on "strangest traffic signals").
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 08, 2020, 03:19:19 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 08, 2020, 12:17:54 PM
I was poking round downtown Denver on Colfax Ave and some of these pre-2010 signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7400462,-104.9929243,3a,66.4y,122.64h,96.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-NSme5QNtYdMngmFbiwAog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en/) are pretty interesting--plenty of 60s-70s 12-8-8 stuff, oversized arrows, trombone arms, etc. Pretty much all of it is now replaced with those standard uniform CO mast arms complete with those weirdly-shaped Colo doghouses (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7401574,-105.0053023,3a,15.2y,89.63h,100.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4IymWMTJORj9emgMkEQuHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

I'm willing to bet WV doesn't find those doghouses weird at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 08, 2020, 03:33:39 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 08, 2020, 01:35:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 08, 2020, 01:06:58 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3652497,-71.1841558,3a,21.7y,207.37h,105.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9s2eqvqENcpUlqaSkuoZbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What on earth

Saw that one a few pages back (or maybe on "strangest traffic signals").

I may have posted it twice lol
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 08, 2020, 04:02:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 08, 2020, 12:17:54 PM
Pretty much all of it is now replaced with those standard uniform CO mast arms complete with those weirdly-shaped Colo doghouses (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7401574,-105.0053023,3a,15.2y,89.63h,100.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4IymWMTJORj9emgMkEQuHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

I've always thought that style made better sense. It's more in line with what the rest of the world does with regards to turn arrows (UK, AU, and NZ come to mind). I think the doghouse configuration is US- (and territories-) exclusive. Personally, I think in-line look better. But that's just me.

As a comment on the terminology: doghouse isn't quite right when used to describe the in-line style used in places like CO. Unless the doghouse has a really slanted roof without a peak :-D.

As well, they're not exactly CO-specific. Common in Colorado, yes, but seen elsewhere too (as mentioned above by plain).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 08, 2020, 06:43:20 PM
While all functionally the same signal, quite a few ways to lay out the 5 aspect PPLT signal:

Towers:
R
Y
G
YA
GA

These are commonly all 12" heads, but older versions would have 8 for the orbs and 12 for the arrows.  Some would also have 12 for the red orb, 12 for the arrows, and 8 for the yellow and green.

Someone else can add how these are oriented for horizontal signals, as I do not recall.

Doghouse - Standard US:

      R
YA         Y
GA         G

(Almost always with 12" heads)

Doghouse - Aligned based on direction:

              R
YA           Y
GA          G

(Almost always with 12" heads)

8/12 hybrid Doghouse - popular in Maryland:

Aligned like the case above, but because the orbs are 8" the signal as a whole looks square

Look at the near side signal here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0321815,-77.0483625,3a,75y,207.57h,87.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxGgNOzLpe7x8SybCsX9OlA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656



Any others that I missed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 08, 2020, 07:35:16 PM
^^ Horizontal signal:  R  Y  LYA  LGA (G or TA) RYA RGA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 08, 2020, 07:36:26 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200708/faddf8c42032796cf7443de6a48141a9.jpg)
Pretty cool crosswalk button.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 08, 2020, 08:38:21 PM
That so called weird Doghouse signal used in Colorado is the standard configuration in Nassau County NY on Long Island. It's called a side-by-side. And I think it's better looking and more visually logical than the traditional Doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 09, 2020, 11:45:47 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2020, 08:38:21 PM
That so called weird Doghouse signal used in Colorado is the standard configuration in Nassau County NY on Long Island. It's called a side-by-side. And I think it's better looking and more visually logical than the traditional Doghouse.

Suffolk and NYC use that style too instead of standard doghouses (where FYAs or stacks are not otherwise used). 100% agree that it is easier to understand and looks better.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 09, 2020, 11:56:27 AM
I've always thought of the standard doghouses or Illinois-style inline-5s look better, but maybe that's just me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 09, 2020, 11:49:38 PM
Okay, there's a lane split and no crossing on the main road.  Why does the main road have a signal with three signal heads? (https://goo.gl/maps/1wYxouA1gyvwrBUQ6)  Why isn't it just a green-T?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 01:13:30 AM
Here's a double right doghouse-controlled turn (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.4898019,-96.3976999,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stJnm2vchQdVOdLoZCEOEiA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Sioux City, Iowa. Any more of these?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 07:56:40 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on July 09, 2020, 11:49:38 PM
Okay, there's a lane split and no crossing on the main road.  Why does the main road have a signal with three signal heads? (https://goo.gl/maps/1wYxouA1gyvwrBUQ6)  Why isn't it just a green-T?

While the green-T is the most proper signal in this instance, it is not necessarily a bad thing to put up a regular signal.  Perhaps it was easier for the signal department to put up a normal signal.  Also, just because it is possible to signalize red and yellow, doesn't mean that it actually does.

I recall this signal in Washington DC at Pennsylvania and Constitution.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8917729,-77.0166988,3a,75y,103.53h,72.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smgFSWR76quUpmfR9xMPTLQ!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Notice that there seems to be no reason for straight traffic to ever stop.  For the longest time, that was in fact the case, and the signal showed green continuously even though it used a normal signal head.

So why does it turn red now?  When the median bike lanes were installed, they used the straight signals to control the bike lane traffic as well.  As these are in conflict with the left turn, they have to be red when the left turn gets a green arrow.  Could this be addressed with bike signals?  Probably, but given that the signals are all close to each other, a bike signal may be confused with the straight signal and should probably not be used in the interests of safety.  In a normal intersection, the straight signals could be kept on the right side with the use of mast arms, but given the direct view of the Capitol, mast arms are not allowed on Pennsylvania, despit the street's width, so that the view of the building is not impacted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on July 10, 2020, 08:48:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2020, 08:38:21 PM
That so called weird Doghouse signal used in Colorado is the standard configuration in Nassau County NY on Long Island. It's called a side-by-side. And I think it's better looking and more visually logical than the traditional Doghouse.

I like to think of those non-doghouses as "Backward Utah's" since they look like the state of Utah, but reversed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 09:28:57 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 10, 2020, 08:48:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2020, 08:38:21 PM
That so called weird Doghouse signal used in Colorado is the standard configuration in Nassau County NY on Long Island. It's called a side-by-side. And I think it's better looking and more visually logical than the traditional Doghouse.

I like to think of those non-doghouses as "Backward Utah's" since they look like the state of Utah, but reversed.

But if they are for right turn signals, they are forward Utahs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 09:57:44 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 09:28:57 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on July 10, 2020, 08:48:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 08, 2020, 08:38:21 PM
That so called weird Doghouse signal used in Colorado is the standard configuration in Nassau County NY on Long Island. It's called a side-by-side. And I think it's better looking and more visually logical than the traditional Doghouse.

I like to think of those non-doghouses as "Backward Utah's" since they look like the state of Utah, but reversed.

But if they are for right turn signals, they are forward Utahs.

Like these (yes I quoted myself):
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 01:13:30 AM
Here's a double right doghouse-controlled turn (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.4898019,-96.3976999,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stJnm2vchQdVOdLoZCEOEiA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Sioux City, Iowa. Any more of these?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 10, 2020, 12:10:46 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 01:13:30 AM
Here's a double right doghouse-controlled turn (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.4898019,-96.3976999,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stJnm2vchQdVOdLoZCEOEiA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Sioux City, Iowa. Any more of these?

Heres one on Long Island

https://maps.app.goo.gl/vh2D1r9uQaCY5CBq8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 12:44:20 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 10, 2020, 12:10:46 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 01:13:30 AM
Here's a double right doghouse-controlled turn (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.4898019,-96.3976999,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stJnm2vchQdVOdLoZCEOEiA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Sioux City, Iowa. Any more of these?

Heres one on Long Island

https://maps.app.goo.gl/vh2D1r9uQaCY5CBq8

Cool! Also got those weird extended visors (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8439341,-73.2796131,3a,31.8y,25.67h,116.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_05oze_S_n7EUQmep2os7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that are so common in California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 12:46:22 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 10, 2020, 12:10:46 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 01:13:30 AM
Here's a double right doghouse-controlled turn (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.4898019,-96.3976999,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stJnm2vchQdVOdLoZCEOEiA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Sioux City, Iowa. Any more of these?

Heres one on Long Island

https://maps.app.goo.gl/vh2D1r9uQaCY5CBq8

The right turn doghouses in Iowa are shaped like regular doghouses.  The ones on Long Island are absolutley shaped like Utah, the yellow border makes this point more obvious.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on July 10, 2020, 01:15:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 09:28:57 AM
But if they are for right turn signals, they are forward Utahs.
Such signals (https://www.google.se/maps/@58.4271385,15.611947,3a,22.5y,309.57h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVtyuQj5k5cdsalmXGvJWww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) are standard design here, Sweden's full of Utahs.  :D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 10, 2020, 01:27:24 PM
Quote from: riiga on July 10, 2020, 01:15:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 09:28:57 AM
But if they are for right turn signals, they are forward Utahs.
Such signals (https://www.google.se/maps/@58.4271385,15.611947,3a,22.5y,309.57h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVtyuQj5k5cdsalmXGvJWww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) are standard design here, Sweden's full of Utahs.  :D

And that's a point I made in my original post: the so-called "side-by-side" in-line style is the standard style used across the globe. Centralising the red orb seems to be an American practice (not Canadian either, since Canada places all arrows and orbs in-line with each other, whether horizontal or vertical). In this way, Colorado, West Virginia (didn't know about this one), and places in New York are actually more normal with respect to other places across the globe.

As I mentioned before, I much prefer the "Utah" style since the arrows are "tacked on" to the correct side of the three orbs: if it's a left turn, they're tacked on to the left side of the three orbs; if for right turns, they're tacked onto the right side. In the end, it may not make any functional difference, but my OCD prefers this as it's just more logical. Plus I'm not really keen on the "peaky" look of doghouse signals. But that's entirely personal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 10, 2020, 01:30:44 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 07:56:40 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on July 09, 2020, 11:49:38 PM
Okay, there's a lane split and no crossing on the main road.  Why does the main road have a signal with three signal heads? (https://goo.gl/maps/1wYxouA1gyvwrBUQ6)  Why isn't it just a green-T?

While the green-T is the most proper signal in this instance, it is not necessarily a bad thing to put up a regular signal.  Perhaps it was easier for the signal department to put up a normal signal.  Also, just because it is possible to signalize red and yellow, doesn't mean that it actually does.

I recall this signal in Washington DC at Pennsylvania and Constitution.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8917729,-77.0166988,3a,75y,103.53h,72.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smgFSWR76quUpmfR9xMPTLQ!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Notice that there seems to be no reason for straight traffic to ever stop.  For the longest time, that was in fact the case, and the signal showed green continuously even though it used a normal signal head.

So why does it turn red now?  When the median bike lanes were installed, they used the straight signals to control the bike lane traffic as well.  As these are in conflict with the left turn, they have to be red when the left turn gets a green arrow.  Could this be addressed with bike signals?  Probably, but given that the signals are all close to each other, a bike signal may be confused with the straight signal and should probably not be used in the interests of safety.  In a normal intersection, the straight signals could be kept on the right side with the use of mast arms, but given the direct view of the Capitol, mast arms are not allowed on Pennsylvania, despit the street's width, so that the view of the building is not impacted.

I've long found that intersection & signal very confusing. I know why it operates the way it does (because of the conflicts with the bike lane), but the advent of modern bike signals should preclude the operation as-is. Right now, I can't even begin to count how many cars I've seen run that light. There's no obvious conflict, no crosswalk or anything. Seems like most drivers assume it's a mistake or something.

They could have just mounted the bike signal below the other signals, as they do in Seattle (https://goo.gl/maps/rXiHecVhznK9fd5M7). To keep from cluttering, backplates could be discarded on the bike signals, since they're low enough to not have to worry about sun glare.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
Unrelated
When I went to Memphis, I was taken aback by the age (https://www.google.pl/maps/@35.1428811,-90.0035644,3a,31.3y,75.94h,105.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm8S9p3BmHI1YHtZmgqRNCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) of some of the signals. I've heard there are more of these through the south (3/4 section original signals). Does anyone else know where more might be? I drove by one in Tuscumbia, AL, by the Hellen Keller birthplace (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7380634,-87.7034181,3a,16.4y,190.92h,97.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9tO1nxCu5Et8PjCZuwkLig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/), and the signal may or may not remember when she was alive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 10, 2020, 06:18:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
I drove by one in Tuscumbia, AL, by the Hellen Keller birthplace (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7380634,-87.7034181,3a,16.4y,190.92h,97.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9tO1nxCu5Et8PjCZuwkLig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/), and the signal may or may not remember when she was alive.

I immediately started laughing, but you may actually be right :-D

Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
When I went to Memphis, I was taken aback by the age (https://www.google.pl/maps/@35.1428811,-90.0035644,3a,31.3y,75.94h,105.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm8S9p3BmHI1YHtZmgqRNCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) of some of the signals. I've heard there are more of these through the south (3/4 section original signals).

Definitely older signals in Memphis, although Memphis is much better at placing the signals than the rest of Tennessee.

As a side-note: TN also appears to be a user of side-by-side 5-section signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 10, 2020, 06:18:58 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
I drove by one in Tuscumbia, AL, by the Hellen Keller birthplace (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7380634,-87.7034181,3a,16.4y,190.92h,97.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9tO1nxCu5Et8PjCZuwkLig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/), and the signal may or may not remember when she was alive.

I immediately started laughing, but you may actually be right :-D

Quote from: STLmapboy on July 10, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
When I went to Memphis, I was taken aback by the age (https://www.google.pl/maps/@35.1428811,-90.0035644,3a,31.3y,75.94h,105.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm8S9p3BmHI1YHtZmgqRNCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) of some of the signals. I've heard there are more of these through the south (3/4 section original signals).

Definitely older signals in Memphis, although Memphis is much better at placing the signals than the rest of Tennessee.

As a side-note: TN also appears to be a user of side-by-side 5-section signals.

Noticed that too (also present in Nebraska), although many Memphian intersections (especially inside the 40/240 beltway) use the "homemade do-it-yourself" doghouse--two 12-inch arrows tacked next to an 8-inch standard RYG that's been there a while longer. Example (https://www.google.pl/maps/@35.1193493,-89.9844514,3a,18.7y,14.9h,96.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3un4EV_MLyveWeuwlcSTiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). New York City seems to use this as well. There are none around me in St Louis, and also no differently-sized signal lights (no 12-8-8s, for example). At least that I know of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 11, 2020, 12:00:51 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 10, 2020, 07:56:40 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on July 09, 2020, 11:49:38 PM
Okay, there's a lane split and no crossing on the main road.  Why does the main road have a signal with three signal heads? (https://goo.gl/maps/1wYxouA1gyvwrBUQ6)  Why isn't it just a green-T?

While the green-T is the most proper signal in this instance, it is not necessarily a bad thing to put up a regular signal.  Perhaps it was easier for the signal department to put up a normal signal.  Also, just because it is possible to signalize red and yellow, doesn't mean that it actually does.

[snip]

After I made my post, I realized they could put a red on the through direction to stop traffic for emergency vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 11, 2020, 11:16:06 PM
Check out this old gantry-mounted traffic light assembly (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6898298,-122.466062,3a,61.9y,186.8h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdAs4KyKlgVhS0RjriobNMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Daly City, CA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 12, 2020, 12:18:23 AM
I may have posted this before: gantry sign and traffic light assembly, Oregon City, Oregon.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/949/42103993632_e5c925d40d_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/279zYqG)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 12, 2020, 08:07:36 PM
Here's a weird traffic light I recently saw on SR 209 in Sandy, Utah:

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0ZPwA8nRX2M/XuL_xJyePYI/AAAAAAAACN4/1JMJnUg5lBImFUpyT_Yp_Sa9EZx77WqOwCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_2b27.jpg)

Until now, I had never seen a double red arrow in Utah, and I don't think I've seen a double red arrow on top of a FYA anywhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:50:03 PM
^^^^
That's gotta be a one-off, in terms of vertical alignment with a double red. TX has quite a few 5-section FYAs with double reds, but the whole signal is aligned horizontally.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 12, 2020, 09:50:31 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 12, 2020, 08:07:36 PM
Here's a weird traffic light I recently saw on SR 209 in Sandy, Utah:

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0ZPwA8nRX2M/XuL_xJyePYI/AAAAAAAACN4/1JMJnUg5lBImFUpyT_Yp_Sa9EZx77WqOwCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_2b27.jpg)

Until now, I had never seen a double red arrow in Utah, and I don't think I've seen a double red arrow on top of a FYA anywhere.
Right by my in-laws' house.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:57:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2020, 09:50:31 PM
Right by my in-laws' house.

Congrats!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 12, 2020, 10:29:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:50:03 PM
^^^^
That's gotta be a one-off, in terms of vertical alignment with a double red. TX has quite a few 5-section FYAs with double reds, but the whole signal is aligned horizontally.

Wouldn't surprise me if there's one someone in the Carolinas.  They do occasionally use double red arrow heads for protected only left turns. (https://goo.gl/maps/G43FPgPBagpwTUQJ7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 12, 2020, 10:55:58 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2020, 10:29:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:50:03 PM
^^^^
That's gotta be a one-off, in terms of vertical alignment with a double red. TX has quite a few 5-section FYAs with double reds, but the whole signal is aligned horizontally.

Wouldn't surprise me if there's one someone in the Carolinas.  They do occasionally use double red arrow heads for protected only left turns. (https://goo.gl/maps/G43FPgPBagpwTUQJ7)
I was just going to say I've seen one somewhere in SC, in the Hilton Head area.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 12, 2020, 11:13:50 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 12, 2020, 10:55:58 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 12, 2020, 10:29:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:50:03 PM
^^^^
That's gotta be a one-off, in terms of vertical alignment with a double red. TX has quite a few 5-section FYAs with double reds, but the whole signal is aligned horizontally.

Wouldn't surprise me if there's one someone in the Carolinas.  They do occasionally use double red arrow heads for protected only left turns. (https://goo.gl/maps/G43FPgPBagpwTUQJ7)
I was just going to say I've seen one somewhere in SC, in the Hilton Head area.


iPhone

It's common all through the southeast, the T-shaped protected-only left. Here are some (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.2318248,-81.4986524,3a,49y,333.83h,93.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIp3E_2BLbff0lY5EpBb9uQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) examples (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9032763,-84.4717196,3a,73.6y,71.61h,83.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1OrCBbmNv29VZAhv9zOzEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) from (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6199208,-84.3832901,3a,79y,275.44h,87.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFik6yAcS05PQpsSzITFaTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) Georgia (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4741525,-82.1286049,3a,75y,354.63h,98.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBCkH04mHCR9P9FPlKFmD2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). All four were installed after 2015. Admittedly, I've never seen a T-shaped flashing yellow, though seeing a T-shaped signal west of the Mississippi is in itself notable.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 12, 2020, 11:45:10 PM
^^ Georgia has a policy of a minimum of 2 red arrows on a protected-only left.  The usual method is 2 3-section signals, but the T-shaped signal can be used if the former can't be used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2020, 12:25:16 AM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2020, 11:45:10 PM
^^ Georgia has a policy of a minimum of 2 red arrows on a protected-only left.  The usual method is 2 3-section signals, but the T-shaped signal can be used if the former can't be used.

You learn something new every day.

Then again, by that logic, Georgia's single-lane FYA installations must use the double red arrow? Or have they all been two signals placed directly next to each other*?

* why exactly they end up next to each other, like in DE, rather than one centered over the lane and one off to the left, is beyond me. smh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 13, 2020, 07:13:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2020, 09:57:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 12, 2020, 09:50:31 PM
Right by my in-laws' house.

Congrats!
Thanks!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 07:46:04 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2020, 12:25:16 AM
Quote from: Big John on July 12, 2020, 11:45:10 PM
^^ Georgia has a policy of a minimum of 2 red arrows on a protected-only left.  The usual method is 2 3-section signals, but the T-shaped signal can be used if the former can't be used.

You learn something new every day.

Then again, by that logic, Georgia's single-lane FYA installations must use the double red arrow? Or have they all been two signals placed directly next to each other*?

* why exactly they end up next to each other, like in DE, rather than one centered over the lane and one off to the left, is beyond me. smh.

I would think that the reason would be cost.  In span wire jurisdictions, it is far cheaper to just hang another signal on the wire, then to add a signal on a pole in the far corner.  There may also be a concept of trying to align one singal face per lane. (And in that sense, it may throw drivers off to see the left arrow signal face over a lane that goes in the other direction.)

In many respects, the 4 aspect FYA signal is the 3 aspect protected only signal with a FYA added between the middle and bottom aspect.  Theoretically, every permutation of the 3 aspect protected only signal should be present with the FYAs as well.  So it is surprising in jurisdictions where the T-shaped 3 aspect protected only signal (with two red arrows) is common, taht the equivalent for the FYAs is not also common, like in the posted example from Utah.  Maybe the FYAs are generally installed in pairs so there are at least two FYA signal faces in the operating direction.

As Big John said, two red arrows are required in GA, in some way or fashion.  Two separate signal heads or at minimum two red arrows on the same signal head.  This is probably to ensure redundancy in case one of the red arrows burns out.  I wonder if the same rule applies in Utah.

I also wonder if there are any situations that use the T-shaped signal twice in the same direction.  In my experience, the T-shaped signals that I have encountered have all been the only signal face in that direction.  And based on the above, it would seem that if there are two separate left signal heads, there would simply be no reason for a T shaped signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 07:46:04 AM
As Big John said, two red arrows are required in GA, in some way or fashion.  Two separate signal heads or at minimum two red arrows on the same signal head.  This is probably to ensure redundancy in case one of the red arrows burns out.  I wonder if the same rule applies in Utah.

I also wonder if there are any situations that use the T-shaped signal twice in the same direction.  In my experience, the T-shaped signals that I have encountered have all been the only signal face in that direction.  And based on the above, it would seem that if there are two separate left signal heads, there would simply be no reason for a T shaped signal.

That rule almost certainly does not apply in Utah - in fact, I'd bet around half of all protected lefts in Utah have just one signal head with one red arrow. That's the only double arrow I've ever seen in Utah, and unless it's a dual left, there aren't that many intersections that have an additional signal head.

That wouldn't even be the reason for the double red, though - in this case, there is an additional signal head on the far side (https://goo.gl/maps/FU18iWomDNpuYMVH7).

My bet is they want to put extra emphasis on the red arrow, maybe because there's been a history of red arrow-running crashes at that intersection. Utah does have a fair amount of intersections where there are double red lights, which UDOT uses on occasion at intersections where they want to minimize red light running or emphasize a red light. Most of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA)), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 11:48:13 AM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 07:46:04 AM
As Big John said, two red arrows are required in GA, in some way or fashion.  Two separate signal heads or at minimum two red arrows on the same signal head.  This is probably to ensure redundancy in case one of the red arrows burns out.  I wonder if the same rule applies in Utah.

I also wonder if there are any situations that use the T-shaped signal twice in the same direction.  In my experience, the T-shaped signals that I have encountered have all been the only signal face in that direction.  And based on the above, it would seem that if there are two separate left signal heads, there would simply be no reason for a T shaped signal.

That rule almost certainly does not apply in Utah - in fact, I'd bet around half of all protected lefts in Utah have just one signal head with one red arrow. That's the only double arrow I've ever seen in Utah, and unless it's a dual left, there aren't that many intersections that have an additional signal head.

That wouldn't even be the reason for the double red, though - in this case, there is an additional signal head on the far side (https://goo.gl/maps/FU18iWomDNpuYMVH7).

My bet is they want to put extra emphasis on the red arrow, maybe because there's been a history of red arrow-running crashes at that intersection. Utah does have a fair amount of intersections where there are double red lights, which UDOT uses on occasion at intersections where they want to minimize red light running or emphasize a red light. Most of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.

Interesting.  RR-Y-G lights for emphasis.  Kind of similar to the 12-8-8 that you see in some places, especially Canada, to emphasize the red signal.  I guess there is no standard larger lens than 12", so just place two reds instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 13, 2020, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AMMost of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.

I was wondering if anyone was actually using doghouse bicycle signals . . .
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 06:21:24 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 13, 2020, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AMMost of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.

I was wondering if anyone was actually using doghouse bicycle signals . . .

I was curious about that as well.  What could the 5 aspects possibly be, unless we are giving a protected left turn phase for bikes?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 07:29:35 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 06:21:24 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 13, 2020, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AMMost of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.

I was wondering if anyone was actually using doghouse bicycle signals . . .

I was curious about that as well.  What could the 5 aspects possibly be, unless we are giving a protected left turn phase for bikes?

I have no idea how those work, but there are a few of those on Mountain View. From what I've been able to tell driving by them, the indications appear to be:

-top: red bicycle
-top left: yellow bicycle
-bottom left: green straight arrow
-top right: yellow right arrow
-bottom right: green right arrow
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 09:33:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 07:29:35 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 13, 2020, 06:21:24 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 13, 2020, 12:36:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 13, 2020, 10:44:34 AMMost of them are along the Mountain View Corridor (like this one (https://goo.gl/maps/UKXeySXuLisUab2XA), but I've seen them scattered elsewhere around the state.

I was wondering if anyone was actually using doghouse bicycle signals . . .

I was curious about that as well.  What could the 5 aspects possibly be, unless we are giving a protected left turn phase for bikes?

I have no idea how those work, but there are a few of those on Mountain View. From what I've been able to tell driving by them, the indications appear to be:

-top: red bicycle
-top left: yellow bicycle
-bottom left: green straight arrow
-top right: yellow right arrow
-bottom right: green right arrow
That actually makes sense.  Straight bikes can go with the straight light, but not when the green left arrow for cars is lit.  Left turns will need a protective phase when bikes are stopped.  Bike right turns will need a protective phase when cars are stopped.

How many bikes do they expect through here give these signals?

Nexus 5X

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 13, 2020, 10:53:39 PM
Took a mini-road trip over the past few days and saw some interesting signal configurations:

Meredith NH: I noticed some preemption equipment at this PHB signal. (https://i.redd.it/2qdkch6izh751.jpg) There is also similar equipment in Quincy MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2519941,-71.003867,3a,23.6y,148.68h,96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAV_kYceZI-N20mLbUe2klA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DAV_kYceZI-N20mLbUe2klA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D153.6648%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) as well. How does preemption work with these signals? Does it simply inhibit the pedestrian phase and/or terminate an in-progress pedestrian phase?

Chelsea MA: This 3-section traffic signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3872188,-71.023731,3a,75y,45.09h,94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AtzVY39nUWieWosRLymUA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) for a right turn slip lane is R-Y-FR, near a drawbridge. Never seen this configuration before and it looks more like a fire signal that you'd normally see on the fire station side and/or side streets (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1777131,-70.8806852,3a,23.7y,163.58h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slxoO032IYKNUJdT_OuetFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 14, 2020, 07:35:18 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 13, 2020, 10:53:39 PM
Took a mini-road trip over the past few days and saw some interesting signal configurations:

Meredith NH: I noticed some preemption equipment at this PHB signal. (https://i.redd.it/2qdkch6izh751.jpg) There is also similar equipment in Quincy MA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2519941,-71.003867,3a,23.6y,148.68h,96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAV_kYceZI-N20mLbUe2klA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DAV_kYceZI-N20mLbUe2klA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D153.6648%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) as well. How does preemption work with these signals? Does it simply inhibit the pedestrian phase and/or terminate an in-progress pedestrian phase?

Chelsea MA: This 3-section traffic signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3872188,-71.023731,3a,75y,45.09h,94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AtzVY39nUWieWosRLymUA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) for a right turn slip lane is R-Y-FR, near a drawbridge. Never seen this configuration before and it looks more like a fire signal that you'd normally see on the fire station side and/or side streets (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1777131,-70.8806852,3a,23.7y,163.58h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slxoO032IYKNUJdT_OuetFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Regarding preemption, it is likely that those HAWK signals get preempted by delaying the pedestrian call.  That is the only phase that would affect emergency vehicles.  If the signal is dark, it should stay dark longer.  If it is already flashing yellow, it can flash yellow a little longer.  Once it goes to solid yellow or solid red it has to remain on that, because a pedestrian will be crossing.  A flashing red also cannot be terminated early, as that is part of the pedestrian clearance phase.  (but then again, traffic can proceed on that phase with a stop)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a pedestrian call has been activated, I believe that preemption cannot shorten the pedestrian clearance phase, i.e. the flashing don't walk.  But pedestrian clearance can bring the signal from walk directly to the flashing don't walk phase.

I don't understand the R-Y-FR signal for a drawbridge.  Perhaps they allow a flashing red when the signal opposes cross traffic so that turning traffic will come to a complete stop and yield to any traffic in its way, but a solid red is shown when the drawbridge is up.  IMO, something like this would be better served with a regular R-Y-G signal and then an electronic no right turn sign that lights up when the bridge is out.  This is common at many right turns where the road you are turning from is parallel to a RR crossing.

Los Angeles has a unique application of this type of signal at driveways that are part of a regular intersection, signalled as R-FR-Y.  When I was a kid, these were signaled with a R-FR, but now they have added a yellow phase as well.

Take a look here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0551703,-118.3863072,3a,75y,215.66h,86.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgDfPl-XyfEivPNanRbJ5Mg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Basically, Livonia is a small street that ends at Pico at a T-intersection.  But it's not a pure T, as from the top of the T is a driveway to/from the bank parking lot.  In this manner, a left from Livonia to Pico is given right of way over traffic from the bank heading down Livonia.  When Livionia gets green, bank gets a flashing red and sees a sign to "watch opposing traffic".  Since its a flashing red, the driveway traffic is forced to treat the intersection like a stop sign, even though the main Pico traffic is stopped by a red light.

While something like this may be useful over a small driveway, I don't like the arrangement here.  THe normal traffic pattern should be that both directions get green and that anyone turning left must yield to opposing traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 14, 2020, 10:51:09 AM
The R-Y-FR light stays FR until the drawbridge is activated which then it'll go red.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 14, 2020, 06:40:58 PM
Signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8931446,-97.0450739,3a,72.1y,359.7h,96.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm6WN4_ITAhf4o8kVM0kEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Grand Forks, ND, with a light fixture coming from the pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 14, 2020, 07:02:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 14, 2020, 06:40:58 PM
Signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8931446,-97.0450739,3a,72.1y,359.7h,96.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm6WN4_ITAhf4o8kVM0kEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Grand Forks, ND, with a light fixture coming from the pole.

I assume you are referring to the apparent mismatch of the light fixture with the signal mast? I ask because light fixtures coming out of a signal mast is standard procedure in most places, although they are typically more integrated than what's seen here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on July 14, 2020, 07:12:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 14, 2020, 06:40:58 PM
Signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8931446,-97.0450739,3a,72.1y,359.7h,96.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm6WN4_ITAhf4o8kVM0kEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Grand Forks, ND, with a light fixture coming from the pole.

That looks ...interesting, like it was Frankenstein'd together lol.  Are FYA's commonly used on signals in ND?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 14, 2020, 09:40:30 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on July 14, 2020, 07:12:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 14, 2020, 06:40:58 PM
Signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.8931446,-97.0450739,3a,72.1y,359.7h,96.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm6WN4_ITAhf4o8kVM0kEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Grand Forks, ND, with a light fixture coming from the pole.

That looks ...interesting, like it was Frankenstein'd together lol.  Are FYA's commonly used on signals in ND?

2017 and onward installs, roughly. It's still majority doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 15, 2020, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.

I'm more intrigued by how three of the four approaches have all of the primary signals near-side, with the stop lines set back to accommodate for it. Very European.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 03:58:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 15, 2020, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.

I'm more intrigued by how three of the four approaches have all of the primary signals near-side, with the stop lines set back to accommodate for it. Very European.

That seems to be somewhat common at larger intersections in the Sunshine State. Anyone have any more examples?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 19, 2020, 08:41:36 AM
Anyone else have tons of lights with a symbol text hybrid.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/c7eb690c1be3428ad80703a248af7f1c.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200719/a774a84bcc92ba578f974e8236e17849.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 19, 2020, 11:54:14 AM
^^ Those are becoming more as the 2000 MUTCD allowed symbol-only pedestrian signals allowing existing word signs to stay in place.

Also rare is 2 pedestrian signals on the same quadrant pointing the same way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 19, 2020, 03:58:21 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on July 19, 2020, 08:41:36 AM
Anyone else have tons of lights with a symbol text hybrid.

Logan, Utah has a handful, but the symbol and text are switched there:

(https://i.imgur.com/FPtQU32.jpeg)

Looks like this was about to be replaced by a new mast-arm signal, which almost certainly means those are gone by now. As far as I know, unless there's one at some minor intersection in Salt Lake, Logan is the only place in Utah to still have text pedestrian signals of any kind.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 19, 2020, 04:07:44 PM
Here's a weirder example in Davis square MA:


https://youtu.be/sBoNcPIa1v8


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CardInLex on July 25, 2020, 05:07:17 PM
A select number of traffic signals in Lexington, KY on Nicholasville Rd (US 27) feature a small blue indication in the rear of the signal heads. This blue light indicates that that head is red. You can see it illuminated here on the opposing left turn signal:

https://goo.gl/maps/5EbRfbwJBccyQJVHA

(If link doesn't load properly look at the backside of the southbound signal heads at the Reynolds Rd intersection).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 25, 2020, 07:15:38 PM
I saw those in Florida. I think theyre nicknamed snitch lights since cops can post up and write tickets easier
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 25, 2020, 10:24:45 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 25, 2020, 07:15:38 PM
I saw those in Florida. I think theyre nicknamed snitch lights since cops can post up and write tickets easier
They also are usually mounted on the top of the signal around here so it can be seen in all directions unlike that Kentucky one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6063154,-81.1986321,3a,27.8y,21.31h,102.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svbcHge_ZEHgKZG1kkQqBow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They're very widespread on most university campuses throughout the state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 25, 2020, 10:41:18 PM
That light in the Florida photo might be there to indicate when the signal has been pre-empted by an approaching emergency vehicle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on July 25, 2020, 10:54:31 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 25, 2020, 10:41:18 PM
That light in the Florida photo might be there to indicate when the signal has been pre-empted by an approaching emergency vehicle.
It does not, they go on and off with the red light right below it always.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 26, 2020, 01:42:42 AM
The blue lights on the traffic signals are definitely there for the cops to use. It makes it easier for them to see which signal is red, thus making it easier to catch red light runners. Newport News, VA have been using these at certain intersections for about five years now.

To me they're an alternate to using red light cameras.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on July 26, 2020, 05:41:51 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 25, 2020, 07:15:38 PM
I saw those in Florida. I think theyre nicknamed snitch lights since cops can post up and write tickets easier

I've always referred to them as "rat lights" (as in the light will rat you out to an officer nearby if you run the red), but don't remember where I exactly picked up that name.  And yes, they're all over the major intersections in Pinellas County, but for the most part seem to be attached to the underside of signals (https://goo.gl/maps/E4LNaVBoc1dceDY37).  However, a couple of times I've seen these lights attached to the back of school zone signs that include flashers, and the light on the back would flash along with the lights on the front of the sign when the school zone was active.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 26, 2020, 05:49:52 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 26, 2020, 05:41:51 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 25, 2020, 07:15:38 PM
I saw those in Florida. I think theyre nicknamed snitch lights since cops can post up and write tickets easier

I've always referred to them as "rat lights" (as in the light will rat you out to an officer nearby if you run the red), but don't remember where I exactly picked up that name.  And yes, they're all over the major intersections in Pinellas County, but for the most part seem to be attached to the underside of signals (https://goo.gl/maps/E4LNaVBoc1dceDY37).  However, a couple of times I've seen these lights attached to the back of school zone signs that include flashers, and the light on the back would flash along with the lights on the front of the sign when the school zone was active.

Are the blue lights mentioned above similar to these lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8506596,-122.2990221,3a,31y,166.35h,97.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1squz-13YXyjpeJKaErzMsOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on the back on ramp meter signals in California?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on July 27, 2020, 09:59:05 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0798294,-96.1755213,3a,16.9y,285.13h,89.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0xVoVtwPyYG1R4ypENAPcg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
I found this intersection in Sioux Center, Iowa, where on the old worded ped signals, the WALK is on top and the DON'T WALK is on the bottom. Have never seen one like this until now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on July 27, 2020, 10:38:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 26, 2020, 05:49:52 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on July 26, 2020, 05:41:51 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 25, 2020, 07:15:38 PM
I saw those in Florida. I think theyre nicknamed snitch lights since cops can post up and write tickets easier

I've always referred to them as "rat lights" (as in the light will rat you out to an officer nearby if you run the red), but don't remember where I exactly picked up that name.  And yes, they're all over the major intersections in Pinellas County, but for the most part seem to be attached to the underside of signals (https://goo.gl/maps/E4LNaVBoc1dceDY37).  However, a couple of times I've seen these lights attached to the back of school zone signs that include flashers, and the light on the back would flash along with the lights on the front of the sign when the school zone was active.

Are the blue lights mentioned above similar to these lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8506596,-122.2990221,3a,31y,166.35h,97.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1squz-13YXyjpeJKaErzMsOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on the back on ramp meter signals in California?

In terms of function, yes; design, not so much.  These lights were installed to inform police that the light was red (save the school zone example I mentioned), but vary in terms of color and placement.  In Newport News, they're blue and on top, while in Pinellas, they're white and on bottom.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 30, 2020, 12:26:44 PM
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, is there no end to the redundancy (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.5634793,-117.8249899,3a,19.9y,313.43h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_LRh78mojO0VLeupNsLp7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) at all?

Yes, that is 5 side mounts and one overhead signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on July 30, 2020, 01:04:00 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 30, 2020, 12:26:44 PM
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, is there no end to the redundancy (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.5634793,-117.8249899,3a,19.9y,313.43h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_LRh78mojO0VLeupNsLp7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) at all?

Yes, that is 5 side mounts and one overhead signal.

On the other hand, jakeroot is probably on Expedia right now booking a flight to go see it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 30, 2020, 01:07:52 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 30, 2020, 12:26:44 PM
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, is there no end to the redundancy (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.5634793,-117.8249899,3a,19.9y,313.43h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_LRh78mojO0VLeupNsLp7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) at all?

Yes, that is 5 side mounts and one overhead signal.

Well, if it's that versus the standard USDOT setup ... yeah I'm taking that every damn day.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2020, 01:04:00 PM
On the other hand, jakeroot is probably on Expedia right now booking a flight to go see it.

I'm already at the airport.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jmacswimmer on July 30, 2020, 01:13:05 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 30, 2020, 12:26:44 PM
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, is there no end to the redundancy (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.5634793,-117.8249899,3a,19.9y,313.43h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_LRh78mojO0VLeupNsLp7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) at all?

Yes, that is 5 side mounts and one overhead signal.

Reminds me of this pedestrian crossing signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1992712,-2.2244061,3a,75y,358.95h,87.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snMZvj7zS7OIxO7y7fccvbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1?hl=en) I came across while studying abroad.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 30, 2020, 05:04:01 PM
This forum has made me pay attention to signal placement, something I never really noticed before. Now it drives me crazy to see agencies continuing to install signals with obviously inferior configurations. The difference between NYS and NJ in this regard is very obvious. In NY signals are usually clustered next to each other on diagonal span wire or overhead on a far side mast arm. If there's a larger vehicle in front of you, you just don't get to see the signals. In NJ the simple addition of an overhead near side signal on the left as standard means that there is usually a signal visible to you regardless of where you stop. It bothers me that New York is willing to spend a lot of money to install new mast arms and signals at an intersection but refuses to make a basic improvement to signal visibility when the opportunity exists.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on July 30, 2020, 08:10:22 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 30, 2020, 05:04:01 PM
This forum has made me pay attention to signal placement, something I never really noticed before. Now it drives me crazy to see agencies continuing to install signals with obviously inferior configurations. The difference between NYS and NJ in this regard is very obvious. In NY signals are usually clustered next to each other on diagonal span wire or overhead on a far side mast arm. If there's a larger vehicle in front of you, you just don't get to see the signals. In NJ the simple addition of an overhead near side signal on the left as standard means that there is usually a signal visible to you regardless of where you stop. It bothers me that New York is willing to spend a lot of money to install new mast arms and signals at an intersection but refuses to make a basic improvement to signal visibility when the opportunity exists.

Like this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.9930648,-73.8206318,3a,75y,35.63h,104.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skqA2kNGmyFsi0jFQB8ERJw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) vs this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.8815851,-74.0837964,3a,31.5y,188.14h,91.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGYVXgZ0MczkO8C3Or5d27g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? (Couldn't find a good NJ truck example). Yeah, I agree with you. I also like NJ being close to 100% mast arm. Redundancy is good, though five side mounts may be a bit overkill.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on July 30, 2020, 11:05:17 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on July 30, 2020, 01:13:05 PM
Reminds me of this pedestrian crossing signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1992712,-2.2244061,3a,75y,358.95h,87.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snMZvj7zS7OIxO7y7fccvbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1?hl=en) I came across while studying abroad.

I'm generally a fan of the British (and Australian) habit of putting lights at both the stop line and the exit, but it's a bit overkill when it's done for a pedestrian crossing, even without the extra light for visibility above/around tall vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on July 30, 2020, 11:06:30 PM
At the other end of the spectrum (presumably this is temporary, as they're changing all the traffic signals on this street in Renton).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50171367228_45ec6617b3_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jrtnwU)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 31, 2020, 03:31:02 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 30, 2020, 05:04:01 PM
This forum has made me pay attention to signal placement, something I never really noticed before. Now it drives me crazy to see agencies continuing to install signals with obviously inferior configurations. The difference between NYS and NJ in this regard is very obvious. In NY signals are usually clustered next to each other on diagonal span wire or overhead on a far side mast arm. If there's a larger vehicle in front of you, you just don't get to see the signals. In NJ the simple addition of an overhead near side signal on the left as standard means that there is usually a signal visible to you regardless of where you stop. It bothers me that New York is willing to spend a lot of money to install new mast arms and signals at an intersection but refuses to make a basic improvement to signal visibility when the opportunity exists.

If you were to query NYS DOT about this, they would probably tell you that their installations meet the standards in the Manual; end of story as far as they're concerned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 02, 2020, 01:19:27 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4733309,-77.9961648,3a,35.6y,38.02h,96.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdZmVfliMBp6Ed8lpcnLdEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

What's up with these European designed signals in Virgina?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on August 04, 2020, 09:53:04 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.

Reminds me of this: Renton-Issaquah Highway (https://goo.gl/maps/3UTzqLrJMU2vWfk48).  Maybe it should have been a continuous arch.  The telephone wire knocked off one of the hoods.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 04, 2020, 03:59:21 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 04, 2020, 09:53:04 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.

Reminds me of this: Renton-Issaquah Highway (https://goo.gl/maps/3UTzqLrJMU2vWfk48).  Maybe it should have been a continuous arch.  The telephone wire knocked off one of the hoods.

Those look like some pretty long hoods. Could've used the slanted hoods (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9383366,-118.2392305,3a,65.4y,76.39h,81.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL3siRVEehD1pAr7-i8ky8w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) that California is so fond of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 04, 2020, 05:56:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 04, 2020, 03:59:21 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 04, 2020, 09:53:04 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on July 15, 2020, 10:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1917119,-82.4657267,3a,16.8y,288.91h,97.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shdVMCY-ub9gqZIp6BnZDQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
So close yet so far. In Florida.

Reminds me of this: Renton-Issaquah Highway (https://goo.gl/maps/3UTzqLrJMU2vWfk48).  Maybe it should have been a continuous arch.  The telephone wire knocked off one of the hoods.

Those look like some pretty long hoods. Could've used the slanted hoods (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9383366,-118.2392305,3a,65.4y,76.39h,81.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL3siRVEehD1pAr7-i8ky8w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) that California is so fond of.
There's one in Geneva, NY that is like that. I'm surprised NYSDOT didn't use diagonal span wire which is what they usually did at the time that was installed.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8756934,-76.9781562,3a,37.5y,196.16h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIYCYKdoOTrrNm_YhfGM78A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8753624,-76.9782629,3a,15y,12.92h,103.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRau7APMJAVElMLUr172qIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on August 05, 2020, 12:32:22 AM
This may have been asked before, but today after the tropical storm ran through NJ and took out power all over my area, a local signal I encountered was in flash mode.  However, I was surprised to see the priority direction get both a flashing yellow and a steady green at the same time.  The cross-street got a regular flashing red.  I don't think I've ever seen that before.  Is there some kind of temporary interval on certain systems that would ever show that in a fault/power outage (green + yellow) before going to just yellow flash (I assumed it did eventually, but didn't stick around to find out), or was there most likely something wrong with the signal? 


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 05, 2020, 08:55:38 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49455356418/in/dateposted-public/

Common case now of mast arms always too long for what is needed.  Can't they customize these arms to fit the exact distance to where the left lane ends?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 05, 2020, 07:11:00 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on August 05, 2020, 12:32:22 AM
This may have been asked before, but today after the tropical storm ran through NJ and took out power all over my area, a local signal I encountered was in flash mode.  However, I was surprised to see the priority direction get both a flashing yellow and a steady green at the same time.  The cross-street got a regular flashing red.  I don't think I've ever seen that before.  Is there some kind of temporary interval on certain systems that would ever show that in a fault/power outage (green + yellow) before going to just yellow flash (I assumed it did eventually, but didn't stick around to find out), or was there most likely something wrong with the signal? 

Pretty sure that was just a short in the controller. It may have been damaged in the storm. I can't imagine a controller would intentionally show conflicting aspects like that–it'd be a liability issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 05, 2020, 07:46:40 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 05, 2020, 08:55:38 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49455356418/in/dateposted-public/

Common case now of mast arms always too long for what is needed.  Can't they customize these arms to fit the exact distance to where the left lane ends?

In that case it's probably just cheaper to get the mast-arm in bulk (at a set size). 

Often, they use arms that are longer for possible future improvements to the intersections, but I don't think that's the case here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:59:14 PM
Yeah I like Nevada too. Similar to Calif. but all straight arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 06, 2020, 12:11:44 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:59:14 PM
Yeah I like Nevada too. Similar to Calif. but all straight arms.
However, the ones I see in Vegas have controller cabinets that are 7 feet tall.  The biggest cabinets for any signal controllers.  NYC of course the smallest with their click boxes that match the 1950's style mast arms they use.

Las Vegas up against NYC with biggest to smallest in technology.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on August 06, 2020, 12:46:49 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 05, 2020, 07:11:00 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on August 05, 2020, 12:32:22 AM
This may have been asked before, but today after the tropical storm ran through NJ and took out power all over my area, a local signal I encountered was in flash mode.  However, I was surprised to see the priority direction get both a flashing yellow and a steady green at the same time.  The cross-street got a regular flashing red.  I don't think I've ever seen that before.  Is there some kind of temporary interval on certain systems that would ever show that in a fault/power outage (green + yellow) before going to just yellow flash (I assumed it did eventually, but didn't stick around to find out), or was there most likely something wrong with the signal? 

Pretty sure that was just a short in the controller. It may have been damaged in the storm. I can't imagine a controller would intentionally show conflicting aspects like that–it'd be a liability issue.
I just wasn't sure if there was some kind of short interim phase I wasn't aware of when it jumps to flash mode, since I can't recall the last time I happened to actually witness that transition during a power outage.  Assuming it's going to battery backup, I assume it completes the cycle to get traffic stopped at a solid red on the side street, and then jumps to flash mode directly so the priority road goes from green to yellow flash (and not both!).  At least it wasn't a true conflict, like red and green at the same time, or greens or yellows for all directions...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

California is one of the few states that has a de facto requirement for both far left, far right and near right signals, in addition to anything overhead. Anything resembling a signal-per-lane requirement is going to produce a shit-ton of signals. Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA. CA has a great setup right now IMO. Virtually no new approach has anything fewer than three through signals. Having 'through-minus-one' to calculate overhead signals helps spreads things out a bit, and definitely cuts down on overhead clutter. It's why you can have giant intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/bfCqNftF6NYPbcgJ9) that somehow don't feel completely shrouded in by signals, as they might be states that insist on signal-per-lane strategies.

Personally, I find post-mounted signals to be far more helpful than extra overhead signals. Why the FHWA would prefer states adopt signal-per-lane first, over more stringent post-mounting requirements, is beyond me. The amount of times I've entered intersections without post-mounted signals, and being completely blind thanks to a taller vehicle, is just sickening.

Utah is interesting, but their signal placement strategy is inexcusably poor for being completely surrounded by states that have far more stringent standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 06, 2020, 06:04:32 AM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on August 06, 2020, 12:46:49 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 05, 2020, 07:11:00 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on August 05, 2020, 12:32:22 AM
This may have been asked before, but today after the tropical storm ran through NJ and took out power all over my area, a local signal I encountered was in flash mode.  However, I was surprised to see the priority direction get both a flashing yellow and a steady green at the same time.  The cross-street got a regular flashing red.  I don't think I've ever seen that before.  Is there some kind of temporary interval on certain systems that would ever show that in a fault/power outage (green + yellow) before going to just yellow flash (I assumed it did eventually, but didn't stick around to find out), or was there most likely something wrong with the signal? 

Pretty sure that was just a short in the controller. It may have been damaged in the storm. I can't imagine a controller would intentionally show conflicting aspects like that–it'd be a liability issue.
I just wasn't sure if there was some kind of short interim phase I wasn't aware of when it jumps to flash mode, since I can't recall the last time I happened to actually witness that transition during a power outage.  Assuming it's going to battery backup, I assume it completes the cycle to get traffic stopped at a solid red on the side street, and then jumps to flash mode directly so the priority road goes from green to yellow flash (and not both!).  At least it wasn't a true conflict, like red and green at the same time, or greens or yellows for all directions...


Nah, just a conflict.  Lights are supposed to be just showing one color at a time, and if a light were to go out due to loss of electric, it would either just go out, or go to a flashing red/yellow or just all flashing red mode.

However when you add water to the mix, such as in a tropical storm where flooding occurs, you can have all sorts of issues (cold and ice don't mix well either sometimes, especially on older controllers).   It's not supposed to happen, but electric doesn't like to get wet, so stuff happens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 05:18:02 PM
Here's a New Haven, CT, mast arm with a separate arm (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.2896856,-72.8923522,3a,27.5y,16.55h,95.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szlaH56s5qrmkMqh2cSnkWQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a CCTV camera. It's commendable alone for CT to have a decently thick mast. Any other signals with separate arms for TVs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 06, 2020, 05:34:23 PM
Jakeroot, I agree with you that a well-balanced combination of overhead and pole mounted heads like Calif. uses is the best of all worlds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 05:41:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA.

I think Nevada is my current favorite; I prefer this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1441888,-115.1187858,3a,65.8y,90.87h,93.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRMwT42pb2husM9jfyyswQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to CA's seat (though a second left turn signal overhead would be great). I've got nothing against UT signal placement, though. Throw me a few GSV links and I may change my mind.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 06, 2020, 07:07:28 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 05:41:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA.

I think Nevada is my current favorite; I prefer this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1441888,-115.1187858,3a,65.8y,90.87h,93.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRMwT42pb2husM9jfyyswQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to CA's seat (though a second left turn signal overhead would be great). I've got nothing against UT signal placement, though. Throw me a few GSV links and I may change my mind.

Here's a random signal that I chose in SLC:

https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.7497208,-111.8883301,3a,75y,71.01h,74.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sK2NqQAY-xzA-WHTyYaEi_Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DK2NqQAY-xzA-WHTyYaEi_Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D8.0117%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

UT is not bad, but IMO it's not great.  The look of the signals is clean and they use fine looking mast arms.  They also incorporate one signal face per lane.  Two signals for the 2 lane (per direction, excluding the left turn lane) 900 South and three signals for the 3 lane State plus a bonus signal for the doghouse.  Again, not bad at all.

The problem is the lack of the pole mounted signals that are lower than the mast arm and directed primarily for the use of turning traffic.  Turning traffic needs to account for pedestrians, so a lower signal face would force your line of sight lower.  The signal on the right side is low so you can watch for pedestrians for both RTOR and green turn while keeping track of what the signal says.  The signal on the left side should be there for the same reason.  I know that if I were making a permissive left, I have to keep track of oncoming traffic, pedestrians, and the signal indication.  A signal on the left pole would direct my line of sight towards the pedestrians on the left.  CA signals do this routinely and if you've ever driven there you know that the signal on the left pole is exaclty where it needs to be so that you can focus on both opposing and pedestrian movements.  In other states that lack this, I find that I have to look slightly to the right for the overhead and not be as focused on the pedestrians as I would like.

Now if UT implemented pole signals, it would basically be like NV, but the cleaner lines could give CA a run for its money.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 07:08:31 PM
mrsman above touched on my sentiments, but I was already finished writing this so I'm posting it anyways:

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 05:41:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA.

I think Nevada is my current favorite; I prefer this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1441888,-115.1187858,3a,65.8y,90.87h,93.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRMwT42pb2husM9jfyyswQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to CA's seat (though a second left turn signal overhead would be great). I've got nothing against UT signal placement, though. Throw me a few GSV links and I may change my mind.

Well, if you didn't clip 90% of my comment, you'd see why I'm not keen on Utah:

Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Utah is interesting, but their signal placement strategy is inexcusably poor for being completely surrounded by states that have far more stringent standards.

It's not that Utah is bad compared to the standard FHWA setup. It's that they're bad compared to every state around them. They only use post-mounted signals when intersections are too long and they are required to, or for visibility reasons, and many of their old double left turns only featured a single left turn signal. It's not that it doesn't "work". It's just that the standards in Utah are too focused on overhead signals, and not enough on post-mounted signals, like those that are positioned in the corner of intersections. These are very helpful when behind taller vehicles, or for redundancy that isn't just "cram everything overhead". For example, three overhead signals could all be simultaneously blocked by a single vehicle. The chance of that vehicle blocking not just the overhead signals, but also the far right and near right signals, is virtually zero. A far left signal? There's no way it could block it. It's too far off to the left.

A well-signalized intersection should spread things out a bit: stuff on the left, stuff overhead, and stuff on the right. Overhead signals alone do not provide optimal visibility for approaching traffic: it's a balancing act, and the best way to balance things is to simply put signals in every single corner, and overhead as well.

If you want to see good stuff, go down under (Australia and New Zealand). For example, this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/2E3LkyQ6T9U2zkXh7) in Melbourne, VIC. All corners are covered in some way, and there is an overhead signal as well. Also, see this SPUI (https://goo.gl/maps/8UkCpxDm1htNMHXZ9) near Nunawading, VIC. Again, all corners are covered, and there's even two overhead signals. A standard FHWA setup with only overhead signals could be blocked by a single tall vehicle. That's a massive fail, and exactly why numerous states and individual cities require post-mounted signals: it's just common sense to spread things out. A single vehicle can't hide every corner at once.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 09:52:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 06, 2020, 07:07:28 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 06, 2020, 05:41:42 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:20:31 PM
That's common in Northern Virginia too. Very sloppy in my opinion. You don't see that crap in California, my favorite state for traffic signals.

Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA.

I think Nevada is my current favorite; I prefer this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1441888,-115.1187858,3a,65.8y,90.87h,93.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRMwT42pb2husM9jfyyswQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to CA's seat (though a second left turn signal overhead would be great). I've got nothing against UT signal placement, though. Throw me a few GSV links and I may change my mind.

Here's a random signal that I chose in SLC:

https://www.google.pl/maps/@40.7497208,-111.8883301,3a,75y,71.01h,74.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sK2NqQAY-xzA-WHTyYaEi_Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DK2NqQAY-xzA-WHTyYaEi_Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D8.0117%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

UT is not bad, but IMO it's not great.  The look of the signals is clean and they use fine looking mast arms.  They also incorporate one signal face per lane.  Two signals for the 2 lane (per direction, excluding the left turn lane) 900 South and three signals for the 3 lane State plus a bonus signal for the doghouse.  Again, not bad at all.

The problem is the lack of the pole mounted signals that are lower than the mast arm and directed primarily for the use of turning traffic.  Turning traffic needs to account for pedestrians, so a lower signal face would force your line of sight lower.  The signal on the right side is low so you can watch for pedestrians for both RTOR and green turn while keeping track of what the signal says.  The signal on the left side should be there for the same reason.  I know that if I were making a permissive left, I have to keep track of oncoming traffic, pedestrians, and the signal indication.  A signal on the left pole would direct my line of sight towards the pedestrians on the left.  CA signals do this routinely and if you've ever driven there you know that the signal on the left pole is exaclty where it needs to be so that you can focus on both opposing and pedestrian movements.  In other states that lack this, I find that I have to look slightly to the right for the overhead and not be as focused on the pedestrians as I would like.

Now if UT implemented pole signals, it would basically be like NV, but the cleaner lines could give CA a run for its money.

Personally I agree with you; I see nothing wrong save for a lack of sidemounts. I would prefer they put backplates on their doghouses but they are moving to FYAs pretty quickly. I originally clipped yours and jakeroot's replies bc I didn't want to clutter the thread, by the way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on August 07, 2020, 12:26:43 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50127764632_4a817313b2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jnBU11)Marbelite 4-way traffic signal (tunnel visors) (https://flic.kr/p/2jnBU11) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50168924422_cb4bd62e86_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jrfRny)Signal Service Corp. 4-way traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2jrfRny) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr


(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50144913546_95da8a9903_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jp8MLW)American Gas Accumulator 4-way traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2jp8MLW) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50127896596_342089e7e9_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jnCzef)Marbelite 3-way traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2jnCzef) by thesignalman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/144426590@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 07, 2020, 09:30:18 PM
Question for my Southeast folk:

I've seen a lot of white stripes (no, not those (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9ANOzmSKQg/)) on NC span wire installs. Examples include this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6005425,-77.3350614,3a,78.8y,25.85h,100.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPJLcfz8Oc20VxCLzKcTIZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) in Greenville, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4500116,-81.0040063,3a,71.9y,107.91h,100.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUJV9r3vc2Fw8Nzvb4ZS6sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) north of Charlotte, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6945875,-78.8350553,3a,76.8y,21.45h,97.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0exUhGM5OuLGlOKRsZeajA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) near Raleigh, and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.599527,-82.5468799,3a,55.4y,107.88h,101.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCy6ZIC1_32NMNaMcMYsfdA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) in Asheville. So, what are the white pinstripes?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on August 08, 2020, 02:28:48 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 07, 2020, 09:30:18 PM
Question for my Southeast folk:

I've seen a lot of white stripes (no, not those (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9ANOzmSKQg/)) on NC span wire installs. Examples include this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6005425,-77.3350614,3a,78.8y,25.85h,100.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPJLcfz8Oc20VxCLzKcTIZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) in Greenville, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4500116,-81.0040063,3a,71.9y,107.91h,100.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUJV9r3vc2Fw8Nzvb4ZS6sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) north of Charlotte, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6945875,-78.8350553,3a,76.8y,21.45h,97.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0exUhGM5OuLGlOKRsZeajA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) near Raleigh, and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.599527,-82.5468799,3a,55.4y,107.88h,101.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCy6ZIC1_32NMNaMcMYsfdA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) in Asheville. So, what are the white pinstripes?

They look to me like bands or straps to keep the wires neatly bundled together. In this screenshot, you can see there is one to keep the loop next to the light in place:
(https://i.imgur.com/tkQiHQM.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 08, 2020, 04:26:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 06, 2020, 12:11:44 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 05, 2020, 09:59:14 PM
Yeah I like Nevada too. Similar to Calif. but all straight arms.
However, the ones I see in Vegas have controller cabinets that are 7 feet tall.  The biggest cabinets for any signal controllers.  NYC of course the smallest with their click boxes that match the 1950's style mast arms they use.

Las Vegas up against NYC with biggest to smallest in technology.

That's a fairly standard signal controller cabinet size throughout Nevada. Gotta have room for the controller computer, conflict monitor, switching relays, battery back-up system, display for the video detection system (where applicable), intersection camera equipment (where applicable), power supplies, etc., as well as a place for all those wires to go.

Quote from: jakeroot on August 06, 2020, 01:20:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 05, 2020, 09:49:00 PM
Well that's not because CA does better on specifying signal length (it doesn't), it's because they always mount the left turn signal at the end of the arm. If they would put more thru signals on then they would earn more points in my book. Current Nevada (https://www.google.pl/maps/@36.1826301,-115.338048,3a,62.2y,169.25h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJJsUVh8Ts7HYq4Eo4zvN9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is my favorite state for signals. If you want a state that combines the CA curved mast with plenty of signals (and not making everything a protected-only left), look no further than Utah (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.1761585,-112.025909,3a,70.8y,18.58h,91.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvtSksvhPmBvF8r-qjacwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

California is one of the few states that has a de facto requirement for both far left, far right and near right signals, in addition to anything overhead. Anything resembling a signal-per-lane requirement is going to produce a shit-ton of signals. Nevada is indeed this way, and I've always felt that many of their installations were a bit overkill. Though certainly much better than bog-standard FHWA. CA has a great setup right now IMO. Virtually no new approach has anything fewer than three through signals. Having 'through-minus-one' to calculate overhead signals helps spreads things out a bit, and definitely cuts down on overhead clutter. It's why you can have giant intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/bfCqNftF6NYPbcgJ9) that somehow don't feel completely shrouded in by signals, as they might be states that insist on signal-per-lane strategies.

Personally, I find post-mounted signals to be far more helpful than extra overhead signals. Why the FHWA would prefer states adopt signal-per-lane first, over more stringent post-mounting requirements, is beyond me. The amount of times I've entered intersections without post-mounted signals, and being completely blind thanks to a taller vehicle, is just sickening.

The example you provided from California looks a bit too simplistic to me. I'll also point out that it is not in compliance with national MUTCD guidance. For a street with 45+ speed limit and three through lanes, three primary signal faces with two overhead would be recommended. (But it is a guidance statement, not a standard.)

While I do like the overhead signal-per-lane design strategy Nevada currently employs, it can lead to an overcrowded appearance on wider approaches. Once you get above 3 lanes, it probably could hurt to scale back down to "number of lanes minus 1". That seemed to be the strategy used in much of the late 1980s-early 1990s, such as this signal  (https://goo.gl/maps/bghk89j7gomZbdGU7)near my mom's house in Vegas (which, interestingly, had two overhead left turn signal heads when first installed circa 1990 but the inner head was removed shortly afterward).

I do agree with you in wishing that more states would install post-mounted signals, and feel FHWA/MUTCD should get more insistent on this (at the very least for turn signals). Probably the best benefit that could be touted is at permissive left turns and where vehicles turn across crosswalks and need to yield to pedestrians–in either scenario, a far side post-mounted signal head is in a better line of sight to where a driver making the turning maneuver is already looking.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

(https://i.imgur.com/JAefW6h.jpg)
Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

(https://i.imgur.com/JAefW6h.jpg)
Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It's a 3M version of what France (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7848529,2.2381945,3a,24.5y,317.29h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTXi6lTuXXXjH5EW9GwjEcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4978734,-122.6718706,3a,18.6y,200.19h,109.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szejnLrZNJl6kt8RYfckD4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 05:06:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

(https://i.imgur.com/JAefW6h.jpg)
Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It's a 3M version of what France (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7848529,2.2381945,3a,24.5y,317.29h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTXi6lTuXXXjH5EW9GwjEcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4978734,-122.6718706,3a,18.6y,200.19h,109.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szejnLrZNJl6kt8RYfckD4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

That's standard for all bike signals in the US too.  Seattle:
(https://i.imgur.com/fuAyKYz.jpg)
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6149039,-122.3471293,3a,32.8y,96.02h,93.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssniZyo8K1MXMkVDlpNc4rw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The chode mast arm is because of the pantograph wire.

I realized after posting that signal, someone bumped a thread about bike signals, but there are more examples there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 06:22:02 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8370804,-94.3504341,3a,29.9y,165.79h,91.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0yzsm_89H7SEEuVivqENAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) is what you like to see. In Nevada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 08, 2020, 10:03:14 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 05:06:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

(https://i.imgur.com/JAefW6h.jpg)
Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It's a 3M version of what France (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7848529,2.2381945,3a,24.5y,317.29h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTXi6lTuXXXjH5EW9GwjEcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4978734,-122.6718706,3a,18.6y,200.19h,109.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szejnLrZNJl6kt8RYfckD4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

That's standard for all bike signals in the US too.  Seattle:
(https://i.imgur.com/fuAyKYz.jpg)
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6149039,-122.3471293,3a,32.8y,96.02h,93.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssniZyo8K1MXMkVDlpNc4rw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The chode mast arm is because of the pantograph wire.

I realized after posting that signal, someone bumped a thread about bike signals, but there are more examples there.
Yeah I was gonna say. Strange bike signals. Check that out! That's the exact signal type.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadrunner75 on August 08, 2020, 10:37:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It's a 3M version of what France (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7848529,2.2381945,3a,24.5y,317.29h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTXi6lTuXXXjH5EW9GwjEcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4978734,-122.6718706,3a,18.6y,200.19h,109.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szejnLrZNJl6kt8RYfckD4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
On an even more unrelated note, clicking that Portland map link and looking around took away about 10 minutes of my time checking out the aerial tram, including its history.  I spend half my time here getting sent off on interesting tangents after clicking on map links.  Keep 'em coming...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on August 08, 2020, 10:37:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 08, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
How about a tiny 3M bike signal?

Portland, OR]https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192]Portland, OR (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4993087,-122.6718247,3a,46.9y,185.97h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9f80ZXNbz8yqXDpDbmGaQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It's a 3M version of what France (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7848529,2.2381945,3a,24.5y,317.29h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTXi6lTuXXXjH5EW9GwjEcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4978734,-122.6718706,3a,18.6y,200.19h,109.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szejnLrZNJl6kt8RYfckD4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
On an even more unrelated note, clicking that Portland map link and looking around took away about 10 minutes of my time checking out the aerial tram, including its history.  I spend half my time here getting sent off on interesting tangents after clicking on map links.  Keep 'em coming...

The redeveloped PDX south waterfront is also near the Tilikum Bridge, a major bridge that doesn't permit private cars or trucks (because Portland). It was the first major bridge across the Willamette in the Portland metro to open since 1973, according to Wikipedia.

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 09, 2020, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago (https://goo.gl/maps/zfTQmzhEFAFbkYwN8) is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 09, 2020, 03:39:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 06:22:02 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8370804,-94.3504341,3a,29.9y,165.79h,91.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0yzsm_89H7SEEuVivqENAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) is what you like to see. In Nevada.

I was all set to ask you to clarify what you meant, before I realized the link was a location in Nevada, MO (a place I didn't know existed).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 09, 2020, 05:39:19 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 09, 2020, 03:39:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 06:22:02 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8370804,-94.3504341,3a,29.9y,165.79h,91.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0yzsm_89H7SEEuVivqENAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) is what you like to see. In Nevada.

I was all set to ask you to clarify what you meant, before I realized the link was a location in Nevada, MO (a place I didn't know existed).

We also have a Cuba, Mexico, Paris, California, Amsterdam, Houston, Memphis, Florida, and Cabool. With the Covid lockdowns these are our new destinations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 09, 2020, 05:47:36 PM
Upside down T signal...in California?

Recently I was in California, so I drove up to see an uncle in Oxnard. While there I saw this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.2431638,-119.1831822,3a,31.3y,324.06h,99.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0DiDXgSh4FwO4q1kIRli6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) oddity. T-shaped signals (both inverted and otherwise) can be found in some states east of the Mississippi (none in Missouri), but I'd never seen one this far west save for one in Utah referenced a page or two back in this thread. The Oxnard example's a fairly new signal, too, having gone in when that Riverpark area was developed. Any other T-shaped signals (upside down or otherwise) in California or surrounding western states?

Removed gratuitous politics. -S.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 10, 2020, 07:56:27 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 09, 2020, 05:39:19 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 09, 2020, 03:39:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 06:22:02 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.8370804,-94.3504341,3a,29.9y,165.79h,91.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0yzsm_89H7SEEuVivqENAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) is what you like to see. In Nevada.

I was all set to ask you to clarify what you meant, before I realized the link was a location in Nevada, MO (a place I didn't know existed).

We also have a Cuba, Mexico, Paris, California, Amsterdam, Houston, Memphis, Florida, and Cabool. With the Covid lockdowns these are our new destinations.

Okay. Still need to mention if they are either (A) in a state, or if (B) they are a state. It's needlessly misleading to do anything less.

The standards in Nevada State are completely different from Nevada, Missouri. It's important to differentiate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 11, 2020, 12:02:12 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200811/fae68480316e240d87239a76121debd8.jpg)
Half a light


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on August 11, 2020, 12:41:31 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 09, 2020, 05:47:36 PM
Upside down T signal...in California?

Recently I was in California, so I drove up to see an uncle in Oxnard. While there I saw this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.2431638,-119.1831822,3a,31.3y,324.06h,99.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0DiDXgSh4FwO4q1kIRli6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) oddity. T-shaped signals (both inverted and otherwise) can be found in some states east of the Mississippi (none in Missouri), but I'd never seen one this far west save for one in Utah referenced a page or two back in this thread. The Oxnard example's a fairly new signal, too, having gone in when that Riverpark area was developed. Any other T-shaped signals (upside down or otherwise) in California or surrounding western states?

Removed gratuitous politics. -S.
Only one that I've seen in person in California is on westbound Del Monte Avenue at Camino El Estero in Monterey.  It's been there for as long as I can remember.
https://goo.gl/maps/KSKV1F6bBPPSJaQD9 (https://goo.gl/maps/KSKV1F6bBPPSJaQD9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on August 11, 2020, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 11, 2020, 12:02:12 AM
Half a light

does that light ever turn red? or is it always the green arrows?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 11, 2020, 11:45:07 AM
Quote from: zachary_amaryllis on August 11, 2020, 09:39:45 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 11, 2020, 12:02:12 AM
Half a light

does that light ever turn red? or is it always the green arrows?
This side does. The other doesn't.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 04:52:21 PM
Why...? (https://www.google.pl/maps/@32.7219709,-117.1638722,3a,18.1y,1.55h,105.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKNSNRaveCvuLZGsHsSbcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 11, 2020, 04:58:21 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 04:52:21 PM
Why...? (https://www.google.pl/maps/@32.7219709,-117.1638722,3a,18.1y,1.55h,105.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKNSNRaveCvuLZGsHsSbcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)

Why what?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 05:27:22 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2020, 04:58:21 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 04:52:21 PM
Why...? (https://www.google.pl/maps/@32.7219709,-117.1638722,3a,18.1y,1.55h,105.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKNSNRaveCvuLZGsHsSbcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)

Why what?

Why would any self-respecting state hang a traffic signal like that? If it's under a bridge just make it horizontal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 11, 2020, 05:34:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 04:52:21 PM
Why...? (https://www.google.pl/maps/@32.7219709,-117.1638722,3a,18.1y,1.55h,105.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKNSNRaveCvuLZGsHsSbcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)

I don't see the need for a PV signal here at all as there are no angled streets at that intersection. A regular signal would've been fine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 11, 2020, 06:40:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 11, 2020, 04:52:21 PM
Why...? (https://www.google.pl/maps/@32.7219709,-117.1638722,3a,18.1y,1.55h,105.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKNSNRaveCvuLZGsHsSbcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)

Minus the up arrow, reminds me of this signal I saw today in Federal Way, WA. Left turn is being converted to FYA, but the fourth lens is being occupied by a green orb in the meantime:

(https://i.imgur.com/8dmaayy.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 14, 2020, 04:47:39 PM
Imagine trying to read this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.7183743,-95.5772237,3a,69.8y,99.27h,95.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU6Js84VBQxTSe8_7ki5usw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) while whisking through the intersection at 45 mph (in Huntsville, TX).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 14, 2020, 10:11:35 PM
um what

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3779733,-71.2358049,3a,21.3y,96.53h,96.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3_t_CASBIg7uviitvm6xvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2020, 10:27:09 PM
Yeah, that's typical old style Massachusetts signals. Are there any still around with flashing green lights? There used to be one in Braintree by the high school but I think it's been changed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 14, 2020, 10:46:59 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 14, 2020, 10:11:35 PM
um what

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3779733,-71.2358049,3a,21.3y,96.53h,96.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3_t_CASBIg7uviitvm6xvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Should be a doghouse.  If you rotate about 90 degrees to the right there's already a doghouse at that corner, complete with a non-MUTCD complaint straight yellow arrow and nonstandard 'yield to peds' sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 14, 2020, 10:11:35 PM
um what

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3779733,-71.2358049,3a,21.3y,96.53h,96.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3_t_CASBIg7uviitvm6xvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on August 15, 2020, 06:55:21 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 14, 2020, 10:27:09 PM
Yeah, that's typical old style Massachusetts signals. Are there any still around with flashing green lights? There used to be one in Braintree by the high school but I think it's been changed.

Yes. There are some in Salem and surrounding towns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 10:13:18 AM
King Traffic Signal the Ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092733,-70.9997694,3a,30y,239.34h,92.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGSrLgDdEE0dbtNZNyjRM9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Oh, Massachusetts...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 15, 2020, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

There's a similar setup around Des Moines, IA, with a straight green arrow instead of the green ball. (https://goo.gl/maps/6ppgDWmQRxEvHZ2R9)

Granted only having one head for the through movement is not MUTCD compliant, but it's likely such a low volume movement that an exception is probably warranted here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 15, 2020, 12:38:29 PM
In MA's defense our new traffic lights are some of the best


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 15, 2020, 07:21:52 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

And also out of MUTCD compliance, since a left turn green arrow should be above a right turn green arrow for a vertical display like this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 15, 2020, 08:52:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 10:13:18 AM
King Traffic Signal the Ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092733,-70.9997694,3a,30y,239.34h,92.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGSrLgDdEE0dbtNZNyjRM9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Oh, Massachusetts...

Ah yes, I know that Braintree intersection well. Believe it or not there used to be older short mast arm traffic lights there before the diagonal span wire! No idea why they didn't just go with longer modern mast-arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 11:30:22 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 15, 2020, 08:52:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 10:13:18 AM
King Traffic Signal the Ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092733,-70.9997694,3a,30y,239.34h,92.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGSrLgDdEE0dbtNZNyjRM9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Oh, Massachusetts...

Ah yes, I know that Braintree intersection well. Believe it or not there used to be older short mast arm traffic lights there before the diagonal span wire! No idea why they didn't just go with longer modern mast-arms.

When was the current one put in? 80s or 90s?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 16, 2020, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 15, 2020, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

There's a similar setup around Des Moines, IA, with a straight green arrow instead of the green ball. (https://goo.gl/maps/6ppgDWmQRxEvHZ2R9)

Granted only having one head for the through movement is not MUTCD compliant, but it's likely such a low volume movement that an exception is probably warranted here.

It leads to a good question as to how to signalize based on three competing "philosophies".  The need for one signal face per lane.  The need for two signal faces for the straight movement.  The need for the signal face facing your lane to indicate all permitted movements from your lane, but not those that are prohibited.  Not all of the above philsophies are required by MUTCD.

If I were designing for a signal in that situation: left lane must turn left, right lane must turn right, middle lane can go left, right, or straight, that is relatively common at diamond ramps to freeway exits, especially considering that all greens come on at the same time regardless of where the arrows are pointing, I would do the following:

Left: RYG-GA left;  Center: RYG-GA left; Right: RY-GA right.  The signs will indicate permitted movements, like in the Johnson, Iowa example - not the signal faces.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 16, 2020, 01:09:27 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 16, 2020, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 15, 2020, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

There's a similar setup around Des Moines, IA, with a straight green arrow instead of the green ball. (https://goo.gl/maps/6ppgDWmQRxEvHZ2R9)

Granted only having one head for the through movement is not MUTCD compliant, but it's likely such a low volume movement that an exception is probably warranted here.

It leads to a good question as to how to signalize based on three competing "philosophies".  The need for one signal face per lane.  The need for two signal faces for the straight movement.  The need for the signal face facing your lane to indicate all permitted movements from your lane, but not those that are prohibited.  Not all of the above philsophies are required by MUTCD.

If I were designing for a signal in that situation: left lane must turn left, right lane must turn right, middle lane can go left, right, or straight, that is relatively common at diamond ramps to freeway exits, especially considering that all greens come on at the same time regardless of where the arrows are pointing, I would do the following:

Left: RYG-GA left;  Center: RYG-GA left; Right: RY-GA right.  The signs will indicate permitted movements, like in the Johnson, Iowa example - not the signal faces.

From what I can see in the street view, there is no special reason for the right turn arrows to be used. With the lane assignment signage in place, I would use the following signal heads:

Left: R-Y-left GA; Center: R-Y-G-left GA; Right: R-Y-G

This would pass muster with MUTCD, and doesn't have the potentially non-kosher issue of having a green ball to the left of a green left arrow.


EDIT: I must have been subconsciously influenced by something I'd seen before when posting this. Immediately afterwards, I looked up the street view of an off ramp here in Reno. Turns out it has the same lane configuration as the quoted post (https://goo.gl/maps/a2T4U4HqKNsFeTM87), and the uses a similar signal head scheme to what I suggested (https://goo.gl/maps/u5XH3rx3Gtjji1mu7) (all arrows on the left-most signal head though, which makes more sense), and does this without lane assignment signage on the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 16, 2020, 08:26:29 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 11:30:22 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 15, 2020, 08:52:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 15, 2020, 10:13:18 AM


King Traffic Signal the Ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092733,-70.9997694,3a,30y,239.34h,92.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGSrLgDdEE0dbtNZNyjRM9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Oh, Massachusetts...

Ah yes, I know that Braintree intersection well. Believe it or not there used to be older short mast arm traffic lights there before the diagonal span wire! No idea why they didn't just go with longer modern mast-arms.

When was the current one put in? 80s or 90s?

Had to mid-1990's or later as I first noticed the mast arm signals around 1992.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 17, 2020, 07:53:42 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 16, 2020, 01:09:27 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 16, 2020, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on August 15, 2020, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

There's a similar setup around Des Moines, IA, with a straight green arrow instead of the green ball. (https://goo.gl/maps/6ppgDWmQRxEvHZ2R9)

Granted only having one head for the through movement is not MUTCD compliant, but it's likely such a low volume movement that an exception is probably warranted here.

It leads to a good question as to how to signalize based on three competing "philosophies".  The need for one signal face per lane.  The need for two signal faces for the straight movement.  The need for the signal face facing your lane to indicate all permitted movements from your lane, but not those that are prohibited.  Not all of the above philsophies are required by MUTCD.

If I were designing for a signal in that situation: left lane must turn left, right lane must turn right, middle lane can go left, right, or straight, that is relatively common at diamond ramps to freeway exits, especially considering that all greens come on at the same time regardless of where the arrows are pointing, I would do the following:

Left: RYG-GA left;  Center: RYG-GA left; Right: RY-GA right.  The signs will indicate permitted movements, like in the Johnson, Iowa example - not the signal faces.

From what I can see in the street view, there is no special reason for the right turn arrows to be used. With the lane assignment signage in place, I would use the following signal heads:

Left: R-Y-left GA; Center: R-Y-G-left GA; Right: R-Y-G

This would pass muster with MUTCD, and doesn't have the potentially non-kosher issue of having a green ball to the left of a green left arrow.


EDIT: I must have been subconsciously influenced by something I'd seen before when posting this. Immediately afterwards, I looked up the street view of an off ramp here in Reno. Turns out it has the same lane configuration as the quoted post (https://goo.gl/maps/a2T4U4HqKNsFeTM87), and the uses a similar signal head scheme to what I suggested (https://goo.gl/maps/u5XH3rx3Gtjji1mu7) (all arrows on the left-most signal head though, which makes more sense), and does this without lane assignment signage on the mast arm.

This is a good way of doing this.  One other benefit is that if a ped crosses illegally on the right, traffic won't act like it is a protected turn and will yield to those peds.

Here's an example from L.A.  Two left signals are RYG-left GA and the right signals are RYG-right GA.  Every signal except for the center signal is a sidemount.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1566853,-118.4488622,3a,37.5y,133.19h,88.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svegLAhRMDDwFL2O9xkRrfg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 17, 2020, 08:19:15 PM
Hawaii deciding the tops and bottoms of its traffic lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@20.878393,-156.4574027,3a,23.6y,59.52h,94.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4sWsxbW3eOSgohuU2IscWQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) don't need silly backplates.

Oh, and apparently visors (https://www.google.com/maps/@20.8833495,-156.4492451,3a,18.2y,367.27h,97.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKva9BP5x_mi5lj6zvlhvIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) are optional too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 17, 2020, 08:25:08 PM
And one Hawaiian island over, a recently widened HA-19 has three overhead signals for two lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@19.7255572,-156.0319976,3a,50.8y,191.22h,88.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX3yuRNGM-4z2cD-mp2cFfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) of thru traffic (and coupled with excessively wide backplates it looks pretty ugly).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 17, 2020, 09:31:36 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 17, 2020, 08:25:08 PM
And one Hawaiian island over, a recently widened HA-19 has three overhead signals for two lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@19.7255572,-156.0319976,3a,50.8y,191.22h,88.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX3yuRNGM-4z2cD-mp2cFfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) of thru traffic (and coupled with excessively wide backplates it looks pretty ugly).
Gives me Oregon vibes. [off topic but] I love those bike lanes


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 18, 2020, 12:07:50 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 15, 2020, 07:21:52 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 15, 2020, 12:34:56 AM
Also in Auburn, Washington; (https://goo.gl/maps/xykhFa5cyMAHBmKi6) with a green ball too.

And also out of MUTCD compliance, since a left turn green arrow should be above a right turn green arrow for a vertical display like this.

This is true, although as it's installed, the corresponding arrows line up with each other (left with left, and right with right), and it's rather more satisfying.

Still, as to the other above posts, the installation would not exist if designed today, since it's out of compliance (not enough through signals), so how "satisfying" it is, isn't really relevant :-D.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 18, 2020, 07:42:49 PM
There's little I hate more than a newer signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@27.2261297,-98.1404632,3a,29.1y,-3.02h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWjOz4EoA7RRDwQVc_gVAzQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with a miniscule street sign.

Also in Texas; doesn't the leftmost signal here (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.8238149,-106.3572689,3a,28.7y,146.75h,87.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su1X1oE6Dh8Fl4IN_-lup3Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) just scream "afterthought"?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 18, 2020, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2020, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago (https://goo.gl/maps/zfTQmzhEFAFbkYwN8) is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.
Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 19, 2020, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 18, 2020, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2020, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago (https://goo.gl/maps/zfTQmzhEFAFbkYwN8) is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.
Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

Oh it's good. I'm well aware of Illinois' vast level of variance in standards; not just from district to district, but also over time. The median signals I could take or leave, but I'm glad they are used when there is a median.

From what I've seen, Chicago-proper and the surrounding D1 have the cleanest signals (good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/Mhxq8cUG6HAnJZCQ7) -- the far left signal, even at a T-intersection, really seals the deal for me). D6 also has really comprehensive installs (good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/JkezwJhXoLxaVJQy6) -- all corners must have signals apart from near-left), although I don't love their over-use of backplates.

What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter. Other states have similar philosophies, but their installs are not always as clean. Most of Illinois has exceptionally clean signal installs, very reminiscent (to me) of European post-mounted installs. They're just pleasant to look at, frankly, and are less industrial feeling than places that only use overhead signals, for example, or places that use a lot of backplates.

As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/miwSEe2fQCcuGPru8)? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 19, 2020, 07:39:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 19, 2020, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 18, 2020, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2020, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago (https://goo.gl/maps/zfTQmzhEFAFbkYwN8) is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.
Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.

Oh it's good. I'm well aware of Illinois' vast level of variance in standards; not just from district to district, but also over time. The median signals I could take or leave, but I'm glad they are used when there is a median.

From what I've seen, Chicago-proper and the surrounding D1 have the cleanest signals (good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/Mhxq8cUG6HAnJZCQ7) -- the far left signal, even at a T-intersection, really seals the deal for me). D6 also has really comprehensive installs (good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/JkezwJhXoLxaVJQy6) -- all corners must have signals apart from near-left), although I don't love their over-use of backplates.

What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter. Other states have similar philosophies, but their installs are not always as clean. Most of Illinois has exceptionally clean signal installs, very reminiscent (to me) of European post-mounted installs. They're just pleasant to look at, frankly, and are less industrial feeling than places that only use overhead signals, for example, or places that use a lot of backplates.

As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/miwSEe2fQCcuGPru8)? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.

It is sort of interesting at the Clark/Fullerton signal posted that the signals facing NB Clark have both right side signals on the mast arm, but the signals facing the other directions  have one side mount and one signal on the mast arm.  (All directions have sidemounts on the left.)  It seems that the left sidemount facing EB Fullerton, being on the same pole as the mast arm facing NB Clark, displaces the possibility of a right sidemount on NB Clark.

The signals are indeed varied in Illinois.  While many signals mirror the signals in CA (left sidemount, mast arm, right sidemount), there are many that would replace the right sidemount with an additional signal on the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 19, 2020, 11:12:16 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 18, 2020, 11:04:11 PM
Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.

Don't forget Congress Pkwy (https://goo.gl/maps/D3PggJ39aNxjRT897).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:39:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 19, 2020, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 18, 2020, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 09, 2020, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 08, 2020, 10:50:04 PM
But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new  (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4334469,-122.7467314,3a,35y,5.4h,99.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqL3aat7ZnWVyiblMV9R0bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)installs (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4188075,-122.78701,3a,75y,210.95h,83.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHQDHBa_KNYCPLu97rpYViQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4264524,-122.8534535,3a,59y,343.89h,94.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7GVuSXyf0q51pUOxAQ5DQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

And see, both of those to me are spectacularly ... unspectacular. Those are both literally base-MUTCD. The second signal is much worse to me, since the signals look crooked (even though they are "aligned"), and the mast arm is way too long.

This approach in Chicago (https://goo.gl/maps/zfTQmzhEFAFbkYwN8) is exactly up my alley. No far-right signal but it has everything else; the spacing is good, the signalization is good, the markings are good. Really has it all. Very clean install, and I really like all the pole-mounted signals. Especially without the backplates. I think they look much cleaner.
Jake, the median signals are a rare occasion in Chicago with the exception of Michigan Ave downtown.
Michigan Ave: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8729568,-87.6241183,3a,75y,1.09h,88.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLf1P5e6Rpz5pSudjDmMhMA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D112.15043%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
More typical newish (2000) signal in Chicago. Clark & Fullerton:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9255266,-87.6403574,3a,75y,339.63h,89.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLfbvn1yfJbA_XlSEFp6fLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Older signal setup. (1980s) 63rd & Austin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7778904,-87.7716237,3a,75y,85.39h,87.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPHH1fCcDQzw9JaJ5xk_lLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I can't think of an example off hand but it used to be common that the far left signal would have a small 3 foot mast arm off of the main signal of the cross street instead of being a stand alone. If I come across one, I will post it.
As for the far-left signal being installed on a mast arm, I assume you mean something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/miwSEe2fQCcuGPru8)? I'm definitely not a fan of these installs.
No Jake. That's not the kind I was talking about. And it was a Chicago only thing. If I find one, I will post it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2020, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why?  :confused:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 19, 2020, 07:24:34 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2020, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why?  :confused:

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 19, 2020, 08:01:42 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I could climb up the pole and knock down that spindly thing with a sledgehammer. Rather than just a thickest mast arm thread (go check it out (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27169.0/)) we should have a thinnest arm thread too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 10:03:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 19, 2020, 07:24:34 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2020, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why?  :confused:

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.
Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 20, 2020, 07:34:34 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 10:03:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 19, 2020, 07:24:34 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2020, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why?  :confused:

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.
Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.

In some ways they are reminiscent of signals in Toronto, where this short mast arm on the left is quite common.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6479054,-79.383594,3a,75y,13.91h,83.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.111134%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

While I agree that the signal placement is ugly, it is still better than having no left sidemount at all. I imagine that given how few of these are left in Chicago, that most will be eliminated with upcoming signal modernization.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 20, 2020, 09:05:55 PM
Do these (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.7782569,-87.9504472,3a,75y,229.78h,86.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-SLRZpOp4NynHLu83C2rOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) look a tad bulky to anyone?

I mean, if WI is going to make masts this bulky, at least do them at interchanges like this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@42.7188354,-87.8461805,3a,63.7y,105.46h,88.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl6axxYZjoftI-AGtoLyvKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 20, 2020, 10:45:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 19, 2020, 12:21:04 AM
What personally makes me happiest with most of Illinois (especially District 1) is that backplates are not overused. It's common to see them overhead, but they're really not as helpful for post-mounted signals, but they do end up "crowding" the post and adding to visual clutter.

Backplates on post mounted signals are very helpful IMHO when the sun is at the wrong angle in the mornings and evenings.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on August 20, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (https://goo.gl/maps/cjv5EJqbzu3kxyS1A) (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive  (https://goo.gl/maps/xy8RATJKzQxKyoMS9)(four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2020, 11:58:31 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on August 20, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (https://goo.gl/maps/cjv5EJqbzu3kxyS1A) (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive  (https://goo.gl/maps/xy8RATJKzQxKyoMS9)(four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?
This exists a lot but it's a bit weird. With signals set up like this it is important to have left turn yield on green and no turn on red arrow signs.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 10:39:45 AM
huh?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7296324,-75.5844454,3a,31.3y,10.78h,99.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6QyrB_uprAECVt8gWZOVtA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 21, 2020, 12:15:31 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2020, 11:58:31 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on August 20, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (https://goo.gl/maps/cjv5EJqbzu3kxyS1A) (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive  (https://goo.gl/maps/xy8RATJKzQxKyoMS9)(four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?
This exists a lot but it's a bit weird. With signals set up like this it is important to have left turn yield on green and no turn on red arrow signs.


iPhone

An arrangement like this is common where the engineers decide that the permissive side should be a lagging left.  The opposing (leading) side needs to have a restricted turn (protected only) to avoid a yellow trap situation.

Of course with FYA signals, the opposing (leading) side could be permissive, since a well coordinated FYA signal can avoid the yellow trap problem.  The leading signal could be 4 aspect (just add a FYA between yellow and green arrows) and the lagging signal can remain as is.

On another note, I notice that the singal a block away does not have left sidemounts.  To my knowledge most signals in the Twin Cities (although I can't speak to the state as a whole) have the left sidemounts, so St Cloud must be a little different.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5587513,-94.1637281,3a,75y,263.73h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-krF622ar95Z2k7FXHWUjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 12:27:58 PM
A reminder that mrsman started this great thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27497.0/). If you have a few minutes, you can share examples of typical lights/installs in your state and really go in depth. It's a fun one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on August 21, 2020, 12:31:49 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 21, 2020, 12:15:31 PM
On another note, I notice that the singal a block away does not have left sidemounts.  To my knowledge most signals in the Twin Cities (although I can't speak to the state as a whole) have the left sidemounts, so St Cloud must be a little different.
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5587513,-94.1637281,3a,75y,263.73h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-krF622ar95Z2k7FXHWUjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
That signal is actually quite a bit older than the one that I linked (by like 20 or 30 years :-D). Newer installations in the area since the mid-2000s or so have all had the standard left sidemounts, but older installations aren't always updated until the entire signal is upgraded.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!! (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/ca40aa770d9f851f1d9e06671c913d6c.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/b1c35a6c518aac5a68445fe875602960.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/e0e25995f95472883035abe0753c84d6.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 01:50:49 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!

How can you be sure? If there's a giveaway, I'm not seeing it.

Quote from: mrsman on August 20, 2020, 07:34:34 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 10:03:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 19, 2020, 07:24:34 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2020, 06:54:21 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Jake, I finally found one. Touhy Ave & Ashland Ave. It is on all 4 corners.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0126983,-87.6702003,3a,75y,342.18h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH2YBFadsYtAn_UbvTYR93Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Why? Just why?  :confused:

Certainly helps with visibility, but also certainly not really needed in an area like this.
Most of these were built in the 1980s in areas that needed it for visibility. I can't tell you why at this intersection. These are extremely rare in the field now. When Chicago updates their signals, they just put the far left signal on either a stand alone pole or on the vertical of the cross street signal or as part of a light pole.

In some ways they are reminiscent of signals in Toronto, where this short mast arm on the left is quite common.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6479054,-79.383594,3a,75y,13.91h,83.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_N5KWyVl17GvqoRnpWnI3g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.111134%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

While I agree that the signal placement is ugly, it is still better than having no left sidemount at all. I imagine that given how few of these are left in Chicago, that most will be eliminated with upcoming signal modernization.

Not just Toronto, but all of Ontario. Post-mounted signals are quite rare in Ontario, apart from those necessary for visibility. The short overhang style is basically ubiquitous.

As to the style: it's not my favorite. Seems pretty flimsy, and I think I'd prefer them being mounted on an independent post or the mast arm. Those in Ontario and the few remaining examples in Chicago are too high up for my taste.

I suppose there's some local bias here, but my vote for best signals in Canada is British Columbia (https://goo.gl/maps/dn87KJZG9SsfXR3EA). Always a post-mounted signal on the left, and at least three signals for protected left turns unless absolutely not possible. Very thorough and very clean installs, and none of those flimsy Ontario-style mast arms, although most are quite thin (STLmapboy: be warned!)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 02:51:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 01:50:49 PM
Very thorough and very clean installs, and none of those flimsy Ontario-style mast arms, although most are quite thin (STLmapboy: be warned!)
Haha thanks for the heads up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 05:19:26 PM
Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse (https://goo.gl/maps/3YKvTnUo8aLqsSjw5)

The bottom right lens is a green orb (https://goo.gl/maps/9xAreKJ8XAkXvj8c6).

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

There's also this funny situation (https://goo.gl/maps/CWAogC3EnHWLYjSn8) (same intersection) where, even though no through movement exists here, the red orb is always lit because of the adjacent pedestrian crossing. Only when that is activated, is the red orb extinguished.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 21, 2020, 05:37:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 05:19:26 PM
Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse (https://goo.gl/maps/3YKvTnUo8aLqsSjw5)

The bottom right lens is a green orb (https://goo.gl/maps/9xAreKJ8XAkXvj8c6).

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

There's also this funny situation (https://goo.gl/maps/CWAogC3EnHWLYjSn8) (same intersection) where, even though no through movement exists here, the red orb is always lit because of the adjacent pedestrian crossing. Only when that is activated, is the red orb extinguished.

As far as the green arrow goes, I imagine it should be facing to the left, since the lane it's over turns left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 05:55:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 21, 2020, 05:37:53 PM
As far as the green arrow goes, I imagine it should be facing to the left, since the lane it's over turns left.

California doesn't really roll with the "place the signal over the 'proper' lane" style of signalization, and instead prefers placement strategies that are meant to more generally indicate what is permitted. So you might have four approach lanes but only a single overhead doghouse (https://goo.gl/maps/VuLEB4Aywn7PzneR7) (and it won't be over the left turn lane). There are other signals off to the left and right, but overhead, there's a lot of freedom.

Point being, the doghouse is for the right turn lane, even if it's over the left turn lane. I only know this because (A) California requires two primary signals for each movement (the near-side tower wouldn't count), and (B) the first link shows that arrow activated simultaneous with the other right turn green arrow, indicating that they are meant to be for the same turn. I doubt they'd not only install the arrow in the wrong direction, but then also program it to display at the wrong time, if it was indeed meant for the left turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 06:05:37 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!! (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/ca40aa770d9f851f1d9e06671c913d6c.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/b1c35a6c518aac5a68445fe875602960.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/e0e25995f95472883035abe0753c84d6.jpg)


iPhone
The 4 section signal with the red yellow yellow and green lens should be a give away (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/817cd41613020ac0ad6997fd2c911b0e.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200821/703a4cad3b0fa0a5aa09ee32887cc48b.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 09:09:16 PM
Poleline Avenue (https://www.google.pl/maps/@47.7303757,-116.9158347,3a,51.5y,343.88h,90.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soGJq9EojfcdBc52pf_GUaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) with a pole that is far too long.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on August 21, 2020, 10:02:21 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on August 20, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
This might be a little bit of a newbie question, so my apologies in advance. I often drive through this intersection, but it seems odd to me that one of the left turn signals is protected-only (https://goo.gl/maps/cjv5EJqbzu3kxyS1A) (typical three-section arrow arrangement) while the signal controlling opposing traffic is permissive  (https://goo.gl/maps/xy8RATJKzQxKyoMS9)(four-section RYG ball+Y/G arrow). How common is an arrangement like this?

Depends on the jurisdiction.  Illinois almost always frowns on that setup (there are exceptions), however Missouri has no issues with it.

Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 05:19:26 PM
Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse (https://goo.gl/maps/3YKvTnUo8aLqsSjw5)

The bottom right lens is a green orb (https://goo.gl/maps/9xAreKJ8XAkXvj8c6).

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

I was going to say it's not MUTCD compliant, but I don't see the MUTCD specifically saying clusters have to follow the the section on placement of indications for horizontal heads (4D.10).  Another possible thing to fix in the next edition of the MUTCD?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 21, 2020, 10:07:26 PM
I'm sure a mistake was made on that Los Angeles signal. And someone in the system should have caught it. I'm surprised to see this happen in California where the authorities are usually very conscientious about traffic lights. More of a New York State DOT kind of error.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 10:10:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
No MassDOT signs all FYAs, just signs haven't been installed here. Our signs look like this: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200822/c262903f31590482935fc9f6321d5e75.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 22, 2020, 08:56:58 AM
This one assembly in Thomasville, GA proves interesting as it has one span wire strung between two other span wires.(https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz)

https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 09:12:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 22, 2020, 08:56:58 AM
This one assembly in Thomasville, GA proves interesting as it has one span wire strung between two other span wires.(https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz)

https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz
Huh, I like it!


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 09:48:39 AM
Anybody ever seen double thru arrows (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.3208336,-81.5982798,3a,15y,12.32h,99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVf2cBiCLHr2t28WAc4yfAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 22, 2020, 12:24:00 PM
How about a five section with the bottom two side by side. https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50138056503/in/album-72157715183258717/

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50138056503_3a6c4039b8_4k_d.jpg)

PA used to use these in Downtown Hershey.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 22, 2020, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 09:12:59 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 22, 2020, 08:56:58 AM
This one assembly in Thomasville, GA proves interesting as it has one span wire strung between two other span wires.(https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz)

https://flic.kr/p/2jrLBKz
Huh, I like it!


iPhone

So do I. Augusta has them on Gordon Highway as well.

Indiana has a similar set up in Kokomo but half diagonal and half two straight wire set ups.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 02:20:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925

Thanks. The existing signal is pretty ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4045027,-71.1460821,3a,86.4y,347.13h,106.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg9PpNME52_4CQSvFL0X_JQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 02:20:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925

Thanks. The existing signal is pretty ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4045027,-71.1460821,3a,86.4y,347.13h,106.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg9PpNME52_4CQSvFL0X_JQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Oh yeah. I made a map just now if our traffic lights. We have a lot of old ones but the important ones are newer. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200822/64c74453bebcb7f37b45428aecfc3345.jpg)
The blue signals are the old ones. Likely pre 1990s. Orange are 1990-2000 installs. 2000-2014 or so. Then Reds are new installs (these have reflective back plates). 2015-present.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 02:20:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925

Thanks. The existing signal is pretty ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4045027,-71.1460821,3a,86.4y,347.13h,106.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg9PpNME52_4CQSvFL0X_JQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Oh yeah. I made a map just now if our traffic lights. We have a lot of old ones but the important ones are newer. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200822/64c74453bebcb7f37b45428aecfc3345.jpg)
The blue signals are the old ones. Likely pre 1990s. Orange are 1990-2000 installs. 2000-2014 or so. Then Reds are new installs (these have reflective back plates). 2015-present.


iPhone

Cool! I once tried to make a map of span wires vs mast arms in the St Louis area (we have 10-15% wires), but I never completed it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 05:10:41 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 02:20:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925

Thanks. The existing signal is pretty ancient (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4045027,-71.1460821,3a,86.4y,347.13h,106.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg9PpNME52_4CQSvFL0X_JQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Oh yeah. I made a map just now if our traffic lights. We have a lot of old ones but the important ones are newer. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200822/64c74453bebcb7f37b45428aecfc3345.jpg)
The blue signals are the old ones. Likely pre 1990s. Orange are 1990-2000 installs. 2000-2014 or so. Then Reds are new installs (these have reflective back plates). 2015-present.


iPhone

Cool! I once tried to make a map of span wires vs mast arms in the St Louis area (we have 10-15% wires), but I never completed it.

We have 2 span wire signals.

Here which is the worst traffic light in my town (No need for it!):

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4116029,-71.1581765,3a,75y,190.87h,91.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKEjQ6c8ux3oSfiZUn-ivpg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Then this MassDOT signal (which I guess is two signals):
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4025445,-71.1570995,3a,32.4y,264.88h,93.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL2AEgqadEXDZwS-DsVvjPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4026286,-71.1558792,3a,32.3y,79.23h,92.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAOOBFOOKckk-hmhlP41M2Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

and what a weird backplate, never seen something like this in MA.:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4026286,-71.1558792,3a,15y,94.94h,95.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAOOBFOOKckk-hmhlP41M2Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 10:50:56 PM
Ever seen anything quite like this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.2052304,-87.4899078,3a,59y,269.42h,91.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sutHMgAdfXhLZNh9P53sWFg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? Four signals overhead for two lanes terminating at a T junction. Interesting sign also.

Nearby in Tuscaloosa: https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.2062956,-87.5256723,3a,24.9y,93.87h,97.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr4X-X-JpJD2VqtFhWS0rEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 23, 2020, 08:53:58 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50250774273/in/dateposted-public/

Noticed lately that some areas at one way streets is using a straight arrow on the signal head closest to the side of the intersection that is DO NOT ENTER.

Reminds me of Newark, NJ.  In the City of Newark at one way street intersections the city would use 2 arrows instead of the usual green ball to show the only two turns that a motorist can make at the intersection.  However, that became problematic when the one way was to left as it would give a green left arrow which means protected left when you still had to yield to oncoming traffic.  As at one time left turn signals were scarce in NJ and growing up in Union County, NJ we had only two protected left turns in my area  which were along NJ Route 28 in Roselle Park.  Now of course the state is full of them, and I am sure Newark was pressured into ridding those arrow configurations to avoid collisions from motorists thinking that the turn is completely protected when it is not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 23, 2020, 01:48:53 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2020, 11:34:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Sorry this is Brooks Av At Lake St in Arlington MA. Street Signs will be installed later when signs are posted. Here are the design plans: https://www.arlingtonma.gov/home/showdocument?id=36925

The newer MA signals are quite nice.  I wouldn't judge the signal until it is completed.  Like Amtrakprod said, the signs will come eventually.

Quote from: roadman65 on August 23, 2020, 08:53:58 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50250774273/in/dateposted-public/

Noticed lately that some areas at one way streets is using a straight arrow on the signal head closest to the side of the intersection that is DO NOT ENTER.

Reminds me of Newark, NJ.  In the City of Newark at one way street intersections the city would use 2 arrows instead of the usual green ball to show the only two turns that a motorist can make at the intersection.  However, that became problematic when the one way was to left as it would give a green left arrow which means protected left when you still had to yield to oncoming traffic.  As at one time left turn signals were scarce in NJ and growing up in Union County, NJ we had only two protected left turns in my area  which were along NJ Route 28 in Roselle Park.  Now of course the state is full of them, and I am sure Newark was pressured into ridding those arrow configurations to avoid collisions from motorists thinking that the turn is completely protected when it is not.

While the Newark thing is quite dangerous, the first signal you posted is quite common.  A green straight arrow is another indication that a left or a right is prohibited at all times. And it is quite a useful thing.

It is not always for do not enter, they also exist at prohibited left turns, even when the cross street is not a one-way.

https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.076293,-118.2917625,3a,75y,271.39h,89.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg6KOP2zJBFTpJ0ma1QRz5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 23, 2020, 04:00:25 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2020, 01:29:10 PM
Well my town is finally installing its first FYA left turn signal. And they plan to use TOD phasing!!
(images clipped)
What's the intersection? Also, is it standard MassDOT practice to not sign FYAs?
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole like (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0263892,-91.702375,3a,75y,359.36h,88.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAceDnQUH4dKzTeepj_QUVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) so (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0716227,-115.100677,3a,19.3y,274.09h,96.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjuKX1EmWVPz7yMepSAqthg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Also that street sign system wouldn't work here or in most of the Nottheast. We don't have large roads like those (which is good!)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 23, 2020, 04:34:39 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 22, 2020, 10:50:56 PM
Ever seen anything quite like this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.2052304,-87.4899078,3a,59y,269.42h,91.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sutHMgAdfXhLZNh9P53sWFg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? Four signals overhead for two lanes terminating at a T junction. Interesting sign also.

Nearby in Tuscaloosa: https://www.google.pl/maps/@33.2062956,-87.5256723,3a,24.9y,93.87h,97.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr4X-X-JpJD2VqtFhWS0rEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Do you one better. 5 at the end of Rickert Dr at Ogden Ave in Naperville, IL. Plus a single near right side one.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.759524,-88.1874096,3a,75y,318.01h,94.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAChVezlCnrWh9KhIIWYEMg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DAChVezlCnrWh9KhIIWYEMg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D26.885906%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 23, 2020, 05:49:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2020, 05:19:26 PM
Anyone have any idea what's going on here? Right outside Nakatomi Plaza in Century City, Los Angeles:

Right-facing green arrow in bottom left of doghouse (https://goo.gl/maps/3YKvTnUo8aLqsSjw5)

The bottom right lens is a green orb (https://goo.gl/maps/9xAreKJ8XAkXvj8c6).

Are the two mixed up? Or is this correct?

There's also this funny situation (https://goo.gl/maps/CWAogC3EnHWLYjSn8) (same intersection) where, even though no through movement exists here, the red orb is always lit because of the adjacent pedestrian crossing. Only when that is activated, is the red orb extinguished.

This is a weird setup.  IIRC, when I lived in L.A. in the 80s and 90s there was no restriction on requiring a turn at this intersection.  Cars from Fox Plaza could continue down Galaxy,if they wanted.

From the pictures, it is hard to tell what the signal phasing is at this corner.  It would also make sense to have a FYA signal for the right turn: R-YA-FYA-GA which would be a little more intuitive.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on August 24, 2020, 10:56:50 AM
Been curious about this for quite a while now. What states other than New Hampshire (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0822572,-70.766064,3a,20.1y,209.37h,93.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siOcz_NAD1Ed-DAEWflsTyQ!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)*, Rhode Island (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5664752,-71.4636129,3a,15.1y,207.43h,91.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdcQSvqaivKqTi1_lzkZjlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and New Jersey (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7318509,-74.5407286,3a,19.9y,197.58h,93.63t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUJGHuuNVxpVlSsmWGtfXkg!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656) primarily use 4-section bimodal signals (R-Y-G-G&YA) for PP(L/R)T signals?

I'm not sure if I should really include Maine or Massachusetts as "primary" users of 4-section bimodal signals becuase while both liked to use both 4 and 5-section signals in the past, AFAIK, new Maine and MassDOT signal installs are starting to primarily use 5-section doghouse signals instead of 4-section bimodal signals for right turns.

*NHDOT installs and maintained signals only use 4-section (bimodal) signals for a shared signal option. The 5-section signals (examples: 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7650863,-71.4403025,3a,15y,198.98h,89.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb-9loShqAx1kVig_7XA3qw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7639509,-71.4666618,3a,32.4y,333.25h,91.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swGHq8c31DGkP1e9RF6yJBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1967153,-71.5638786,3a,86.4y,122.94h,88.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdGZKdrOEWQDIDmPI35lBKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), and 4 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7817404,-71.2292207,3a,27.1y,325.12h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKwumfjcsD4u5Yjed0ZHpfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) that are seen in New Hampshire are NOT NHDOT installs, those are usually installed by an outside contractor for a town/city.

----

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole.

NHDOT-maintained signals sometimes do include the street signs on the pole, like here on Route 125 at Harvey Hill / Wadleigh Falls Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0983641,-71.0420472,3a,75y,338.72h,93.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suQS523CVOWmjyygsfIvzNg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Lee.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:49:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on August 24, 2020, 10:56:50 AM
Been curious about this for quite a while now. What states other than New Hampshire (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0822572,-70.766064,3a,20.1y,209.37h,93.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siOcz_NAD1Ed-DAEWflsTyQ!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192)*, Rhode Island (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5664752,-71.4636129,3a,15.1y,207.43h,91.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdcQSvqaivKqTi1_lzkZjlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and New Jersey (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7318509,-74.5407286,3a,19.9y,197.58h,93.63t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUJGHuuNVxpVlSsmWGtfXkg!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656) primarily use 4-section bimodal signals (R-Y-G-G&YA) for PP(L/R)T signals?

I'm not sure if I should really include Maine or Massachusetts as "primary" users of 4-section bimodal signals becuase while both liked to use both 4 and 5-section signals in the past, AFAIK, new Maine and MassDOT signal installs are starting to primarily use 5-section doghouse signals instead of 4-section bimodal signals for right turns.

*NHDOT installs and maintained signals only use 4-section (bimodal) signals for a shared signal option. The 5-section signals (examples: 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7650863,-71.4403025,3a,15y,198.98h,89.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb-9loShqAx1kVig_7XA3qw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7639509,-71.4666618,3a,32.4y,333.25h,91.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swGHq8c31DGkP1e9RF6yJBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1967153,-71.5638786,3a,86.4y,122.94h,88.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdGZKdrOEWQDIDmPI35lBKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), and 4 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7817404,-71.2292207,3a,27.1y,325.12h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKwumfjcsD4u5Yjed0ZHpfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) that are seen in New Hampshire are NOT NHDOT installs, those are usually installed by an outside contractor for a town/city.

----

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 21, 2020, 07:12:09 PM
I wish more northeastern states would have street name signs on or hanging from the signal pole.

NHDOT-maintained signals sometimes do include the street signs on the pole, like here on Route 125 at Harvey Hill / Wadleigh Falls Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0983641,-71.0420472,3a,75y,338.72h,93.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suQS523CVOWmjyygsfIvzNg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Lee.
As you said Massachusetts definitely does. But yeah that's typically used for a cheap town who doesn't want to buy another signal section. MassDOT currently uses 4 section FYAs for PPTL and Right turn doghouses for PPTR. They do not use inline 5 section signals for an odd reason (like Spokane Washington). Local quirk I assume.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200824/49deebd19da800f45336302fae7220de.jpg)
2 signals for a 3 lane road. Unheard of in IL basically lol


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL.

Illinois isn't really "tornado land" and signal styles don't make much of a difference anyway. That said, the picture you linked is extremely lackluster--looks like something out of NM.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on August 24, 2020, 04:19:49 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
Looks to me like that's a one-off installation because of the nearby airport. It's still a little strange because I've never seen signal clearance as an issue near airports; usually the main concern is with streetlight height and optics. Not sure what the advantage of horizontal signals in this situation is vs. vertical signals (aside from the extra couple feet of clearance), but I guess whatever works.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 04:21:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL.

Illinois isn't really "tornado land" and signal styles don't make much of a difference anyway. That said, the picture you linked is extremely lackluster--looks like something out of NM.
They got tornados doe. And I'd say it makes a difference. Kinda like how SoFlo uses horizontal signals due to hurricanes


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:37:29 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 04:21:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL.

Illinois isn't really "tornado land" and signal styles don't make much of a difference anyway. That said, the picture you linked is extremely lackluster--looks like something out of NM.
They got tornados doe. And I'd say it makes a difference. Kinda like how SoFlo uses horizontal signals due to hurricanes


iPhone

None of the tornado alley states are majority horizontal signals (save parts of Texas). A giant vortex of 100+mph wind doesn't discriminate based on traffic signal orientation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 24, 2020, 06:05:28 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:37:29 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 04:21:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL.

Illinois isn't really "tornado land" and signal styles don't make much of a difference anyway. That said, the picture you linked is extremely lackluster--looks like something out of NM.
They got tornados doe. And I'd say it makes a difference. Kinda like how SoFlo uses horizontal signals due to hurricanes


iPhone

None of the tornado alley states are majority horizontal signals (save parts of Texas). A giant vortex of 100+mph wind doesn't discriminate based on traffic signal orientation.
As someone who storm chases in the Spring, I can attest that Illinois is certainly part of "Tornado Alley". What people don't realize is that Tornado Alley actually shifts around depending on the time of year.
January & February - Eastern Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi
March - Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas
April - Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas
May - Western & Northwestern Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Eastern Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, Southern Illinois
June - Kansas, Eastern Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Western Indiana
July & August - Eastern Wyoming, Eastern Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Southern Saskatchewan, Southern Manitoba, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana
September - Kansas, Eastern Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, Missouri, Iowa, Southern Minnesota, Illinois, Southern Wisconsin, Western Indiana
October - Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas
November & December - Eastern Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi

Keep in mind though. They can and do happen any time of year in the United States. There have been tornadoes in Kenosha, Wisconsin as late as November 22nd (2010).
http://www.tornadohistoryproject.com/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on August 24, 2020, 07:32:51 PM
We're used to meters on on-ramps, but at the west end of the Glendale Freeway stub, there's metering before the end of the freeway, (https://goo.gl/maps/9BtmA4Y7J9mSV8oTA) effectively metering an off-ramp.  They don't want traffic flooding into neighborhood streets.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 25, 2020, 03:47:30 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

Agreed with this. This is just a complete waste, they could've added at least one more signal on that mast arm to justify its length.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2020, 04:19:50 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:37:29 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 04:21:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL.

Illinois isn't really "tornado land" and signal styles don't make much of a difference anyway. That said, the picture you linked is extremely lackluster--looks like something out of NM.

They got tornados doe. And I'd say it makes a difference. Kinda like how SoFlo uses horizontal signals due to hurricanes

None of the tornado alley states are majority horizontal signals (save parts of Texas). A giant vortex of 100+mph wind doesn't discriminate based on traffic signal orientation.

The horizontal signals at that Illinois intersection are due to the nearby airport (KJOT).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 08:17:43 AM
Ever seen newly-installed lights tilted downward (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.595014,-96.6499812,3a,43y,336.87h,95.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGeXxr3wS6B7hAxEjvjVrSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 09:03:19 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 08:17:43 AM
Ever seen newly-installed lights tilted downward (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.595014,-96.6499812,3a,43y,336.87h,95.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGeXxr3wS6B7hAxEjvjVrSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?
Nope. My town just puts them sideways: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200825/b4b0e14663e286b6d26e39f7c277158b.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200825/e55c803332eacb51c41d5a99244a0872.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 09:51:02 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 09:03:19 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 08:17:43 AM
Ever seen newly-installed lights tilted downward (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.595014,-96.6499812,3a,43y,336.87h,95.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGeXxr3wS6B7hAxEjvjVrSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?
Nope. My town just puts them sideways: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200825/b4b0e14663e286b6d26e39f7c277158b.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200825/e55c803332eacb51c41d5a99244a0872.jpg)


iPhone

Missouri tilts them sideways also, though I think I've seen some bagged.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 10:03:49 AM
This is the something I never thought I'd ever see in MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.572285,-71.1566622,3a,32.7y,167.08h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgSj9ysemPBrU5jGthITfcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 10:03:49 AM
This is the something I never thought I'd ever see in MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.572285,-71.1566622,3a,32.7y,167.08h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgSj9ysemPBrU5jGthITfcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
The right turn doghouse?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 10:06:45 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 10:03:49 AM
This is the something I never thought I'd ever see in MA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.572285,-71.1566622,3a,32.7y,167.08h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgSj9ysemPBrU5jGthITfcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
The right turn doghouse?

The inline right turn doghouse in MA lol.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 25, 2020, 02:26:25 PM
I guess I'm from one of the few areas that bags signals (https://goo.gl/maps/CNuDoSCwNbgkU1dR9) when not in use?
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 25, 2020, 05:41:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 25, 2020, 02:26:25 PM
I guess I'm from one of the few areas that bags signals (https://goo.gl/maps/CNuDoSCwNbgkU1dR9) when not in use?
In Ma it is district by district. (Or I guess town.)

For example the slightly richer town to the direct west of Arlington (Called Lexington) uses bags. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200825/c964a544c93f77d49747610980cdc2a5.jpg)
My town just tilts the signals and doesn't use bags. I think then should. Maybe they bagged signals in the past? I can't recall lol.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on August 25, 2020, 07:03:27 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 24, 2020, 03:51:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 01:14:35 PM
City of Joliet IL installing new horizontal traffic signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5139755,-88.1692747,3a,75y,346.5h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVrBk_ZINOb4Q7bWidiRQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?!?!
About time tornado land switched to that. Can I jsut point our this is the WORST signal I've ever seen in IL. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200824/49deebd19da800f45336302fae7220de.jpg)
2 signals for a 3 lane road. Unheard of in IL basically lol
I pass through this intersection like every week. If you go to the actual streetview link, you can see that the other three approaches have much more robust signals.  Upon seeing that, you should be able to realize that this is obviously a temporary install for a mast arm that got wrecked.  The horizontal signal heads were chosen because an airport landing strip ends just short of the intersection; limiting any upward protrusions is in everyone's best interest.  It might not have even been enough, apparently!

I posted this signal to a thread somewhere around Traffic Control dealing with horizontal signal heads...I also work for the agency who put it up >_>

The worst signal in Illinois is just to the east along McDonough St. in Joliet--at Joyce Road.  https://goo.gl/maps/HoXwaGVRmsvMe6Dn7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 07:09:33 PM
Here's a removed (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.0354298,-83.6906345,3a,64.7y,109.98h,87.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sd14QlZ6c6jgdVTeAw5goiw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) signal in a Flint industrial wasteland. Notice how the cord is coiled against the pole (nearby later GSV shows it removed).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on August 25, 2020, 07:44:47 PM
The real reason I came to this thread was to share this photo, which was an amusing sight in Plainfield, IL, yesterday!

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50269075621_4d2b5b9037_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jA79Qn)
20200824_141948_HDR (https://flic.kr/p/2jA79Qn) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 25, 2020, 08:21:33 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 25, 2020, 07:44:47 PM
The real reason I came to this thread was to share this photo, which was an amusing sight in Plainfield, IL, yesterday!

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50269075621_4d2b5b9037_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jA79Qn)
20200824_141948_HDR (https://flic.kr/p/2jA79Qn) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr

That's either a design error or a malfunction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on August 25, 2020, 08:35:38 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 25, 2020, 08:21:33 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 25, 2020, 07:44:47 PM
The real reason I came to this thread was to share this photo, which was an amusing sight in Plainfield, IL, yesterday!

(image)

That's either a design error or a malfunction.

It was definitely a malfunction.  The electrical contractor was on site offstage to the left of the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 25, 2020, 11:15:01 PM
Revealing their true colors. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9161383,-73.8111139,3a,18.1y,342.12h,125.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spnrKN25VJQ4IvQzLV_R8rA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2020, 06:33:17 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

2 signals per movement.  Gets that accomplished. Signals may not be 8 feet apart which is the only issue, but a minor one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 26, 2020, 07:04:57 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.
Would've been great if they just moved one of the left turn signals onto the left sided pole


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 26, 2020, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

Agreed.  Use of some sidemounted signals would declutter this install.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on August 26, 2020, 10:06:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 26, 2020, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

Agreed.  Use of some sidemounted signals would declutter this install.

I like how this is designed.  If you're going to have a mast arm that long, you might as well use it for both of your signals intended for one movement.  A usage of sidemounted signals would put them too far off to the side, given the length of the mast arm; unless you put them on the channelizing islands housing the crosswalk signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on August 26, 2020, 10:42:31 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 26, 2020, 10:06:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 26, 2020, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

Agreed.  Use of some sidemounted signals would declutter this install.

I like how this is designed.  If you're going to have a mast arm that long, you might as well use it for both of your signals intended for one movement.  A usage of sidemounted signals would put them too far off to the side, given the length of the mast arm; unless you put them on the channelizing islands housing the crosswalk signals.
I feel like two left turn signals mounted on the same mast is a visual cue for two left turn lanes... it wouldn't surprise me if some drivers mistake the left thru lane as an option lane and attempt to turn left from that lane as well (lane markings be damned). I'd rather see that second arrow either side-mounted or mounted on the mast in the foreground instead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 27, 2020, 07:30:29 AM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on August 26, 2020, 10:42:31 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 26, 2020, 10:06:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 26, 2020, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

Agreed.  Use of some sidemounted signals would declutter this install.

I like how this is designed.  If you're going to have a mast arm that long, you might as well use it for both of your signals intended for one movement.  A usage of sidemounted signals would put them too far off to the side, given the length of the mast arm; unless you put them on the channelizing islands housing the crosswalk signals.
I feel like two left turn signals mounted on the same mast is a visual cue for two left turn lanes... it wouldn't surprise me if some drivers mistake the left thru lane as an option lane and attempt to turn left from that lane as well (lane markings be damned). I'd rather see that second arrow either side-mounted or mounted on the mast in the foreground instead.

That's a really good point.  There are different standards in different states as to whether there even needs to be two left turn signal faces at every intersection.  [Some states only require one, some states require two, some states require two but allow the second to be near sided or on a left sidemount, some states only require the red left arrow to be doubled like in Baltimore.]

Baltimore example:  https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3569075,-76.7032814,3a,75y,306.12h,103.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAFDdgUH00yLC0vAVfxf53g!2e0!5s20090801T000000!7i13312!8i6656

[Old install.  The modern install has a regular RA-YA-GA at this location with a second signal face on a near sided install on the other mast arm.]

But you are right that it is very common in many areas to have two left signal faces on the mast arm where there are two left lanes, and one on the mast arm where there is only one lane - so another reason to move the second RA-YA-GA signal off this mast arm.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 27, 2020, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: mrsman on August 27, 2020, 07:30:29 AM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on August 26, 2020, 10:42:31 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 26, 2020, 10:06:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 26, 2020, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

Agreed.  Use of some sidemounted signals would declutter this install.

I like how this is designed.  If you're going to have a mast arm that long, you might as well use it for both of your signals intended for one movement.  A usage of sidemounted signals would put them too far off to the side, given the length of the mast arm; unless you put them on the channelizing islands housing the crosswalk signals.
I feel like two left turn signals mounted on the same mast is a visual cue for two left turn lanes... it wouldn't surprise me if some drivers mistake the left thru lane as an option lane and attempt to turn left from that lane as well (lane markings be damned). I'd rather see that second arrow either side-mounted or mounted on the mast in the foreground instead.

That's a really good point.  There are different standards in different states as to whether there even needs to be two left turn signal faces at every intersection.  [Some states only require one, some states require two, some states require two but allow the second to be near sided or on a left sidemount, some states only require the red left arrow to be doubled like in Baltimore.]

On these forums, I think sometimes we lose focus on how states operate.  We are quick to say, well, they do it a certain way in Maryland, or NJ, or Ohio, or Montana, because we're looking at the country (and beyond) on a Macro level, and would love to see states incorporate how other states do things.

Whereas Delaware is only concerned about Delaware.  Their Transportation guys are in Delaware, and adhere to Delaware standards and procedures.  While they may have heard of how other states build things, and no doubt they've seen other options on personal vacations, they're suddenly not going to abandon their state's procedures and engineering methods. 

In this regard, Delaware overall isn't big on sidemounted signals.  There's some around, especially in cities where they may do their own installs or due to narrow intersection widths.  But overall, they keep everything mounted on guidewires (and even their method was fairly unique) or use these masts.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it's mostly Delaware residents driving on Delaware roads.  Consistency is somewhat important.  And to this point, this location isn't unique to Delaware using 2 Left Turn lights for a single lane. 

https://goo.gl/maps/gspQ1r51FpHHTDau6
https://goo.gl/maps/KCcU9iLKGRd3axy29
https://goo.gl/maps/xGkjCbY6eURAZXBq6
https://goo.gl/maps/A8FeWpzHxzGtoeTo9 (This intersection does have a side mounted install...for the ramp lane where the only option is to turn left)

So before everyone goes all shock and appalled at how the lights are installed at this intersection, realize that this is a typical installation in Delaware, and confusion shouldn't exist.

For what it's worth - anyone check out the abnormally long left turn lane here? It's 900 feet long!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 27, 2020, 01:01:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 27, 2020, 08:18:29 AM
On these forums, I think sometimes we lose focus on how states operate.  We are quick to say, well, they do it a certain way in Maryland, or NJ, or Ohio, or Montana, because we're looking at the country (and beyond) on a Macro level, and would love to see states incorporate how other states do things.

I think we're all very much aware that each state has their own standards, and that engineers in those states generally have to comply with the rules in those states.

What I think we're all a bit confused about, is why you have states like California or Minnesota, with similar requirements for duplication, yet they have objectively far-superior placement standards for those extra signal heads. Delaware, for whatever reason, has decided to cram the extra signal heads all right next to each other. Congrats to them for having redundant signals, but they have the opportunity to have both redundancy and improved visibility, yet they don't seem to care about the latter. From what I've seen, Georgia has similar requirements, and similar practices; thus, similar negatives.

In Washington State, WSDOT's Eastern Region (Spokane) requires two left turn signals for dedicated left turns (Spokane proper requires far-left/far-right signals at all intersections); in all cases, the extra left turn signal is on the far left side of the intersection. This kills two birds with one stone: you get the redundancy in case of burn-out or malfunction, and drivers can see the state of the signals behind taller vehicles.

Just the other day, moving through a double left fully-protected turn southeast of Tacoma, WA, I was behind a very tall trash-semi (not the kind that pick up garbage, but the kind that move it from transfer facilities). I could not see around it. As I was approaching the stop line, although the light had been green for a while, letting off the throttle long enough to actually see over the truck (and risking the possibility of letting the light trip) would have put me a good 10 car lengths behind the truck, which is not reasonable at all. Well, lo and behold, the truck entered on red, and I entered on a very, very red signal. I was caught out in the middle, because WSDOT did not install an extra left turn signal (the Olympic Region does not have extra signal requirements) and I was basically blind entering behind the truck. I waited for traffic to go, and then finished my turn. This worked fine, but other drivers might have simply kept turning and drove head-first into oncoming traffic, or might have tried to reverse back behind the limit line. Either way, not safe.

That entire situation could have been avoided by signalizing the left turn like this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/hSRDNtg7Y33CYU5S6) barely a mile away, or this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/8RBYA3uCLXeeZS6i6) a little further out. But because WSDOT's Olympic Region has its own standards, they didn't have to install that extra signal on the left, and therefore they did not. Their standards are objectively worse than similar standards even in the same state.

What's my rambling point here? Roads do not exist in a bubble, and neither do the experiences and situations encountered on those roads. Delaware's standards are objectively poor when compared to states with similar redundancy requirements. Delaware may only be "concerned about Delaware", but that shouldn't allow them to ignore objectively better practices from elsewhere. After all, it's not like they don't adopt other new things (like zebra crossings for all crossings, or retroreflective yellow signal borders).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 27, 2020, 01:32:28 PM
As part of the Seattle area's Sound Transit Eastlink light rail extension through Bellevue, the city of Bellevue is constructing a new arterial, Spring Blvd, adjacent to the light rail ROW.

As is the norm for Bellevue, the left turns are going to be flashing yellow arrow signals. However, this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/KCVV1NxVBax51cBQ7) (pictured below -- no GSV imagery yet) also has bike signals in each direction.

From what I've seen elsewhere in Washington, left turns across signalized bike lanes are always protected-only. So I'm very interested to see how these will operate.

FYA signals in Bellevue have advanced ped phasing; the red arrow remains on while the walk sign is on, but the FYA activates when the countdown begins. I assume some variation of this will be used here.

(Image 1) shows an overview of the signals
(Image 2) shows a close-up of the bike signals with other nearby signals
(Image 3) shows the bike signal off to the left of an overhead FYA

(all images slightly modified to improve visibility of the signals).

(https://i.imgur.com/M2L9f6t.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/9O3UoIU.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/ZVPsp16.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 27, 2020, 03:48:42 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2020, 06:33:17 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 26, 2020, 05:46:10 PM
Two overhead signals each (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.1590661,-75.5429291,3a,57.1y,176.9h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3LDKfFhHRIx3xa2UFqzMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) for a single thru lane and a single left turn. This is overkill and a messy install.

2 signals per movement.  Gets that accomplished. Signals may not be 8 feet apart which is the only issue, but a minor one.

J&N, I believe the Manual only requires the two thru movement signal heads to be eight feet apart, which they appear to be in that photo. Any supplemental or turn-signal heads can be closer. In fact New York City has some installations where the turn-signal head is immediately adjacent to the thru head. I originally thought it was an MUTCD violation, but found that it was not, when I re-read the standard.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 27, 2020, 04:47:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 27, 2020, 01:01:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 27, 2020, 08:18:29 AM
On these forums, I think sometimes we lose focus on how states operate.  We are quick to say, well, they do it a certain way in Maryland, or NJ, or Ohio, or Montana, because we're looking at the country (and beyond) on a Macro level, and would love to see states incorporate how other states do things.

I think we're all very much aware that each state has their own standards, and that engineers in those states generally have to comply with the rules in those states.

I think there's a number of people that do.  Probably the majority.  But there's clearly some people that don't get it.

Quote from: jakeroot on August 27, 2020, 01:01:26 PM
What's my rambling point here? Roads do not exist in a bubble, and neither do the experiences and situations encountered on those roads. Delaware's standards are objectively poor when compared to states with similar redundancy requirements. Delaware may only be "concerned about Delaware", but that shouldn't allow them to ignore objectively better practices from elsewhere. After all, it's not like they don't adopt other new things (like zebra crossings for all crossings, or retroreflective yellow signal borders).

I somewhat agree.  I think it's important to note that Delaware has been using this type of setup for many years, if not literally decades. One picture of one intersection is posted, and people not used to Delaware's setup have a conniption over it not realizing this is Delaware's standard operating procedure statewide, and has been for a long time. 

It's also important to note that based on that, Delaware seems to do very well without side-mounted signals.  They are also by far not the only state which doesn't tend to use side-mounted traffic lights.  I don't know if anyone here has ever developed a list, but I'd wager that states that primarily use overhead-only lights are probably a more common setup than states with a mix of overhead and side-mounted lights at intersections.  Ironically, they border against NJ, which is probably one of the most aggressive states when it comes to side-mounted or overhead lights on the near side of the intersection.

However, and moving away from Delaware, we can see that there is a lot of inconsistency throughout the entire country on traffic standards (Hell, even within the states themselves, there's a lot of inconsistency).  If we took the best of the best of every state, and mandated it throughout the country, we would probably be better off for it. 

That said, while Delaware is only concerned about Delaware, generally speaking, (Insert your state here) is only concerned about (Insert same state here), and there are an untold number of differences between states that share a common border.  Personally, I think Delaware does a lot of things right, especially as I look at it from a point of view living in NJ and traveling a lot in PA.  Delaware does a lot of things uniquely as well: They have a ton of T and inverted T lights; way more than most other states.  And then they do some things poorly, such as signing turning lanes - they frequently only use a single turn arrow on the road, and rarely have signage informing you of the lane designations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 28, 2020, 03:16:21 AM
Regarding the Bellevue lights, seems like an odd spot for bike signals -- considering that the street has a bike lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 28, 2020, 09:36:52 AM
You seen backplates, but have you seen lights (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7259246,-86.6439923,3a,39.6y,326.04h,110.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sht0EXXsvjuRWXtZ3aFmnJQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) entirely in front of their backplates?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 28, 2020, 12:13:04 PM
In KC (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.0385312,-94.3410754,3a,15y,185.46h,93.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6da_K--UmuPvkigDy3Cx-g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/), before the road veers right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on August 28, 2020, 10:35:51 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 28, 2020, 09:36:52 AM
You seen backplates, but have you seen lights (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7259246,-86.6439923,3a,39.6y,326.04h,110.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sht0EXXsvjuRWXtZ3aFmnJQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) entirely in front of their backplates?

I'm absolutely not a fan of that. I think it looks tacky.

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 28, 2020, 12:13:04 PM
In KC (https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.0385312,-94.3410754,3a,15y,185.46h,93.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6da_K--UmuPvkigDy3Cx-g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/), before the road veers right.

How on earth was this allowed? :confused:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 29, 2020, 08:08:03 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 28, 2020, 09:36:52 AM
You seen backplates, but have you seen lights (https://www.google.pl/maps/@34.7259246,-86.6439923,3a,39.6y,326.04h,110.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sht0EXXsvjuRWXtZ3aFmnJQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) entirely in front of their backplates?

The vast majority of Huntsville's lights are like that. I can't stand them. Looks even dumber in person.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 29, 2020, 08:41:21 AM
One light in my town is similar to that, but isnt behind the entire signal.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4026099,-71.1558461,3a,15y,91.45h,100.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-17SvUsu6lH6Sk25ufYwsA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 29, 2020, 05:24:56 PM
Check out this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YON0XPlklcw/) 2-minute Youtube video, filmed in Carlyss LA (near Lake Charles) during Laura. Multiple traffic signals are shown; one span wire with traffic lights barely hanging on, a completely destroyed mast arm leaning across a road, and a mast arm by a gas station that is still intact but the wind has spun it around.

More damaged traffic light content: here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uemcx-Ktb6o/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 30, 2020, 12:23:02 PM
Ever seen a mast arm painted vivid blue before (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.6881499,-86.0615863,3a,67.7y,346.23h,101.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl7KOAcym_EJfjFto_3pS0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 30, 2020, 02:18:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 30, 2020, 12:23:02 PM
Ever seen a mast arm painted vivid blue before (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.6881499,-86.0615863,3a,67.7y,346.23h,101.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl7KOAcym_EJfjFto_3pS0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?

Lots of signals are painted a similar color in downtown Albuquerque (https://goo.gl/maps/1UxbYH8eMtzmxPJe9), though I think they'd prefer to call it turquoise.

As a side note, why are you using Polish Google?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 30, 2020, 03:10:08 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 30, 2020, 02:18:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 30, 2020, 12:23:02 PM
Ever seen a mast arm painted vivid blue before (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.6881499,-86.0615863,3a,67.7y,346.23h,101.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl7KOAcym_EJfjFto_3pS0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?

Lots of signals are painted a similar color in downtown Albuquerque (https://goo.gl/maps/1UxbYH8eMtzmxPJe9), though I think they'd prefer to call it turquoise.

As a side note, why are you using Polish Google?
It's a long story but basically involves an inherited computer and a bookmarked tab I'm too lazy to change.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 30, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
Unrelated (maybe)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7759595,-73.6982198,3a,27.5y,143.45h,87.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saN_BkYCS2iRTbV5dhoXzGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Oh my gosh, they are key lime green!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on August 30, 2020, 09:37:32 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

This signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3247767,-70.9578666,3a,83.3y,258.13h,86.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAv9f-0YGbNQoaW8DOTovcQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Rochester NH on US202/NH11 comes to mind. Being a NHDOT maintained signal, it used to have two overhead signals (started off as two thru arrows, then changed to green ball on the left signal, green thru arrow on the right signal), then for some unknown reason, the left-most signal was removed and replaced with a "LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN" sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 30, 2020, 09:48:00 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

NJ 70 near NJ 73: https://maps.app.goo.gl/rCNJXprJRq2UxRNf9

Leaving a shopping center; rough estimate is about 52 feet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Also in Northern Ohio; some super weird arrows (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.4502311,-82.674469,3a,23y,257.98h,109.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_IGwDIhQnKqyyRsM9hbmOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that I'm gonna guess are found nowhere else in the US, if not the world.

SECOND EDIT: More Ohio weirdness (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.4180106,-82.1628892,3a,54.7y,1.22h,93.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2BJjkF3F3hWb6WtD6Rksdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Goddamn, this state might be one of the most inconsistent in the country when it comes to traffic signals!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on August 31, 2020, 07:18:22 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM

Also in Northern Ohio; some super weird arrows (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.4502311,-82.674469,3a,23y,257.98h,109.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_IGwDIhQnKqyyRsM9hbmOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that I'm gonna guess are found nowhere else in the US, if not the world.

Might have been an Ohio thing, as I am old enough to remember seeing the criss-cross arrows in signals in Toledo, Lorain and Independence -- all are long gone.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 09:33:05 PM
Take a look at this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.445736,-82.1200459,3a,75y,357.92h,93.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBE3U9hNT4nQC67f2Aq35sw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) removed signal area in Lorain (huge "57" sign) and this (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.4492225,-82.0764657,3a,22.9y,-8.19h,101.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7mochZiRNoXc2Q9X5YUSRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) a mile or two away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 09:53:14 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Depends where the exact border is, I suppose.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 02:40:50 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Very reminiscent of this installation (https://goo.gl/maps/KAdfgZLhzsWTKF7C6) in Langley, BC. Again, near an airport. Post-mounted signals are normal in BC, but very rare without at least one overhead signal.

They even have little flashing lights on top.

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 30, 2020, 12:23:02 PM
Ever seen a mast arm painted vivid blue before (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.6881499,-86.0615863,3a,67.7y,346.23h,101.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl7KOAcym_EJfjFto_3pS0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)?

I've seen one painted regular blue, in Victoria BC. Millstream & McCallum (https://goo.gl/maps/8sRUdF4JX2iGUFor8), out west of the city centre. Some other signals in the area are painted similarly in other colors, like this red one (https://goo.gl/maps/e2ihD5yYRL8mV9Rv8).

(https://i.imgur.com/H7fiY35.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on September 01, 2020, 02:44:24 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Also, improper 5-element signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 02:59:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 02:40:50 PM
Very reminiscent of https://i.imgur.com/H7fiY35.jpg[/img]]this installation (http://[img%20width=800%20height=239) in Langley, BC. Again, near an airport. Post-mounted signals are normal in BC, but very rare without at least one overhead signal.

I attempted to fix this, but your post-mounted link ended up being the same thing as what's posted at the bottom.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:26:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 02:59:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 02:40:50 PM
Very reminiscent of https://i.imgur.com/H7fiY35.jpg[/img]]this installation (http://[img%20width=800%20height=239) in Langley, BC. Again, near an airport. Post-mounted signals are normal in BC, but very rare without at least one overhead signal.

I attempted to fix this, but your post-mounted link ended up being the same thing as what's posted at the bottom.

I have no idea how I didn't notice that. Must have been drunk this morning. Hmm.

Fixed. Thanks for the heads up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:29:18 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 01, 2020, 02:44:24 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Also, improper 5-element signal?

Could you expand a bit on what you mean by "improper"? Looks good to me. AFAIK, it's normal in many places for overhead signals to use doghouse layouts, but for mast-/post-mounted signals to use vertical 5-section towers. In case this is what you're referring to.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:41:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:29:18 PM

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 01, 2020, 02:44:24 PM

Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Also, improper 5-element signal?

Could you expand a bit on what you mean by "improper"? Looks good to me. AFAIK, it's normal in many places for overhead signals to use doghouse layouts, but for mast-/post-mounted signals to use vertical 5-section towers. In case this is what you're referring to.

For those interested, here (https://goo.gl/maps/aUfpgN5oKzaZZvaB6) is a shot of all three left arrows in use.  And those for the cross street (https://goo.gl/maps/WB9ypbWUNeLPZME89).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:42:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:26:33 PM
Must have been drunk this morning. Hmm.

You know you have a problem when you don't even remember that you were drunk.   :cheers:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 01, 2020, 03:47:19 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Am I the only one who actually really digs this install? Something about it just looks really good.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:50:46 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 01, 2020, 03:47:19 PM

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Am I the only one who actually really digs this install? Something about it just looks really good.

Not at all.  I love it too.  All four approaches have signals at all four corners.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:41:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:29:18 PM

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 01, 2020, 02:44:24 PM

Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 31, 2020, 10:27:31 PM
Doghouse in DC?

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9658016,-77.0025126,3a,69y,178.07h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3Q5MzLC5YZQSQfKbWtLuOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Also, improper 5-element signal?

Could you expand a bit on what you mean by "improper"? Looks good to me. AFAIK, it's normal in many places for overhead signals to use doghouse layouts, but for mast-/post-mounted signals to use vertical 5-section towers. In case this is what you're referring to.

For those interested, here (https://goo.gl/maps/aUfpgN5oKzaZZvaB6) is a shot of all three left arrows in use.  And those for the cross street (https://goo.gl/maps/WB9ypbWUNeLPZME89).

Ahhhhh. Yeah, that's pretty peculiar. Although having a left-facing arrow on the right edge of the intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/optrG5B12jEWANx7A) is pretty common in DC.

I've also seen it at least once before, at this on-ramp in Lakewood, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/HHzgw8ndnvtPPzjaA) (both ramp terminals).

I can't recall exactly, but I'm 90% sure that left-facing arrows are not allowed on the right edge of intersection. Near the right edge, yes, but not on the edge (like on the mast or a post).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:42:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 01, 2020, 03:26:33 PM
Must have been drunk this morning. Hmm.

You know you have a problem when you don't even remember that you were drunk.   :cheers:

That's for damn sure!!! :-D

Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:50:46 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 01, 2020, 03:47:19 PM

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Am I the only one who actually really digs this install? Something about it just looks really good.

Not at all.  I love it too.  All four approaches have signals at all four corners.

Coming in here for a third vote. I think it's lovely. I would much prefer this to be the "base" installation according to FHWA standards, with overhead signals being supplementary. I just find them more useful when trying to see around vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 01, 2020, 08:50:58 PM
Once again, that's why I've always thought that California (and Nevada) do it best. They usually have a combination of pole and overhead mounted heads, providing the best of all worlds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 01, 2020, 09:35:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:50:46 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 01, 2020, 03:47:19 PM

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Am I the only one who actually really digs this install? Something about it just looks really good.

Not at all.  I love it too.  All four approaches have signals at all four corners.

Coming in here for a third vote. I think it's lovely. I would much prefer this to be the "base" installation according to FHWA standards, with overhead signals being supplementary. I just find them more useful when trying to see around vehicles.
[/quote]

Yeah, I like this one. I'd prefer FYAs though to the doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 01, 2020, 09:44:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 01, 2020, 09:35:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2020, 03:50:46 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 01, 2020, 03:47:19 PM

Quote from: STLmapboy on August 31, 2020, 02:23:06 PM
Ohio near-airport install (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5582857,-83.4726004,3a,75y,274.81h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbzgTQ2GEk7PJX-DpnqVMCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Notice how they're all ground mounted.

Am I the only one who actually really digs this install? Something about it just looks really good.

Not at all.  I love it too.  All four approaches have signals at all four corners.
Yeah, I like this one. I'd prefer FYAs though to the doghouse.

OH isn't big on FYAs, even on newer installs (https://www.google.pl/maps/@41.4303749,-81.7352606,3a,75y,182.65h,89.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snAfRjEqtyL8tbgq667n-DA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on September 02, 2020, 12:09:47 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

Do ramp meter lights count? (https://goo.gl/maps/fWpfF214qu2yJi4K7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2020, 04:56:05 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

There's quite a few in Ellensburg, WA where the "through-minus-one" philosophy employed by the city has resulted in quite a few mast arms with only one signal. Totally fine with me, and I quite like the design here. Just wish there was a third signal on the far left:

(https://i.imgur.com/zHVLZ0r.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/usYSr7R.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 02, 2020, 11:57:48 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 24, 2020, 10:31:56 PM
What are the longest (https://www.google.pl/maps/@43.6959099,-98.0154528,3a,21.4y,241.17h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGTdN07rnJT_NZGqycOZWTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) poles you've seen with just one overhead signal? This image from Mitchell SD.

Here's a long one on Beverly Glen @ Olympic in Los Angeles:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0503511,-118.4206519,3a,75y,143.66h,83.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEsqIJSi3BQZIqNZgjmP7TQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 07:13:01 PM
Double-red (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3768183,-76.4601349,3a,64.3y,9.34h,90.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKCexrfgbDZqeGfpFHBcZgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) in Maryland?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 02, 2020, 07:19:27 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 07:13:01 PM
Double-red (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3768183,-76.4601349,3a,64.3y,9.34h,90.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKCexrfgbDZqeGfpFHBcZgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) in Maryland?

Interesting!  Looks like they retconned a permitted-only left turn signal in place of a protected/permitted. (Maybe vice versa?) That doghouse (?) thing in the opposite direction looks interesting to me too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 07:45:39 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 02, 2020, 07:19:27 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 07:13:01 PM
Double-red (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3768183,-76.4601349,3a,64.3y,9.34h,90.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKCexrfgbDZqeGfpFHBcZgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) in Maryland?

Interesting!  Looks like they retconned a permitted-only left turn signal in place of a protected/permitted. (Maybe vice versa?) That doghouse (?) thing in the opposite direction looks interesting to me too.
Found a (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4022043,-76.7834966,3a,20.1y,125.69h,90.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6fo0q_4RTArtuICGevoxcw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6fo0q_4RTArtuICGevoxcw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D219.72621%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) few (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.352462,-76.6844394,3a,17.4y,302.75h,99.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3ynpo4RxbOiU1t4ezBbcxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) more (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3978379,-76.796254,3a,15y,4.05h,90.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s89AYNx8dpmshONruPuzjbg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D89AYNx8dpmshONruPuzjbg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D44.205288%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) double reds.

Regarding the doghouse: Maryland has a lot of these (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4051773,-76.7790848,3a,41.3y,7.93h,99.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssLRxOXgRONMuEYXijPGrCw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) wonky (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3207298,-77.0193952,3a,81.9y,201.89h,97.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXf2gx86quq3kAGTkiqzhgg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en/) signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7603782,-76.0780936,3a,60y,315.97h,97.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6unuUQJJkq7TGLRjiEYxgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/). Personally, I'm not a fan.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 08:05:56 PM
Going back to the bagged head/tilted sideways comparison (or maybe that was another thread):

Here's NY holding new traffic lights hostage (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6819296,-73.785415,3a,31.5y,34.94h,103.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU_BPieWaep0cUn4RQk-iJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) with orange ribbon and very thin bags.

Also NY: What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331778,-78.7440007,3a,21.2y,341.68h,101.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8-mBpr3t1KcKIWHqnR0epg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/)?!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2020, 08:58:17 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 08:05:56 PM
Also NY: What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331778,-78.7440007,3a,21.2y,341.68h,101.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8-mBpr3t1KcKIWHqnR0epg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/)?!

Looks like a bimodal arrow for either an advanced or lagging left turn. Very weird to be so distant from the related signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 09:01:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 02, 2020, 08:58:17 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 08:05:56 PM
Also NY: What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331778,-78.7440007,3a,21.2y,341.68h,101.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8-mBpr3t1KcKIWHqnR0epg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/)?!

Looks like a bimodal arrow for either an advanced or lagging left turn. Very weird to be so distant from the related signal.

Also love how the wire for the lights is literally tied to (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9331885,-78.7441134,3a,19.3y,20.78h,100.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVmP3oOVogQVOohOguZpw0w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/) the aging pole. Stay classy NY.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 02, 2020, 09:03:51 PM
Looks like a local govt. installation, not NYS DOT. The State's installations are usually better quality. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 02, 2020, 09:13:20 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 02, 2020, 09:03:51 PM
Looks like a local govt. installation, not NYS DOT. The State's installations are usually better quality.

You're probably right, and NYSDOT does have some decent stuff (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9009628,-78.3889563,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scS3pZMG9CQY4hYZIgaWFOg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en/) going on, especially in newer installs. That said, local NY installments can get pretty dicey in a way I haven't quite seen in other states, right down to the inconsistent awfulness that is Tonawanda (referenced multiple times in this thread and others).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 07:51:37 PM
Signal for thee (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2474614,-73.773326,3a,36.2y,126.82h,96.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz_4vB_39ku7Zq1b2xdDKng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) but not for me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 04, 2020, 08:05:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 02, 2020, 09:03:51 PM
Looks like a local govt. installation, not NYS DOT. The State's installations are usually better quality.
Honestly looks like an after thought. Most local governments in MA would either replace the whole signal or give a leading phasing but not hardware changes.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 04, 2020, 08:20:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 07:51:37 PM
Signal for thee (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2474614,-73.773326,3a,36.2y,126.82h,96.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz_4vB_39ku7Zq1b2xdDKng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) but not for me.

....what sick filth bullshit is this?  One signal head in each direction?  How have the MUTCD gods not smote this entire town?

This might be the worst traffic signal I've ever seen; I'm not even kidding.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 04, 2020, 08:37:33 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 04, 2020, 08:20:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 07:51:37 PM
Signal for thee (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2474614,-73.773326,3a,36.2y,126.82h,96.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz_4vB_39ku7Zq1b2xdDKng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) but not for me.

....what sick filth bullshit is this?  One signal head in each direction?  How have the MUTCD gods not smote this entire town?

This might be the worst traffic signal I've ever seen; I'm not even kidding.

Honestly though. I have no idea what is going on here. Even the signs don't make any sense. Why is there a No Turn on Red sign on the left side?!

:banghead:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 04, 2020, 08:48:04 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 04, 2020, 08:20:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 07:51:37 PM
Signal for thee (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2474614,-73.773326,3a,36.2y,126.82h,96.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz_4vB_39ku7Zq1b2xdDKng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) but not for me.

....what sick filth bullshit is this?  One signal head in each direction?  How have the MUTCD gods not smote this entire town?

This might be the worst traffic signal I've ever seen; I'm not even kidding.

Back when New York had their own Manual, there was an exception to the rule for minimum two heads in each direction. It said that if the approach had only one traffic lane, then one head was acceptable. Don't know if their State Supplement to the Federal MUTCD still contains that provision or not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 30, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
Unrelated (maybe)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7759595,-73.6982198,3a,27.5y,143.45h,87.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saN_BkYCS2iRTbV5dhoXzGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Oh my gosh, they are key lime green!
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 04, 2020, 10:08:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

That's an oddly specific situation; why would this be desirable? It looks to me like a single left-turn lane with a full FYA would've been more logical here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on September 04, 2020, 10:40:14 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 04, 2020, 10:08:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

That's an oddly specific situation; why would this be desirable? It looks to me like a single left-turn lane with a full FYA would've been more logical here.

From a different view (and a year or so older), it looks like it is a bi-modal on the bottom. In this image it is a green arrow with the same flashing arrow sign there too  https://goo.gl/maps/sEiFBrGp3zPgv5xZ7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 11:23:21 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on September 04, 2020, 10:40:14 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 04, 2020, 10:08:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

That's an oddly specific situation; why would this be desirable? It looks to me like a single left-turn lane with a full FYA would've been more logical here.

From a different view (and a year or so older), it looks like it is a bi-modal on the bottom. In this image it is a green arrow with the same flashing arrow sign there too  https://goo.gl/maps/sEiFBrGp3zPgv5xZ7
You're right. And it's even got a red ball (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593292,-92.0455282,3a,75y,226.2h,89.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxEeuu4gxJbjTJknHynlvmw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/)!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 05, 2020, 12:06:39 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 30, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
Unrelated (maybe)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7759595,-73.6982198,3a,27.5y,143.45h,87.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saN_BkYCS2iRTbV5dhoXzGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Oh my gosh, they are key lime green!
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

Holy fuck, there's a ton. I have a 20 page thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17051.0) going of many examples.

That's a great one. Good find.

EDIT: That's a thread just detailing permissive double lefts, not permissive only. Those are decidedly less common.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 05, 2020, 12:31:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 05, 2020, 12:06:39 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 30, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
Unrelated (maybe)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7759595,-73.6982198,3a,27.5y,143.45h,87.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saN_BkYCS2iRTbV5dhoXzGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Oh my gosh, they are key lime green!
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

Holy fuck, there's a ton. I have a 20 page thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17051.0) going of many examples.

That's a great one. Good find.

Those aren't permissive-only FYAs, but bimodal arrows - here's a GSV of them in the green phase (https://goo.gl/maps/Qu25wV6q7yZFLsf66). Personally I hate bimodals, but I'll save my criticism of them for another time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 05, 2020, 10:31:49 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 05, 2020, 12:31:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 05, 2020, 12:06:39 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 04, 2020, 09:38:31 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 30, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
Unrelated (maybe)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7759595,-73.6982198,3a,27.5y,143.45h,87.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saN_BkYCS2iRTbV5dhoXzGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Oh my gosh, they are key lime green!
Louisiana has a lot of very green (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.1593261,-92.0454114,3a,56y,263.44h,89.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4ZyCHLDwBRpQH2D1eT6OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) lights.
On another note; does anyone know of any other intersection with double permissive-only FYAs?

Holy fuck, there's a ton. I have a 20 page thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17051.0) going of many examples.

That's a great one. Good find.

Those aren't permissive-only FYAs, but bimodal arrows - here's a GSV of them in the green phase (https://goo.gl/maps/Qu25wV6q7yZFLsf66). Personally I hate bimodals, but I'll save my criticism of them for another time.
There looked to be more bimodals around Lafayette (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.1695861,-92.0386565,3a,18.4y,301.02h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shDCOmdVBZLz401yvzmJQwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). I don't like them either; they're deceptive. I'm looking at lies.

Unrelated but still in the land of green signals; that's a lot of right turn on red (https://www.google.pl/maps/@30.0758647,-91.9399251,3a,40.9y,105.1h,89.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stETxutsneGZrA_xc9U1EhA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 05, 2020, 02:03:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 05, 2020, 10:31:49 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 05, 2020, 12:31:39 AM
Those aren't permissive-only FYAs, but bimodal arrows - here's a GSV of them in the green phase (https://goo.gl/maps/Qu25wV6q7yZFLsf66). Personally I hate bimodals, but I'll save my criticism of them for another time.
There looked to be more bimodals around Lafayette (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.1695861,-92.0386565,3a,18.4y,301.02h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shDCOmdVBZLz401yvzmJQwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). I don't like them either; they're deceptive. I'm looking at lies.

Definitely don't come to Washington State. There's quite a lot of bimodal FYAs. Some cities, like Lakewood, use them exclusively. Although most use a flashing yellow arrow in the middle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 05, 2020, 03:20:36 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks like a decent pedestrian crossing. A bit shaded by trees and the like but still functional.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 05, 2020, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Seems like the signals themselves are warning enough?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 05, 2020, 04:20:14 PM
Anybody ever seen anything like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1473309,-118.1415928,3a,15.9y,173.62h,95.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqkNvYa6qLU2uws-otNFEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/)?
Looks extremely redundant to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 05, 2020, 04:27:44 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks to me like that signal is only Red-Yellow-Yellow despite the Signal Ahead sign right in front of it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 08:41:37 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 05, 2020, 04:27:44 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks to me like that signal is only Red-Yellow-Yellow despite the Signal Ahead sign right in front of it.

1/2

There is no stop line!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 05, 2020, 11:02:34 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 05, 2020, 04:20:14 PM
Anybody ever seen anything like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1473309,-118.1415928,3a,15.9y,173.62h,95.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqkNvYa6qLU2uws-otNFEUg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en/)?
Looks extremely redundant to me.

This signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6493488,-70.2600888,3a,15y,147.44h,91.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSym8mE1KhbieQI6_H1BPBQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), leftmost 4-section, approching the Casco Bay Bridge in Portland ME is very similar to what you posted... only inverted.

The closest thing that resembles what you posted is this signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1949959,-70.8764667,3a,18.7y,179.35h,94.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2c_RLJ-TWtVXtW5nJPMCyQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Dover NH. This has since been replaced with a new configuration which includes FYA's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 05, 2020, 11:06:25 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 08:41:37 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 05, 2020, 04:27:44 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks to me like that signal is only Red-Yellow-Yellow despite the Signal Ahead sign right in front of it.

1/2

There is no stop line!

Is this signal operating in flash mode? I only ask because in setups like this, the lower yellow usually flashes in resting mode until a pedestrian presses the button, then it goes solid yellow (middle), than solid red (upper). Also, the ped signal is also completly dark unless the bulbs are burnt out, which usually rest on "DON'T WALK".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 06, 2020, 12:03:39 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 05, 2020, 11:06:25 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 08:41:37 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 05, 2020, 04:27:44 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 05, 2020, 02:43:27 PM
what's wrong here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4143618,-71.2031974,3a,75y,163.43h,80.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s26IvdztrrRLPn6Ah9tdLJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks to me like that signal is only Red-Yellow-Yellow despite the Signal Ahead sign right in front of it.

1/2

There is no stop line!

Is this signal operating in flash mode? I only ask because in setups like this, the lower yellow usually flashes in resting mode until a pedestrian presses the button, then it goes solid yellow (middle), than solid red (upper). Also, the ped signal is also completly dark unless the bulbs are burnt out, which usually rest on "DON'T WALK".

Maryland has similar pedestrian signals that operate a lot like firehouse signals:

Flashing yellow (most of the time)
More rapid flashing yellow [after someone pushes the button as a warning that the light will change]
Solid yellow
Solid red.

Here's an example:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0398383,-77.0430817,3a,75y,103.58h,86.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZvWBU2zxx4zgh894iGefkw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


My take:  There are many variations on the ped only crossing:  Pelican crossing, HAWK signals, regular signals, Modified firehouse signals, and probably a few others out there.  I think these signals should be made uniform and should be designed for the highest safety for the peds while allowing for the least overall delay for traffic.

With that being said, I prefer a signal that rests on green.  Green signifies that its a traffic signal and it may eventually come red.  Flashing yellow could always be a flashing yellow and since a driver could drive by such a signal and never see it red, they never expect red to occur.  Also, flashing yellow sometimes would allow a pedestrian to cross anyway.  That should be avoided.  Peds (and bikes in this case) should push the button and wait for the walk indication and not be "allowed" to cross against a flashing yellow.

After a pedestrian pushes the button, green turns to yellow which turns to red.

The red signal should be a solid red initially.  Gives drivers a chance to rest and see the situation.  But in cases like this, it is not a good idea for the signal to be red for the entire pedestrian clearance phase.  In situations like this there is probably signicant jaywalking or very fast peds and bikes along an exercise trail- why make cars wait if the peds already crossed.  Therefore, the solid red should be brief -- about the time of the walk phase.  When the peds get FDW, the cars can get a flashing red.  Cars can come to a complete stop and when the peds have cleared they may proceed.  Once solid DW arrives, the signal reverts to green.

This is most similar to a pelican crossing, except that it flashes red instead of yellow during FDW.  [The full stop adds safety with minimal added wait time.] This is also similar to the Los Angeles mid-block crossing, except that the L.A. crossings always flash red during the red phase, my signal would go from solid red first and then to flashing red.

FWIW, I believe someone had posted a video of driving along Santa Monica Blvd in West Hollywood and it appeared there was a signal similar to what I was descring about a block west of La Cienega - but in that case the solid red signal was very brief.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:01 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8282304,-73.9351375,3a,17.9y,121.36h,97.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1KsMaIKZi2QgJH6p8dJOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:30 PM
oh god and this: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.828054,-73.9346261,3a,15y,247.04h,97.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6_U3Pflp7zt3kMI_79QwlA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 01:20:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:01 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8282304,-73.9351375,3a,17.9y,121.36h,97.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1KsMaIKZi2QgJH6p8dJOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:30 PM
oh god and this: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.828054,-73.9346261,3a,15y,247.04h,97.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6_U3Pflp7zt3kMI_79QwlA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
First one is New York typical (though the arrow is off). In classic NY fashion, there's also a cluster of burnt-out diodes.
Second one is weird. Apart from the arrowmania, there's also that tiny red atop the large green/yellow that I hate ("pinball signals," someone called them).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 03:24:20 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 01:20:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:01 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8282304,-73.9351375,3a,17.9y,121.36h,97.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1KsMaIKZi2QgJH6p8dJOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 01:05:30 PM
oh god and this: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.828054,-73.9346261,3a,15y,247.04h,97.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6_U3Pflp7zt3kMI_79QwlA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
First one is New York typical (though the arrow is off). In classic NY fashion, there's also a cluster of burnt-out diodes.
Second one is weird. Apart from the arrowmania, there's also that tiny red atop the large green/yellow that I hate ("pinball signals," someone called them).
Yes. These may be the only doghouse signals in NYC. The first one I sent because of the odd arrow for the green.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 06, 2020, 03:59:01 PM
On a related note, are there any RRFB crossings (https://tti.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/v52n1rrfb-crosswalk-lg.jpg) that include an APS button (https://www.sauerburger.org/dona/APS_files/APS.jpg)? The crosswalks near the University of Maine at Park St and Rangeley Road (https://mainecampus.com/2018/09/new-roundabout-aims-to-improve-unsafe-intersection/) feaure APS buttons to activate the RRFB's at the roundabout.

The messages say "YELLOW LIGHTS ARE FLASHING", then the same messages in Spanish.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 06, 2020, 11:18:31 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 06, 2020, 03:59:01 PM
On a related note, are there any RRFB crossings (https://tti.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/v52n1rrfb-crosswalk-lg.jpg) that include an APS button (https://www.sauerburger.org/dona/APS_files/APS.jpg)? The crosswalks near the University of Maine at Park St and Rangeley Road (https://mainecampus.com/2018/09/new-roundabout-aims-to-improve-unsafe-intersection/) feaure APS buttons to activate the RRFB's at the roundabout.

The messages say "YELLOW LIGHTS ARE FLASHING", then the same messages in Spanish.
San clementr CA has this, ill link that tmr. And in Cambridge MA too I think


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 07, 2020, 12:26:07 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 06, 2020, 03:59:01 PMThe crosswalks near the University of Maine at Park St and Rangeley Road (https://mainecampus.com/2018/09/new-roundabout-aims-to-improve-unsafe-intersection/) feaure APS buttons to activate the RRFB's at the roundabout.

In that story:

QuoteOther factors are at play when planning a project like this. Due to the oversized load vehicles that transport wind blades to the Advanced Structures and Composites Center, project coordinators required the roundabout to be surrounded by a raised island to allow for the movement of large trucks.

So...either the reporter is clearly uninformed (well, she is a college student) the coordinators are uninformed, or they just all made up an excuse to state why the raised island was build...because that's simply standard roundabout design.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 07, 2020, 08:39:55 PM
weird MA intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470718,-71.5435329,3a,15y,304.09h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sab70QC-WoZzI46P2nIr5JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471418,-71.5433264,3a,15y,65.53h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1RRnTc-5DUCHYHzpUtie8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on September 07, 2020, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 07, 2020, 08:39:55 PM
weird MA intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470718,-71.5435329,3a,15y,304.09h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sab70QC-WoZzI46P2nIr5JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471418,-71.5433264,3a,15y,65.53h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1RRnTc-5DUCHYHzpUtie8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Flip around to the other side (https://goo.gl/maps/vkQkxV3X1ZEfApz39) and the yellow card is gone, revealing a text "WALK" sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.

The double right turn yield (https://goo.gl/maps/SxeXBuPspHokZoLu5) is pretty cool. Usually only see those in Canada. Pretty rare in the US, although more common at roundabouts (particularly some in Wisconsin -- exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/AnrmoyV4UXdzxeKK8))

As a side-note: please, for god sakes, fix your browser so that I'm not seeing google.pl. It's very annoying, and I know that you know you're doing it. It's not a hard fix, and makes it easier to re-link to another location. We really don't need everyone browsing Google Poland.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 08, 2020, 09:16:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.

The double right turn yield (https://goo.gl/maps/SxeXBuPspHokZoLu5) is pretty cool. Usually only see those in Canada. Pretty rare in the US, although more common at roundabouts (particularly some in Wisconsin -- exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/AnrmoyV4UXdzxeKK8))

As a side-note: please, for god sakes, fix your browser so that I'm not seeing google.pl. It's very annoying, and I know that you know you're doing it. It's not a hard fix, and makes it easier to re-link to another location. We really don't need everyone browsing Google Poland.
If you insist :rolleyes:.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 08, 2020, 12:16:15 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 07, 2020, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 07, 2020, 08:39:55 PM
weird MA intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470718,-71.5435329,3a,15y,304.09h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sab70QC-WoZzI46P2nIr5JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471418,-71.5433264,3a,15y,65.53h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1RRnTc-5DUCHYHzpUtie8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Flip around to the other side (https://goo.gl/maps/vkQkxV3X1ZEfApz39) and the yellow card is gone, revealing a text "WALK" sign.

What does the yellow card say?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 08, 2020, 09:16:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
As a side-note: please, for god sakes, fix your browser so that I'm not seeing google.pl. It's very annoying, and I know that you know you're doing it. It's not a hard fix, and makes it easier to re-link to another location. We really don't need everyone browsing Google Poland.
If you insist :rolleyes:.

Thanks pal. It's really helpful. If you link to somewhere, but then I want to show you another location that may be relevant, I have to close your tab (or open another one), reopen Google Maps US, and then link the location. Why? Because we all primarily use Google Maps US and many of us save stuff to our Google accounts. None of us are logged in on Google Maps Poland. Plus, if someone doesn't notice, they might also link to the Polish Google maps, and then it starts this chain. Yeeesh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 03:12:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 08, 2020, 12:16:15 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 07, 2020, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 07, 2020, 08:39:55 PM
weird MA intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3470718,-71.5435329,3a,15y,304.09h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sab70QC-WoZzI46P2nIr5JQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471418,-71.5433264,3a,15y,65.53h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1RRnTc-5DUCHYHzpUtie8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Flip around to the other side (https://goo.gl/maps/vkQkxV3X1ZEfApz39) and the yellow card is gone, revealing a text "WALK" sign.

What does the yellow card say?

I had to pan around a bunch until I could get a closer shot:

"WATCH FOR TURNING VEHICLES (https://goo.gl/maps/q2Vwg6ZVMyJaofvz7)"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on September 08, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.

The double right turn yield (https://goo.gl/maps/SxeXBuPspHokZoLu5) is pretty cool. Usually only see those in Canada. Pretty rare in the US, although more common at roundabouts (particularly some in Wisconsin -- exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/AnrmoyV4UXdzxeKK8))


Ug.  Exhibit A seems to imply a direct left turn from the sign.  Only if you look close can you see a dot by the left-most arrow.  The other day I had to think for a bit why this dot was rubbed out of this pavement marking before this new roundabout in Port Orchard.  It took a while to realize they don't want to imply the right lane is the closest one to the center of the circle.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50321043646_da9fa92941_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jEGv7N)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 08, 2020, 04:26:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 08, 2020, 09:16:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
As a side-note: please, for god sakes, fix your browser so that I'm not seeing google.pl. It's very annoying, and I know that you know you're doing it. It's not a hard fix, and makes it easier to re-link to another location. We really don't need everyone browsing Google Poland.
If you insist :rolleyes:.

Thanks pal. It's really helpful. If you link to somewhere, but then I want to show you another location that may be relevant, I have to close your tab (or open another one), reopen Google Maps US, and then link the location. Why? Because we all primarily use Google Maps US and many of us save stuff to our Google accounts. None of us are logged in on Google Maps Poland. Plus, if someone doesn't notice, they might also link to the Polish Google maps, and then it starts this chain. Yeeesh.
I  see your reasoning. :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 05:05:50 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on September 08, 2020, 04:03:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.

The double right turn yield (https://goo.gl/maps/SxeXBuPspHokZoLu5) is pretty cool. Usually only see those in Canada. Pretty rare in the US, although more common at roundabouts (particularly some in Wisconsin -- exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/AnrmoyV4UXdzxeKK8))

Ug.  Exhibit A seems to imply a direct left turn from the sign.  Only if you look close can you see a dot by the left-most arrow.  The other day I had to think for a bit why this dot was rubbed out of this pavement marking before this new roundabout in Port Orchard.  It took a while to realize they don't want to imply the right lane is the closest one to the center of the circle.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50321043646_da9fa92941_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jEGv7N)

I've never been keen on those fish hook arrows. I seem to recall reading a study that concluded them being too confusing compared to regular arrows.

IIRC, APLs are extremely common at roundabouts in Wisconsin, with the dot being a common feature. I don't mind the dot, although I don't know how many drivers really know the meaning.

Hard to tell, but WSDOT actually screwed up with the dot at the new on-ramp to the 205 from NE 18th in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/knW1Y45GUu1reDee8). It's still there, years later, for both arrows. Although this may be because both arrows were originally the same (showing left and straight options) before they fixed it (you can sort of see the rubbed out arrowhead in Street View, and better in satellite view (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6355554,-122.5612915,49m/data=!3m1!1e3)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on September 09, 2020, 08:26:44 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 08, 2020, 09:16:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 08, 2020, 01:04:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 06, 2020, 10:25:35 PM
Nonstandard (https://www.google.pl/maps/@37.1383815,-93.3195132,3a,27.8y,102.98h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svlGyNDMxBnzfgPAjusGiRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) "left on green arrow only" signage in my state. Uses a picture.

Also, the lights that are bagged on the other poles have been that way for a while.

The double right turn yield (https://goo.gl/maps/SxeXBuPspHokZoLu5) is pretty cool. Usually only see those in Canada. Pretty rare in the US, although more common at roundabouts (particularly some in Wisconsin -- exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/AnrmoyV4UXdzxeKK8))

As a side-note: please, for god sakes, fix your browser so that I'm not seeing google.pl. It's very annoying, and I know that you know you're doing it. It's not a hard fix, and makes it easier to re-link to another location. We really don't need everyone browsing Google Poland.
If you insist :rolleyes:.
The question that begs to be asked is why is anyone sharing Google maps Poland links to begin with?  He's sharing links to US locations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 09, 2020, 09:16:32 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200909/1cfe6dc77d7cc960513eeef599a63c81.jpg)
Belmont, MA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on September 09, 2020, 09:30:02 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 09, 2020, 09:16:32 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200909/1cfe6dc77d7cc960513eeef599a63c81.jpg)
Belmont, MA


iPhone

Looks typical. What am I missing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 09, 2020, 10:01:45 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 09, 2020, 09:16:32 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200909/1cfe6dc77d7cc960513eeef599a63c81.jpg)
Belmont, MA


iPhone

Yuck! I hate when DOTs do this. It just feels wrong. I know Chicago is guilty of this practice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 09, 2020, 10:09:33 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 09, 2020, 10:01:45 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 09, 2020, 09:16:32 AM

Belmont, MA


iPhone

Yuck! I hate when DOTs do this. It just feels wrong. I know Chicago is guilty of this practice.

The problem is mixing the orb signal with the arrow signal.  If you want a hybrid signal, you can have: R-Y-G-YA-GA.  But to shorten it to R-YA-GA is confusing
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
New England has a lot of relics (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.651449,-72.3177639,3a,81.4y,31.33h,93.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suMh7g6QpebhDDzyQ5T3Irw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Also, has anybody noticed these lime-green lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2599442,-72.5852566,3a,24.6y,67.32h,92.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szz8FV9x2qQQ3N2aur0mthA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? Kirkwood MO had some (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5820812,-90.4063336,3a,56.2y,357.37h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0KQf3QT3cvS4nXD56YIwow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) before they were torn out in Jan 2020.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 09, 2020, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
Also, has anybody noticed these lime-green lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2599442,-72.5852566,3a,24.6y,67.32h,92.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szz8FV9x2qQQ3N2aur0mthA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? Kirkwood MO had some (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5820812,-90.4063336,3a,56.2y,357.37h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0KQf3QT3cvS4nXD56YIwow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) before they were torn out in Jan 2020.

Those are older incandescent displays. They usually had a lime green appearance, as opposed to today's blueish green LED signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:03:24 PM
You never seen anything quite like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9104614,-122.2933044,3a,31.3y,183.39h,91.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slinaNR0N3BfKF2ML0EVI1Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). Jakeroot, this one's near you in Mukilteo.

And nearby at the Boeing (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9221985,-122.2720126,3a,58.4y,16.64h,89.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smLyfBX6A10d4z2ZrwQTKSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) factory. Why not just use ground mounted poles?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 09, 2020, 09:51:46 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:03:24 PM
You never seen anything quite like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9104614,-122.2933044,3a,31.3y,183.39h,91.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slinaNR0N3BfKF2ML0EVI1Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). Jakeroot, this one's near you in Mukilteo.

And nearby at the Boeing (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9221985,-122.2720126,3a,58.4y,16.64h,89.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smLyfBX6A10d4z2ZrwQTKSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) factory. Why not just use ground mounted poles?

That's a little strange, yeah. Why it's not mounted directly to the mast, I couldn't tell you.

The signal next to the Boeing Everett facility is odd only in that signals that low would normally be post-mounted. Having a mast arm across nothing, opposite a road that ends at a T-junction, is not unusual around here (exhibit A (https://goo.gl/maps/q6Jz4ojEboAPYhKU6); exhibit B (https://goo.gl/maps/L8afX3fSjUMQhSzH7))
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:03:24 PM
And nearby at the Boeing (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9221985,-122.2720126,3a,58.4y,16.64h,89.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smLyfBX6A10d4z2ZrwQTKSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) factory. Why not just use ground mounted poles?

I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 10, 2020, 07:22:23 AM
I can surmise that in many cases a DOT does things that are normal and common for it.   It is normal and common for these DOTs to use mast arms, and they have a lot in stock, so they use them even when not really needed, like at a T-intersection.

It is also common where a wide street ends at a T-intersection in California:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9165237,-118.3715981,3a,75y,189.81h,94.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smFcZKB5QwmY4me2Mu9RS0w!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:40:31 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 12:56:01 PMAlso, has anybody noticed these lime-green lights (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2599442,-72.5852566,3a,24.6y,67.32h,92.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szz8FV9x2qQQ3N2aur0mthA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)? Kirkwood MO had some (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5820812,-90.4063336,3a,56.2y,357.37h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0KQf3QT3cvS4nXD56YIwow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) before they were torn out in Jan 2020.

Those just look like your typical classic incandescent green to me. They look very different from LED greens used today.

Here's one just like it in Kenilworth, IL. Still standing as of a couple months ago, at least.

(https://i.imgur.com/iqUrf8W.png)

Street View link. (https://goo.gl/maps/H7YVmepFcNdpXYKS9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 11, 2020, 08:54:28 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50330121051_075f19a69b_k.jpg)Never saw a signal back like these two signal heads in Florence, SC on Cashua Drive at Second Loop Drive.

Who makes these odd looking signal backs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 12:02:32 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5309365,-71.2938608,3a,58y,235.34h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHs1TbqhY8xBSddwgrTJ9OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is a very unusual style for Rhode Island. Curved mast arms on RI-114 in Middletown.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 11, 2020, 12:18:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 12:02:32 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5309365,-71.2938608,3a,58y,235.34h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHs1TbqhY8xBSddwgrTJ9OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is a very unusual style for Rhode Island. Curved mast arms on RI-114 in Middletown.

An interesting strategy for trying to maneuver the mast arm around those aerial lines!  And they couldn't just install a new mast closer to the current mast because the sidewalk is in the way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2020, 12:40:47 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 11, 2020, 12:18:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 12:02:32 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5309365,-71.2938608,3a,58y,235.34h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHs1TbqhY8xBSddwgrTJ9OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is a very unusual style for Rhode Island. Curved mast arms on RI-114 in Middletown.

An interesting strategy for trying to maneuver the mast arm around those aerial lines!  And they couldn't just install a new mast closer to the current mast because the sidewalk is in the way.

The telephone poles are also located within the sidewalk, so the traffic light pole would need to go right against the curb line to avoid the wires.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 01:19:24 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2020, 12:40:47 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 11, 2020, 12:18:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 12:02:32 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5309365,-71.2938608,3a,58y,235.34h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHs1TbqhY8xBSddwgrTJ9OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is a very unusual style for Rhode Island. Curved mast arms on RI-114 in Middletown.

An interesting strategy for trying to maneuver the mast arm around those aerial lines!  And they couldn't just install a new mast closer to the current mast because the sidewalk is in the way.

The telephone poles are also located within the sidewalk, so the traffic light pole would need to go right against the curb line to avoid the wires.
There used (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.530864,-71.2938929,3a,75y,237.77h,93.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se3loBwVE4Wj7F85KUF9GzQ!2e0!7i3328!8i1664/) to be two straight mast arms coming from a pole planted where the sidewalk is now located. The sidewalk was constructed in 2009-10.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:03:24 PM
And nearby at the Boeing (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9221985,-122.2720126,3a,58.4y,16.64h,89.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smLyfBX6A10d4z2ZrwQTKSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) factory. Why not just use ground mounted poles?

I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.

For the location near Boeing, it's obvious you need signal heads to be lower due to the bridge. Post-mounted poles would seem to make more sense, but it may actually have taken less cable to do it this way...so a cheaper install cost perhaps?

The Bangor, ME location looks like it was done that way to avoid having the signal heads obscured by, or to avoid potential collision with, the overhead utility lines (I'm assuming the utility lines predate the signal).

Quote from: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 01:19:24 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 11, 2020, 12:40:47 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 11, 2020, 12:18:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 11, 2020, 12:02:32 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5309365,-71.2938608,3a,58y,235.34h,92.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHs1TbqhY8xBSddwgrTJ9OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is a very unusual style for Rhode Island. Curved mast arms on RI-114 in Middletown.

An interesting strategy for trying to maneuver the mast arm around those aerial lines!  And they couldn't just install a new mast closer to the current mast because the sidewalk is in the way.

The telephone poles are also located within the sidewalk, so the traffic light pole would need to go right against the curb line to avoid the wires.
There used (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.530864,-71.2938929,3a,75y,237.77h,93.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se3loBwVE4Wj7F85KUF9GzQ!2e0!7i3328!8i1664/) to be two straight mast arms coming from a pole planted where the sidewalk is now located. The sidewalk was constructed in 2009-10.

Using the curved mast arm here actually makes a bit more sense. The old straight mast arm was positioned between sets of utility lines, whereas the curved mast arm connects to the mast below all the utility lines. In the case of a utility pole falling or some other major issue, it's less likely that any utility lines will get tangled with the traffic signal, reducing complications in affecting repairs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
In this MaineDOT Mobility Report (https://www1.maine.gov/mdot/publications/docs/plansreports/mainedot-mobility-report-web.pdf) under the Signal Design and Operations section, there are two things that caught my eye regarding phasing (page 30):

QuoteNo new protected left turns from a shared lane. This is very inefficient and does little to increase capacity or safety. Existing locations may remain.

I want to know how using permissive/protected phasing with a thru/left lane (or a single lane approach) is "very inefficient" and "does little to increase capacity or safety". Unless I'm overthinking this, my concern (example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6303788,-70.3113364,3a,26y,282.26h,95.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snI4U5CUyIMisPFV9s64p7A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) is that when one approch has a protected phase with the left turn lane is allowed to phase skip, or where preemption is initated, the direction with the shared lane could be yellow trapped if there is no all-red clear and/or required barrier crossing to prevent such trap.

My other concern is what happens if there is a heavy left turning queue and there is no lagging left turn to clear the left turning traffic. Some people, on permissive left turns, in my area don't pull into the intersection, opting to wait behind the line, and some in the intersection don't complete their turn when the light changes from yellow to red.

When DOT says that above quote, does that exempt split phasing, because split phasing usually does involve "protected left turns from a shared lane"?

QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

This has been discussed a lot previously, but my question is what "history" justifies that "this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time"? I see a lot of existing retrofits and new FYA's being installed in some locations across two thru lanes in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and I'm not sure about Connecticut as well. Not sure about the crash history of these locations in the mentioned states.

If they really wanted to restrict PPLT phasing because it may be difficult to turn during the peak travel periods, why don't they implement FYA TOD phasing? It could be protected only during the day (6am-9pm), then during the night, it could be permissive/protected, so cars don't have to come to a full stop and wait 5 seconds when there's no oncoming traffic in the middle of the night.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 12, 2020, 12:12:28 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
In this MaineDOT Mobility Report (https://www1.maine.gov/mdot/publications/docs/plansreports/mainedot-mobility-report-web.pdf) under the Signal Design and Operations section, there are two things that caught my eye regarding phasing (page 30):

QuoteNo new protected left turns from a shared lane. This is very inefficient and does little to increase capacity or safety. Existing locations may remain.

I want to know how using permissive/protected phasing with a thru/left lane (or a single lane approach) is "very inefficient" and "does little to increase capacity or safety". Unless I'm overthinking this, my concern (example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6303788,-70.3113364,3a,26y,282.26h,95.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snI4U5CUyIMisPFV9s64p7A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) is that when one approch has a protected phase with the left turn lane is allowed to phase skip, or where preemption is initated, the direction with the shared lane could be yellow trapped if there is no all-red clear and/or required barrier crossing to prevent such trap.

My other concern is what happens if there is a heavy left turning queue and there is no lagging left turn to clear the left turning traffic. Some people, on permissive left turns, in my area don't pull into the intersection, opting to wait behind the line, and some in the intersection don't complete their turn when the light changes from yellow to red.

When DOT says that above quote, does that exempt split phasing, because split phasing usually does involve "protected left turns from a shared lane"?

QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

This has been discussed a lot previously, but my question is what "history" justifies that "this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time"? I see a lot of existing retrofits and new FYA's being installed in some locations across two thru lanes in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and I'm not sure about Connecticut as well. Not sure about the crash history of these locations in the mentioned states.

If they really wanted to restrict PPLT phasing because it may be difficult to turn during the peak travel periods, why don't they implement FYA TOD phasing? It could be protected only during the day (6am-9pm), then during the night, it could be permissive/protected, so cars don't have to come to a full stop and wait 5 seconds when there's no oncoming traffic in the middle of the night.
By protected lefts I think MaineDOT means protected only signals (Red Arrow; Yellow Arrow; Green Arrow)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:19:12 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 12, 2020, 12:12:28 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
In this MaineDOT Mobility Report (https://www1.maine.gov/mdot/publications/docs/plansreports/mainedot-mobility-report-web.pdf) under the Signal Design and Operations section, there are two things that caught my eye regarding phasing (page 30):

QuoteNo new protected left turns from a shared lane. This is very inefficient and does little to increase capacity or safety. Existing locations may remain.

I want to know how using permissive/protected phasing with a thru/left lane (or a single lane approach) is "very inefficient" and "does little to increase capacity or safety". Unless I'm overthinking this, my concern (example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6303788,-70.3113364,3a,26y,282.26h,95.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snI4U5CUyIMisPFV9s64p7A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) is that when one approch has a protected phase with the left turn lane is allowed to phase skip, or where preemption is initated, the direction with the shared lane could be yellow trapped if there is no all-red clear and/or required barrier crossing to prevent such trap.

My other concern is what happens if there is a heavy left turning queue and there is no lagging left turn to clear the left turning traffic. Some people, on permissive left turns, in my area don't pull into the intersection, opting to wait behind the line, and some in the intersection don't complete their turn when the light changes from yellow to red.

When DOT says that above quote, does that exempt split phasing, because split phasing usually does involve "protected left turns from a shared lane"?

QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

This has been discussed a lot previously, but my question is what "history" justifies that "this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time"? I see a lot of existing retrofits and new FYA's being installed in some locations across two thru lanes in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and I'm not sure about Connecticut as well. Not sure about the crash history of these locations in the mentioned states.

If they really wanted to restrict PPLT phasing because it may be difficult to turn during the peak travel periods, why don't they implement FYA TOD phasing? It could be protected only during the day (6am-9pm), then during the night, it could be permissive/protected, so cars don't have to come to a full stop and wait 5 seconds when there's no oncoming traffic in the middle of the night.
By protected lefts I think MaineDOT means protected only signals (Red Arrow; Yellow Arrow; Green Arrow)


iPhone

I believe this is referring to approches like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.504429,-70.4395234,3a,26.4y,56.8h,103.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXgLz7wtU1lF1Hwo-s3vRGg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Shared left turn lane, but the phasing is protected/permissive. Correct me on this, but you can't really use a regular RA-YA-GA signal unless that approch is split phased...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
In this MaineDOT Mobility Report (https://www1.maine.gov/mdot/publications/docs/plansreports/mainedot-mobility-report-web.pdf) under the Signal Design and Operations section, there are two things that caught my eye regarding phasing (page 30):

QuoteNo new protected left turns from a shared lane. This is very inefficient and does little to increase capacity or safety. Existing locations may remain.

I want to know how using permissive/protected phasing with a thru/left lane (or a single lane approach) is "very inefficient" and "does little to increase capacity or safety". Unless I'm overthinking this, my concern (example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6303788,-70.3113364,3a,26y,282.26h,95.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snI4U5CUyIMisPFV9s64p7A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) is that when one approch has a protected phase with the left turn lane is allowed to phase skip, or where preemption is initated, the direction with the shared lane could be yellow trapped if there is no all-red clear and/or required barrier crossing to prevent such trap.

My other concern is what happens if there is a heavy left turning queue and there is no lagging left turn to clear the left turning traffic. Some people, on permissive left turns, in my area don't pull into the intersection, opting to wait behind the line, and some in the intersection don't complete their turn when the light changes from yellow to red.

When DOT says that above quote, does that exempt split phasing, because split phasing usually does involve "protected left turns from a shared lane"?

QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

This has been discussed a lot previously, but my question is what "history" justifies that "this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time"? I see a lot of existing retrofits and new FYA's being installed in some locations across two thru lanes in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and I'm not sure about Connecticut as well. Not sure about the crash history of these locations in the mentioned states.

If they really wanted to restrict PPLT phasing because it may be difficult to turn during the peak travel periods, why don't they implement FYA TOD phasing? It could be protected only during the day (6am-9pm), then during the night, it could be permissive/protected, so cars don't have to come to a full stop and wait 5 seconds when there's no oncoming traffic in the middle of the night.

Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

I would imagine the split phasing scenario would be different (I think a lot of engineers don't really view that as a "protected" left, even though it technically is). In a lot of cases, split phasing is not desirable because of its inflexibility.


No PPLT across two through lanes is really limiting. I don't know what kind of historical data they're citing...I'm assuming they have historical crash rates that they've analyzed. If that rule applied in Nevada, I'd guess there would be less than 30 PPLT locations in the state... Many of the Vegas-area agencies will allow a single-lane PPLT across up to three opposing through lanes if the speed limit is 45mph or less–northern Nevada is a bit more conservative than that on the speed limit, but will still do up to three lanes.

Time of day on the FYA would be a better compromise. Some agencies are better at implementing more progressive traffic signal timing and phasing methodologies than others...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on September 12, 2020, 10:55:16 AM
QuoteNo new protected left turns from a shared lane. This is very inefficient and does little to increase capacity or safety. Existing locations may remain.

I think what it is getting at is if you have an intersection where there is a lot of left turns and those turns create a queue of traffic behind the left turners that what to go straight, that this is not a sufficient remedy. In those situations, rarely is it only the first car that wants to make the left turn. There are a whole mixture of cars that want to turn left and also go straight (or potentially turn right depending on number of lanes of travel).

I am not sure this means protected left only signals; rather my thought is that includes any amount of protected left turn is not to be used (protected only or protected/permissive).

My guess is the intention is about design and remediation of issues. If the concern is that left turns are really causing delays and increased accidents that a new intersection design is needed. Small measures that only makes for minor efficiency increases at best are considered not appropriate. As accidents may be a major driver of the problem, these need to be taken into account, which means the solution is to provide actual overall improvement in the issues.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

I really have to wonder whether there is valid data to back up that statement, or if this is based on a few intersections where other issues affected the crash rate, such as sight distance, negative offset between opposing left turn lanes, and/or a lack of gaps in opposing traffic to make the turn.  I think are a lot of counter examples across the country with permissive left turns across two through lanes without major crash issues.  Or does Maine have a low bar for what is considered "a high crash location"?

Semi-related side rant:  Is Maine of those places where left turns are protected only but then are unrestricted left turns to/from other unsignalized side roads and driveways on either side of that intersection?  I am really started to get annoyed with a few locations where I have to wait forever for a green arrow to turn left whereas I could turn right away into a different driveway fifty feet away from the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:31:36 PM
Individual cities in WA are pretty liberal with permissive phasing; there are more than a few with permissive lefts across four (https://goo.gl/maps/urShz7F5c8atDy18A) lanes. I'm sure there's one across five somewhere.

WSDOT (the state highway department) has often avoided protected lefts across more than one lane, but there is no strict policy that doesn't allow it. Good news is that retrofits have become common (WA-9 being a good example, plus numerous on-ramps) and new permissive lefts across two lanes are being installed. It's just slow, since WSDOT has this tendency to jump straight to protected lefts, so tons of existing FYA or 5-section 'yield on green' signals have been retrofits of protected lefts. I don't know what happened to the good old days of progressively advancing to more protected over time, but WSDOT didn't get the memo.

I'm hoping Maine doesn't fall into the same trap that WSDOT sort of fell into, by installing dozens of protected lefts, only to then rip them out later when it becomes clear that the policy has no clear basis in reality. At least when looking at all left turns as a whole (you could cherry pick data easily enough).

Quote from: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 11:31:57 AM
Semi-related side rant:  Is Maine of those places where left turns are protected only but then are unrestricted left turns to/from other unsignalized side roads and driveways on either side of that intersection?  I am really started to get annoyed with a few locations where I have to wait forever for a green arrow to turn left whereas I could turn right away into a different driveway fifty feet away from the signal.

I think it's very related, and a great question. Canyon Road in Pierce County, WA is a six to eight lane arterial with fully protected lefts south of WA-512. The protected lefts were installed because the county followed the state in not using permissive lefts across more than two lanes. However, the arterial is full of designated left and U turn points that are just regular yields. You can see both in this GSV still (https://goo.gl/maps/UrorUEDJuvk8xq8L9). Some would say, "signalized and non-signalized intersections have different warrants for left turn operations". To which I would say: why? It's the same traffic, and the same number of lanes being crossed (often enough), etc, etc. Saying that left turns across three or more lanes should not be permissive, but then installing dozens of yield-only left turns along the same corridor that have no signal at all, just screams "policy alone didn't allow us to install permissive lefts despite no obvious difference to the average driver".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.

I would echo your sentiments that these are exceptionally rare (if non-existenst) out west, although I have seen them in DC.

Do you have some links to those in Atlanta? I'm curious how they operate. 5-section PPLT signals are not unusual along corridors without turn lanes anywhere in the country, but protected-only left turns along corridors without turn lanes seems really weird to me. Even in DC, where things are already pretty weird as-is, they strike me as a bit odd and perhaps not a good idea.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:09:41 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 12, 2020, 12:09:06 AM
QuoteNo protected/permitted left turns across two through lanes. History has shown that this type of movement develops into a high crash location over time.

I really have to wonder whether there is valid data to back up that statement, or if this is based on a few intersections where other issues affected the crash rate, such as sight distance, negative offset between opposing left turn lanes, and/or a lack of gaps in opposing traffic to make the turn.  I think are a lot of counter examples across the country with permissive left turns across two through lanes without major crash issues.  Or does Maine have a low bar for what is considered "a high crash location"?

Shouldn't you have valid data yourself to support your opinion, rather than "I think there are a lot of counter examples..."

It doesn't matter what other examples there are across the country.  Likewise, should I counter with there shouldn't be any permissive 2 lane left turns elsewhere because Maine doesn't allow it?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 03:30:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:09:41 PM
Likewise, should I counter with there shouldn't be any permissive 2 lane left turns elsewhere because Maine doesn't allow it?

No, because that wouldn't make sense. Maine's policy is being discussed because Maine's new policy would be counter to most other agencies, and thus any data that other said agencies use to support their own policies. The onus is on Maine to prove their more restrictive policy has some basis in reality. Based on the policy of most other places in the US, the answer would appear to be "no".

I would counter: Virtually all other states allow permissive left turns across more than one lane, thus Maine's new policy must be misguided. Unless Maine drivers are just really. that. bad.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:51:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 03:30:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:09:41 PM
Likewise, should I counter with there shouldn't be any permissive 2 lane left turns elsewhere because Maine doesn't allow it?

No, because that wouldn't make sense. Maine's policy is being discussed because Maine's new policy would be counter to most other agencies, and thus any data that other said agencies use to support their own policies. The onus is on Maine to prove their more restrictive policy has some basis in reality. Based on the policy of most other places in the US, the answer would appear to be "no".

I would counter: Virtually all other states allow permissive left turns across more than one lane, thus Maine's new policy must be misguided. Unless Maine drivers are just really. that. bad.

Actually,  Maine doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. If Maine wants to mandate a certain traffic control function, its well within their right to do so, regardless what any other state does. If they want federal funding, they would need to make certain they don't run afoul of any federal regulations or guidance, which this does not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 05:14:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow—meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.

I would echo your sentiments that these are exceptionally rare (if non-existent) out west, although I have seen them in DC.

Do you have some links to those in Atlanta? I'm curious how they operate. 5-section PPLT signals are not unusual along corridors without turn lanes anywhere in the country, but protected-only left turns along corridors without turn lanes seems really weird to me. Even in DC, where things are already pretty weird as-is, they strike me as a bit odd and perhaps not a good idea.

I guess I didn't read closely enough - these generally aren't protected-only, but they might as well be given the typical very heavy oncoming traffic. Traditionally these used regular doghouse PPLT signals, but most of them now use bimodal FYAs - many in a doghouse configuration (never seen that anywhere else). Here's one example along Piedmont Road, a corridor full of them (https://goo.gl/maps/KwNuJT2GdwP5zeJ66). Turn around 180 degrees and you'll see how much backup it regularly causes.

I'm not sure I can think of any intersections at all in Utah with a shared left/straight lane that don't use split phasing. Just about every signalized intersection, if there are at least two lanes approaching, has a dedicated left turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 12, 2020, 08:26:07 PM
Protected only is very big in some parts of California, notably San Mateo County south of San Francisco. In that county virtually every signalized intersection is protected only whether it seems to need it or not. I was amazed to find this at some relatively low volume traffic intersections where you would not expect to find left-turn arrows at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 12, 2020, 10:25:15 PM
Talk about making use of all the available space on the pole (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4921675,-87.278806,3a,37.9y,323.38h,101.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCyp4oQqUt9UloqP0J8NPaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 10:30:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:51:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 03:30:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:09:41 PM
Likewise, should I counter with there shouldn't be any permissive 2 lane left turns elsewhere because Maine doesn't allow it?

No, because that wouldn't make sense. Maine's policy is being discussed because Maine's new policy would be counter to most other agencies, and thus any data that other said agencies use to support their own policies. The onus is on Maine to prove their more restrictive policy has some basis in reality. Based on the policy of most other places in the US, the answer would appear to be "no".

I would counter: Virtually all other states allow permissive left turns across more than one lane, thus Maine's new policy must be misguided. Unless Maine drivers are just really. that. bad.

Actually,  Maine doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. If Maine wants to mandate a certain traffic control function, its well within their right to do so, regardless what any other state does. If they want federal funding, they would need to make certain they don't run afoul of any federal regulations or guidance, which this does not.

Congrats captain obvious... are you really that dense? I'm not saying Maine has to literally prove that their policy has sound data behind it. They can do whatever the fuck they want.

The general process in most other states is for intersections to gradually progress from fully permissive to fully protected based on individual warrants (such as speeds, number of lanes, turning angles, etc). Maine just threw that entire process out the window. I just want to know why, because even Maine worked that way for decades. Why the change?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 12, 2020, 10:30:33 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 05:14:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.

I would echo your sentiments that these are exceptionally rare (if non-existent) out west, although I have seen them in DC.

Do you have some links to those in Atlanta? I'm curious how they operate. 5-section PPLT signals are not unusual along corridors without turn lanes anywhere in the country, but protected-only left turns along corridors without turn lanes seems really weird to me. Even in DC, where things are already pretty weird as-is, they strike me as a bit odd and perhaps not a good idea.

I guess I didn't read closely enough - these generally aren't protected-only, but they might as well be given the typical very heavy oncoming traffic. Traditionally these used regular doghouse PPLT signals, but most of them now use bimodal FYAs - many in a doghouse configuration (never seen that anywhere else). Here's one example along Piedmont Road, a corridor full of them (https://goo.gl/maps/KwNuJT2GdwP5zeJ66). Turn around 180 degrees and you'll see how much backup it regularly causes.

I'm not sure I can think of any intersections at all in Utah with a shared left/straight lane that don't use split phasing. Just about every signalized intersection, if there are at least two lanes approaching, has a dedicated left turn lane.
Ah. DC has protected ONLY lefts on split lanes. Really really dumb. If I wasn't on my phone I'd link an example.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 10:48:56 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 05:14:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.

I would echo your sentiments that these are exceptionally rare (if non-existent) out west, although I have seen them in DC.

Do you have some links to those in Atlanta? I'm curious how they operate. 5-section PPLT signals are not unusual along corridors without turn lanes anywhere in the country, but protected-only left turns along corridors without turn lanes seems really weird to me. Even in DC, where things are already pretty weird as-is, they strike me as a bit odd and perhaps not a good idea.

I guess I didn't read closely enough - these generally aren't protected-only, but they might as well be given the typical very heavy oncoming traffic. Traditionally these used regular doghouse PPLT signals, but most of them now use bimodal FYAs - many in a doghouse configuration (never seen that anywhere else). Here's one example along Piedmont Road, a corridor full of them (https://goo.gl/maps/KwNuJT2GdwP5zeJ66). Turn around 180 degrees and you'll see how much backup it regularly causes.

I'm not sure I can think of any intersections at all in Utah with a shared left/straight lane that don't use split phasing. Just about every signalized intersection, if there are at least two lanes approaching, has a dedicated left turn lane.

I think it depends on the age of the infrastructure. Most of Utah seems to have pretty new infrastructure. Parts of Washington have older or unwidened infrastructure, thus intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/6rK4L99S8AgLtm7f9) without (https://goo.gl/maps/waFNEDgTLG58yQQr9) direct left turn lanes (https://goo.gl/maps/b3SN5YSqt1auRoxAA) but with protected/permissive phasing.

Really weird to me that they'd use split phasing when there's no turn lanes. That describes probably 30 to 40% of signalized intersection approaches in Tacoma. Split phasing is normally reserved for intersections with double left turns but where one is an option left/straight lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 10:55:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 12, 2020, 03:09:41 PM
Shouldn't you have valid data yourself to support your opinion, rather than "I think there are a lot of counter examples..."

I don't have the time (nor wish to spend the money) filing FOIA's for crash data to research it myself.  If there was always a problem with having permissive lefts across just two opposing through lanes, it's unlikely the Chicago District of IDOT would be allowing new installations of that type.  They seem fairly good at switching over to protected-only lefts if crash problems develop with a left turn movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 13, 2020, 12:43:38 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 10:48:56 PM
Really weird to me that they'd use split phasing when there's no turn lanes. That describes probably 30 to 40% of signalized intersection approaches in Tacoma. Split phasing is normally reserved for intersections with double left turns but where one is an option left/straight lane.

I don't think I can even think of an intersection in Utah with no turn lanes - almost every traffic light I can think of has at least two approach lanes. But my experience out there is that anything with a shared left/straight lane will be split-phased - even if it's just the one left-turn lane. Here's a prime example of that (https://goo.gl/maps/5haH83wJXB5zYBa1A) in Salt Lake.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 14, 2020, 07:28:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 12, 2020, 10:25:15 PM
Talk about making use of all the available space on the pole (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4921675,-87.278806,3a,37.9y,323.38h,101.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCyp4oQqUt9UloqP0J8NPaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

And the most needed information is actaully left out - the common name of those streets, 9th St and Main St.

The other information, the shields and the guides signs to the next towns usually are placed on ground mounted signs ahead of the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 14, 2020, 07:33:36 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 12, 2020, 10:30:33 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 05:14:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 12, 2020, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 12, 2020, 12:39:20 AM
Say there's a two lane approach with #1 lane shared left/through lane and #2 is a through lane, and the left turn is protected only left turns (no permitted movement). If the first car in queue in the #1 shared lane wants to turn left, they are stuck waiting for an arrow–meanwhile, the 10 cars behind that want to go straight are unable to move (or they are darting into the #2 lane when there's a gap). There's your inefficiency.

Atlanta is full of these...and it's very frustrating as someone who grew up in the west where there are very few (if any) of these, and never on major roads.

I would echo your sentiments that these are exceptionally rare (if non-existent) out west, although I have seen them in DC.

Do you have some links to those in Atlanta? I'm curious how they operate. 5-section PPLT signals are not unusual along corridors without turn lanes anywhere in the country, but protected-only left turns along corridors without turn lanes seems really weird to me. Even in DC, where things are already pretty weird as-is, they strike me as a bit odd and perhaps not a good idea.

I guess I didn't read closely enough - these generally aren't protected-only, but they might as well be given the typical very heavy oncoming traffic. Traditionally these used regular doghouse PPLT signals, but most of them now use bimodal FYAs - many in a doghouse configuration (never seen that anywhere else). Here's one example along Piedmont Road, a corridor full of them (https://goo.gl/maps/KwNuJT2GdwP5zeJ66). Turn around 180 degrees and you'll see how much backup it regularly causes.

I'm not sure I can think of any intersections at all in Utah with a shared left/straight lane that don't use split phasing. Just about every signalized intersection, if there are at least two lanes approaching, has a dedicated left turn lane.
Ah. DC has protected ONLY lefts on split lanes. Really really dumb. If I wasn't on my phone I'd link an example.


iPhone

Here's one:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9848756,-77.0266865,3a,75y,172.45h,68.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ0ND-oNgT3T54lW8P5BNUw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

IMO, the above signal would be better served with the left lane forcing a left turn.  Especially, since the three lanes merge into two lanes after the next intersection.

I am not happy with ME's one size fits all approach.  turning left across two lanes should generally be OK without protected only signals.

THe option/left seems to make more sense.  A restricted protected only turn will back things up drastically.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 14, 2020, 12:48:34 PM
Anybody else really like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6565566,-82.9744082,3a,75y,98.85h,84.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGr4d0mV_sySH0VH7B99-Kg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) install? The backplates are a bit wide, but Michigan would do good with more of this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 14, 2020, 12:55:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 14, 2020, 12:48:34 PM
Anybody else really like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6565566,-82.9744082,3a,75y,98.85h,84.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGr4d0mV_sySH0VH7B99-Kg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) install? The backplates are a bit wide, but Michigan would do good with more of this.

Personally, I'm the exact opposite on this one. I'm really not a fan of those ultra-wide backplates. If you're referring to the fact that the signals are mast-mounted as opposed to span wire-hung... it's okay. Living where I do in Illinois (Wisconsin), I actually like seeing span-wire signals, but that's probably a case of enjoying a change of scenery.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2020, 06:32:05 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 11:31:57 AM
I think are a lot of counter examples across the country with permissive left turns across two through lanes without major crash issues.  Or does Maine have a low bar for what is considered "a high crash location"?

I remember talking about this when I was an intern at my city's DPW back in summer of 2019. Read below:

Quote from: Maine ITEA High Crash Location (HCL) is a location that has had eight or more traffic crashes and a Critical Rate Factor (CRF) greater than 1.00 in a three-year period. A highway location with a CRF greater than 1.00 has a frequency of crashes that is greater than the statewide average for similar locations. A CRF is a statistical measure to determine the "expected crash rate"  as compared to similar intersections in the State of Maine. In this regard, the analysis considers both the number of crashes and exposure over a three year period.

Sources: MaineDOT, Maine ITE

I'm not sure if this is one of the reasons why they would want to bar permissive left turns across 2+ thru lanes. AFAIK, a majority of our left turn lanes are negative offset and use leading left turns, and until recently, MaineDOT has been reluctant to phase out the 5-section doghouse in favour of the FYA (was told by a MaineDOT offical that they are requiring FYA for all PPLT movements post-2019). As mentioned mutiple times, we still have a high number of PPLT intersections that have yellow trap via phase skip and/or preemption...

----

Quote from: Revive 755 on September 12, 2020, 11:31:57 AM
Semi-related side rant:  Is Maine of those places where left turns are protected only but then are unrestricted left turns to/from other unsignalized side roads and driveways on either side of that intersection?  I am really started to get annoyed with a few locations where I have to wait forever for a green arrow to turn left whereas I could turn right away into a different driveway fifty feet away from the signal.

It sure is. A good example I can think of is at Main St at Alumni/Old Mill Rd in Sanford. The old lights were at the Sanford Plaza (lead) and Integrity Drive (lag), PPLT lead/lag. When our new high school opened on October 10, 2018, the DOT made that intersection all in/right out and moved the lights 100 m (328 ft) to the north. The turn onto Alumni Blvd is now a protected only leading left, the turn onto Old Mill PPLT lagging, and the location of the old intersection is basically a unsignalised left.

Sometimes, especially during light traffic periods, it's actually faster to turn via that unsignalised left then turn right onto Alumni, rather than wait for the green arrow. Red is via the signal, black is the alternative way. (To prevent yellow trap at this intersection, an all red clear is initiated before it can recycle back to that leading left.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2020, 06:52:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 10:30:25 PM
Congrats captain obvious... are you really that dense? I'm not saying Maine has to literally prove that their policy has sound data behind it. They can do whatever the fuck they want.

The general process in most other states is for intersections to gradually progress from fully permissive to fully protected based on individual warrants (such as speeds, number of lanes, turning angles, etc). Maine just threw that entire process out the window. I just want to know why, because even Maine worked that way for decades. Why the change?

You can say the same thing about NHDOT as well. A long time ago, New Hampshire just had the option of just having protected only, or permissive only at many signalised intersections. This resulted in a lot of intersections having protected-only lefts, even on approaches that have excellent sight distance and sufficient gaps to turn into. That was, until 2008-ish (https://www.nh.gov/dot/media/nr2008/documents/nr072108yellow.pdf) when they approved the FYA for use and many intersections are getting an FYA retrofit as a result.

When I went to a job shadow in July 2019 at NHDOT, I asked them about the whole "no permissive lefts across 2+ thru lanes". They said that they have no such policy against that manoeuvre and they rely on other factors, like sight distance, pedestrians, etc. That along with the FYA being mandated in New Hampshire for PPLT is one of the reasons why those turns are very common now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 16, 2020, 08:31:00 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed recently, but the 5-section doghouse signal has made it into in Canada for the first time AFAIK, albeit temporarily. This is located in Regina, Saskatchewan at 8th Avenue and Broad St (https://www.google.com/maps/place/8th+Ave+%26+Broad+St,+Regina,+SK+S4M+0A1,+Canada/@50.457086,-104.6063756,3a,26y,191.36h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s77Haw_A_sk7EuPalpw0eag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x531c1e4fd2acccc1:0x26b198db8a448c5!8m2!3d50.4567373!4d-104.6063336), temporarily replacing a median mounted 4-section bimodal signal for the left turn movement.

Quote from: City of Regina | Municipal GovermentRecent sewer work required the median signal pole to be removed, and because the current traffic light pole can't support the weight of all the signals in a row, this style was temporarily installed. These traffic signals will likely be upgraded next year, pending budget approval.

The green advanced left arrow does flash rapidly during the protected phase.

Post from the City of Regina.
Video by CBC about driver reactions.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 16, 2020, 09:51:26 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 16, 2020, 08:31:00 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed recently, but the 5-section doghouse signal has made it into in Canada for the first time AFAIK, albeit temporarily. This is located in Regina, Saskatchewan at 8th Avenue and Broad St (https://www.google.com/maps/place/8th+Ave+%26+Broad+St,+Regina,+SK+S4M+0A1,+Canada/@50.457086,-104.6063756,3a,26y,191.36h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s77Haw_A_sk7EuPalpw0eag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x531c1e4fd2acccc1:0x26b198db8a448c5!8m2!3d50.4567373!4d-104.6063336), temporarily replacing a median mounted 4-section bimodal signal for the left turn movement.

Quote from: City of Regina | Municipal GovermentRecent sewer work required the median signal pole to be removed, and because the current traffic light pole can't support the weight of all the signals in a row, this style was temporarily installed. These traffic signals will likely be upgraded next year, pending budget approval.

The green advanced left arrow does flash rapidly during the protected phase.

Post from the City of Regina.
Video by CBC about driver reactions.
That CBC video is gold.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 16, 2020, 02:32:27 PM
Yikes!! Their reactions are hilarious.

I actually found a 5-section signal in BC (https://goo.gl/maps/fmApf3zF8QskVMPW7) (Production Way @ 200 St, Langley), but it's a tower in keeping with Canadian traditions. Google Earth suggests it was installed around 2002 or 2003.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 16, 2020, 02:42:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 16, 2020, 02:32:27 PM
Yikes!! Their reactions are hilarious.

I actually found a 5-section signal in BC (https://goo.gl/maps/fmApf3zF8QskVMPW7) (Production Way @ 200 St, Langley), but it's a tower in keeping with Canadian traditions. Google Earth suggests it was installed around 2002 or 2003.
Per their reactions--I think they're pretty funny, but most American drivers wouldn't instinctively know what to do with a flashing green arrow either. We all have our quirks I guess.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 16, 2020, 04:45:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 16, 2020, 02:42:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 16, 2020, 02:32:27 PM
Yikes!! Their reactions are hilarious.

I actually found a 5-section signal in BC (https://goo.gl/maps/fmApf3zF8QskVMPW7) (Production Way @ 200 St, Langley), but it's a tower in keeping with Canadian traditions. Google Earth suggests it was installed around 2002 or 2003.
Per their reactions--I think they're pretty funny, but most American drivers wouldn't instinctively know what to do with a flashing green arrow either. We all have our quirks I guess.

That's true, although the operation of the signal in the video is identical to what you'd normally see in Canada. It's just the layout.

For once, those in the US are actually the more experienced ones here, since we have all types of 4 and 5 section PPLT signal layouts (with all configurations having heavy use depending on the area), and the new-ish flashing yellow arrow. Canadians are so used to seeing 4-section PPLT signals that literally anything else is just "HUH???". Sure, they have flashing green arrows (and orbs in BC) but the actual layout of the signals is remarkably consistent. I guess, for once, that's not such a good thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 16, 2020, 07:04:23 PM
I found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9491752,-91.9405367,3a,75y,13.78h,85.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ16jQCy_pEPxD3xa_ZvfeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Kingdom City MO today (traffic light ground-mount pole sticking right up out of asphalt with very small concrete base). Are there any more examples of traffic lights isolated in pavement?

Opposite direction has a pretty long mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9496004,-91.9407018,3a,47y,172.6h,88.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s22vgSL5jwBfYvjzXrMqpYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) devoted to a single left turn signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 17, 2020, 06:12:37 PM
here (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.2557341,-81.4858149,3a,64.1y,332.6h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4r6VLjT55oz1y8l7Hlnx1g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D4r6VLjT55oz1y8l7Hlnx1g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D11.177856%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192/), FL seems to be replacing a mast arm barely over a decade old with a span wire. At least the poles indicate such.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 17, 2020, 07:37:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 17, 2020, 06:12:37 PM
here (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.2557341,-81.4858149,3a,64.1y,332.6h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4r6VLjT55oz1y8l7Hlnx1g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D4r6VLjT55oz1y8l7Hlnx1g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D11.177856%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192/), FL seems to be replacing a mast arm barely over a decade old with a span wire. At least the poles indicate such.

I'm not sure I've ever seen that kind of pole used to support span-wire signals. Looking at project plans online (http://www.cflroads.com/project/239714-1) (check the "project files" section), that pole looks to be placed appropriate for a span wire signal.

If they weren't upgrading the intersection, I think an argument against replacement would be warranted. But two of the signals have to be moved to accommodate widening, so I guess it's just easier to knock everything down and put up a box span or something.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 17, 2020, 10:03:32 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 16, 2020, 08:31:00 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed recently, but the 5-section doghouse signal has made it into in Canada for the first time AFAIK, albeit temporarily. This is located in Regina, Saskatchewan at 8th Avenue and Broad St (https://www.google.com/maps/place/8th+Ave+%26+Broad+St,+Regina,+SK+S4M+0A1,+Canada/@50.457086,-104.6063756,3a,26y,191.36h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s77Haw_A_sk7EuPalpw0eag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x531c1e4fd2acccc1:0x26b198db8a448c5!8m2!3d50.4567373!4d-104.6063336), temporarily replacing a median mounted 4-section bimodal signal for the left turn movement.

Quote from: City of Regina | Municipal GovermentRecent sewer work required the median signal pole to be removed, and because the current traffic light pole can't support the weight of all the signals in a row, this style was temporarily installed. These traffic signals will likely be upgraded next year, pending budget approval.

The green advanced left arrow does flash rapidly during the protected phase.

Post from the City of Regina.
Video by CBC about driver reactions.
And I thought Americans were slow lmao. I don't get the big change. Just the orientation?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 17, 2020, 10:30:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 17, 2020, 10:03:32 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 16, 2020, 08:31:00 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed recently, but the 5-section doghouse signal has made it into in Canada for the first time AFAIK, albeit temporarily. This is located in Regina, Saskatchewan at 8th Avenue and Broad St (https://www.google.com/maps/place/8th+Ave+%26+Broad+St,+Regina,+SK+S4M+0A1,+Canada/@50.457086,-104.6063756,3a,26y,191.36h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s77Haw_A_sk7EuPalpw0eag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x531c1e4fd2acccc1:0x26b198db8a448c5!8m2!3d50.4567373!4d-104.6063336), temporarily replacing a median mounted 4-section bimodal signal for the left turn movement.

Quote from: City of Regina | Municipal GovermentRecent sewer work required the median signal pole to be removed, and because the current traffic light pole can't support the weight of all the signals in a row, this style was temporarily installed. These traffic signals will likely be upgraded next year, pending budget approval.

The green advanced left arrow does flash rapidly during the protected phase.

Post from the City of Regina.
Video by CBC about driver reactions.
And I thought Americans were slow lmao. I don't get the big change. Just the orientation?


iPhone
Take a listen to the guy's accent at the second link's 1:04 mark.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 18, 2020, 07:57:36 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 11, 2020, 08:54:28 AM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50330121051_075f19a69b_k.jpg)Never saw a signal back like these two signal heads in Florence, SC on Cashua Drive at Second Loop Drive.

Who makes these odd looking signal backs?
I was in NY yesterday and saw something similar. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200918/d6ff8c863c392eaf4606c03ef08360d6.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 18, 2020, 09:28:53 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 18, 2020, 07:57:36 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 11, 2020, 08:54:28 AM
Who makes these odd looking signal backs?
I was in NY yesterday and saw something similar. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200918/d6ff8c863c392eaf4606c03ef08360d6.jpg)


iPhone
The one on the left is a TCT signal, one on the right is a standard Econolite poly buttonback.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 18, 2020, 02:19:24 PM
How does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7445686,-73.6067219,3a,18.5y,264.01h,93.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFfXOM7_usn1b3hUNtDWGgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) make any sense?!
One of the tower PPLT signals is just a green ball, other is a green ball and arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 18, 2020, 02:23:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 18, 2020, 02:19:24 PM
How does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7445686,-73.6067219,3a,18.5y,264.01h,93.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFfXOM7_usn1b3hUNtDWGgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) make any sense?!
One of the tower PPLT signals is just a green ball, other is a green ball and arrow.

Could be a burned-out bulb, which illustrates why there should be at least 2 of every signal present.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 18, 2020, 02:42:42 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 18, 2020, 02:23:10 PM

Quote from: STLmapboy on September 18, 2020, 02:19:24 PM
How does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7445686,-73.6067219,3a,18.5y,264.01h,93.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFfXOM7_usn1b3hUNtDWGgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) make any sense?!
One of the tower PPLT signals is just a green ball, other is a green ball and arrow.

Could be a burned-out bulb, which illustrates why there should be at least 2 of every signal present.

Confirmed. (https://goo.gl/maps/1G1Yo42JA4mEEmkX9)  There was a green left-turn indication there three years ealier.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 18, 2020, 09:45:30 PM
I drive thru that intersection regularly. I'm pretty sure that's just a burned out bulb, but I'll check it myself next time I'm on that road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 19, 2020, 08:08:04 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 16, 2020, 07:04:23 PM
I found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9491752,-91.9405367,3a,75y,13.78h,85.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ16jQCy_pEPxD3xa_ZvfeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Kingdom City MO today (traffic light ground-mount pole sticking right up out of asphalt with very small concrete base). Are there any more examples of traffic lights isolated in pavement?

I know it's off to the side, but that is still just a recipe for someone driving straight into that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 11:17:35 AM
Can we just appreciate this signal in Culver City:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282404,-118.3902255,3a,15y,248.73h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxJMotbCmawc5WEqT3UDb4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This whole light is weird. Right turn FYA, signal pole coming from train line, horizontal signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 19, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 11:17:35 AM
Can we just appreciate this signal in Culver City:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282404,-118.3902255,3a,15y,248.73h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxJMotbCmawc5WEqT3UDb4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This whole light is weird. Right turn FYA, signal pole coming from train line, horizontal signals.

All of that makes sense, except the single signal mounted to the train bridge structure. I've seen signals mounted to overhead structures many times, but it's usually all the signal heads for an approach and not just one signal. I'm actually surprised the went through the trouble instead of just putting it on the center post-mounted signal already in the median.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 07:22:51 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 19, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 11:17:35 AM
Can we just appreciate this signal in Culver City:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282404,-118.3902255,3a,15y,248.73h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxJMotbCmawc5WEqT3UDb4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This whole light is weird. Right turn FYA, signal pole coming from train line, horizontal signals.

All of that makes sense, except the single signal mounted to the train bridge structure. I've seen signals mounted to overhead structures many times, but it's usually all the signal heads for an approach and not just one signal. I'm actually surprised the went through the trouble instead of just putting it on the center post-mounted signal already in the median.
Agreed haha. It does look good


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 19, 2020, 07:56:05 PM
Probably the first time I've ever seen horizontal signals in California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 08:12:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 19, 2020, 07:56:05 PM
Probably the first time I've ever seen horizontal signals in California.
I thought the same thing.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 20, 2020, 11:13:11 PM
What is the point of the 3M's here?  The streets meet at a right angle and there are no turn lanes.  And what's the point of the second mast arm, below?  It isn't connected to the upper mast arm in a truss arm fashion.  What is happening, Minneapolis?

https://goo.gl/maps/gwz9UmWcfdCR5ffw8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 20, 2020, 11:54:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:31:36 PM
I'm hoping Maine doesn't fall into the same trap that WSDOT sort of fell into, by installing dozens of protected lefts, only to then rip them out later when it becomes clear that the policy has no clear basis in reality. At least when looking at all left turns as a whole (you could cherry pick data easily enough).

It has already happened at some locations statewide.

Take this example in Bangor at I-95 at Route 222. When the intersection and bridge was being rebuilt a few years ago, the new signals were initially installed (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8085941,-68.7928449,3a,83.2y,114.06h,79.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soZH3Lf2CIY2PpgZ1Jb-NTg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with a protected-only left turn (2016). However, sometime later between 2016-18, it was changed to a protected/permissive left (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8086986,-68.7931109,3a,36y,116.7h,88.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_BI3fsjU7CsHPbtjfkLX4Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (no FYA?) not too long ago. Wonder why that was the case...

Two more examples include:

- Franklin and Commercial St in Portland (old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6578098,-70.2498506,3a,35.3y,25.5h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjFaphluVzhZax9bvEyIUwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), current (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6578446,-70.2498187,3a,75y,25.5h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_IFRhf9-ZEKsWESeDRr0Ag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), though that was initally installed as a protected only left across one through lane, and it was converted to a PPLT in 2018.
- Route 111 at Route 208 in Biddeford (old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4913957,-70.4552104,3a,39.5y,99.1h,89.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAyovJU4U32WXICr0RmewGw!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656), current (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4914074,-70.4551381,3a,71y,105.36h,86.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVm7VlISpHrooan9VCeW0g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)), again, crossing only one thru lane but PPLT was only added on the Route 208 approaches.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 21, 2020, 07:57:40 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 20, 2020, 11:13:11 PM
What is the point of the 3M's here?  The streets meet at a right angle and there are no turn lanes.  And what's the point of the second mast arm, below?  It isn't connected to the upper mast arm in a truss arm fashion.  What is happening, Minneapolis?

https://goo.gl/maps/gwz9UmWcfdCR5ffw8

Spare part they had in their truck when completing the installation? :awesomeface:

Honestly though, no idea why that's needed there. Not only do I dislike the extra, useless arm, I also really dislike the mismatched paint jobs on all the signal equipment. The overhead arms look nice painted in that dark brown, but the ground-mounted signals are in the Minnesota pale yellow with green bases.

I'm really not a fan of Minnesota's signals for the color schemes alone.
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 21, 2020, 11:55:01 AM
Filmed this train activated traffic light in NY last week.

Activation:
https://youtu.be/XhAC2sMNFHE
Deactivation:

https://youtu.be/Hg-ZJQh2t3o

And another clip:

https://youtu.be/iwAbI-SI9L4

iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 21, 2020, 12:05:19 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 21, 2020, 07:57:40 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 20, 2020, 11:13:11 PM
What is the point of the 3M's here?  The streets meet at a right angle and there are no turn lanes.  And what's the point of the second mast arm, below?  It isn't connected to the upper mast arm in a truss arm fashion.  What is happening, Minneapolis?

https://goo.gl/maps/gwz9UmWcfdCR5ffw8

Spare part they had in their truck when completing the installation? :awesomeface:

Honestly though, no idea why that's needed there. Not only do I dislike the extra, useless arm, I also really dislike the mismatched paint jobs on all the signal equipment. The overhead arms look nice painted in that dark brown, but the ground-mounted signals are in the Minnesota pale yellow with green bases.

I'm really not a fan of Minnesota's signals for the color schemes alone.
For some reason I've always liked MN and ND signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 21, 2020, 01:28:52 PM
You've seen double red left turn arrows but have you seen double green? (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.4479952,-80.4750672,3a,24.5y,198.42h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGgG_w4QQNUILExFH4Z6YrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Old Dominionite on September 21, 2020, 02:05:36 PM
The signal in Culver City, CA, reminded me of this signal in Brawley, CA, at the corner of old SR 78 and SR 111.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.9786757,-115.5304394,3a,51.4y,279.55h,98.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX-uDJkTm3wFkpideBn2LPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
(https://www.google.com/maps/@32.9786757,-115.5304394,3a,51.4y,279.55h,98.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX-uDJkTm3wFkpideBn2LPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 21, 2020, 02:06:41 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 21, 2020, 01:28:52 PM
You've seen double red left turn arrows but have you seen double green? (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.4479952,-80.4750672,3a,24.5y,198.42h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGgG_w4QQNUILExFH4Z6YrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)

I feel like it used to be a 5 section PPTL signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 21, 2020, 04:40:10 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 20, 2020, 11:54:54 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 12, 2020, 02:31:36 PM
I'm hoping Maine doesn't fall into the same trap that WSDOT sort of fell into, by installing dozens of protected lefts, only to then rip them out later when it becomes clear that the policy has no clear basis in reality. At least when looking at all left turns as a whole (you could cherry pick data easily enough).

It has already happened at some locations statewide.

Take this example in Bangor at I-95 at Route 222. When the intersection and bridge was being rebuilt a few years ago, the new signals were initially installed (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8085941,-68.7928449,3a,83.2y,114.06h,79.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soZH3Lf2CIY2PpgZ1Jb-NTg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with a protected-only left turn (2016). However, sometime later between 2016-18, it was changed to a protected/permissive left (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8086986,-68.7931109,3a,36y,116.7h,88.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_BI3fsjU7CsHPbtjfkLX4Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (no FYA?) not too long ago. Wonder why that was the case...

Two more examples include:

- Franklin and Commercial St in Portland (old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6578098,-70.2498506,3a,35.3y,25.5h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjFaphluVzhZax9bvEyIUwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), current (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6578446,-70.2498187,3a,75y,25.5h,89.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_IFRhf9-ZEKsWESeDRr0Ag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), though that was initally installed as a protected only left across one through lane, and it was converted to a PPLT in 2018.
- Route 111 at Route 208 in Biddeford (old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4913957,-70.4552104,3a,39.5y,99.1h,89.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAyovJU4U32WXICr0RmewGw!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656), current (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4914074,-70.4551381,3a,71y,105.36h,86.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVm7VlISpHrooan9VCeW0g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)), again, crossing only one thru lane but PPLT was only added on the Route 208 approaches.

Reminds me a lot of some signals I see in Oregon or Washington. Two lane approaches where one is a left turn...all protected. Great example (https://goo.gl/maps/cMRPs6v1PNaFCYu16) in Downtown Yelm, WA. And we wonder why they're building a Yelm Bypass...smh.

Luckily, these have become a lot less common. Great example is quite a few intersections along WA-9 in Snohomish County. The highway is primarily a 55 mph rural highway, so it warranted protected lefts, but the left turns were backing up into the through lanes and causing not just serious congestion, but some pretty hideous crashes where people would accidentally clip each other. So the left turns were changed to flashing yellow arrows (before (https://goo.gl/maps/cKN2na6prxim7enq8), after (https://goo.gl/maps/TdX3aU8ekjj83QLLA)). This change seems to have made WSDOT more comfortable with permissive lefts than they had been in the past, as I'm seeing more and more.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on September 21, 2020, 06:14:23 PM
Pretty sure the sideways-mounted signal head on the mast arm was meant for the westbound approach, not the northbound approach.  https://goo.gl/maps/njUAh7SwsPmqyYMw6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on September 21, 2020, 06:21:44 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 21, 2020, 01:28:52 PM
You've seen double red left turn arrows but have you seen double green? (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.4479952,-80.4750672,3a,24.5y,198.42h,92.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGgG_w4QQNUILExFH4Z6YrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
There used to be four I know of in Oklahoma, all ODOT installations from the 1960s.

US-75 and 6th Street in Okmulgee, and NW 39th & College in Bethany had 8" R-Y with two 12" green arrows.

32nd & Broadway and 32nd & Okmulgee in Muskoee had vertical 8" R-Y-G with twin 12" horizontal green arrows(!).

SM-T580

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 21, 2020, 07:40:46 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 21, 2020, 06:14:23 PM
Pretty sure the sideways-mounted signal head on the mast arm was meant for the westbound approach, not the northbound approach.  https://goo.gl/maps/njUAh7SwsPmqyYMw6

Looks like it would be useful for that approach too. Still, I'd put it on the other approach first before this. THEN AGAIN, the extra signal heads on the corner make me wonder if horizontal signals are really that helpful here at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on September 22, 2020, 06:23:57 PM
Two interesting signals near me.

(1)  Southbound Halsted Road at Grand River Avenue in Farmington Hills, MI.  One left turn lane, two right turn lanes.  All traffic must turn (there's even a sign fixture on the signal wire).  Left turn signal is red-yellow-green left arrow.  But the right turn signals are red-yellow-green ball-green right arrow.  During the advance right turn phase, both right signals display a red ball and the right green arrow, even though GOING STRAIGHT THRU IS NOT AN OPTION.
https://goo.gl/maps/8bgwULuTw3XDPGU89

(2)  I-696 ramps to Orchard Lake Road, again in Farmington Hills.  Two left turn lanes, two right turn lanes.  The right turn signals have lighted RIGHT fixtures and green right arrows, but the left turn signals have only green balls.
https://goo.gl/maps/uuwyYevYGT3ULpBBA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 22, 2020, 07:18:38 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on September 22, 2020, 06:23:57 PM
(1)  Southbound Halsted Road at Grand River Avenue in Farmington Hills, MI.  One left turn lane, two right turn lanes.  All traffic must turn (there's even a sign fixture on the signal wire).  Left turn signal is red-yellow-green left arrow.  But the right turn signals are red-yellow-green ball-green right arrow.  During the advance right turn phase, both right signals display a red ball and the right green arrow, even though GOING STRAIGHT THRU IS NOT AN OPTION.
https://goo.gl/maps/8bgwULuTw3XDPGU89

Has the signal changed from an earlier design? This GSV screenshot (https://goo.gl/maps/CLH5AUWxbfAUDBGXA) from only a year prior shows a green arrow in the second-to-bottom lens.

Based on the arrangement of the lanes and the movements here, all-arrow displays would seem to be appropriate for this approach unless the plan is to add a crosswalk across the right turn. In which case the green orb would need to be used to tell the double right turn to yield to pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 22, 2020, 08:27:22 PM
Encountered this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3251913,-79.8566688,3a,35.3y,20.77h,96.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRLdpi3MOEH9mG_bXjiuKyw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) in McKeesport, PA. Any idea what it does?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 22, 2020, 09:01:26 PM
Along with that white line across the road, I'd guess it might be a fire station signal. Is there a fire station up ahead to the right where the American flags are flying? The signal probably lights up flashing red or amber when activated.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on September 23, 2020, 01:41:34 AM
SignBridge, I think you're correct.  There's a fire station a few blocks away off Elizabeth Street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on September 23, 2020, 08:27:32 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 22, 2020, 07:18:38 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on September 22, 2020, 06:23:57 PM
(1)  Southbound Halsted Road at Grand River Avenue in Farmington Hills, MI.  One left turn lane, two right turn lanes.  All traffic must turn (there's even a sign fixture on the signal wire).  Left turn signal is red-yellow-green left arrow.  But the right turn signals are red-yellow-green ball-green right arrow.  During the advance right turn phase, both right signals display a red ball and the right green arrow, even though GOING STRAIGHT THRU IS NOT AN OPTION.
https://goo.gl/maps/8bgwULuTw3XDPGU89

Has the signal changed from an earlier design? This GSV screenshot (https://goo.gl/maps/CLH5AUWxbfAUDBGXA) from only a year prior shows a green arrow in the second-to-bottom lens.

Based on the arrangement of the lanes and the movements here, all-arrow displays would seem to be appropriate for this approach unless the plan is to add a crosswalk across the right turn. In which case the green orb would need to be used to tell the double right turn to yield to pedestrians.

My bad; you are correct.  I thought they were green balls.  My point, though, was that since traffic has to turn right, why display a red ball with a green right arrow?  There is no crosswalk across Grand River Avenue, and I doubt there is any plan to add one since the loop ramp from eastbound Grand River is free-flowing (does not stop at the signal).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 23, 2020, 10:34:28 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 19, 2020, 08:12:00 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 19, 2020, 07:56:05 PM
Probably the first time I've ever seen horizontal signals in California.
I thought the same thing.


iPhone

Very rare, but exist particularly in these situations where an overhead structure blocks view.

As elevated train lines are becoming more of a thing in CA, we'll see more of these signals.  We'll see more as expansion of light rail and transit lines become a thing, construction of high speed rail, and even some RR grade crossing elmination.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 23, 2020, 11:13:37 AM
Quote from: mapman on September 23, 2020, 01:41:34 AM
SignBridge, I think you're correct.  There's a fire station a few blocks away off Elizabeth Street.

Not a few blocks away, but right there there is something that involves fire trucks:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3255632,-79.8565186,3a,37.5y,195.18h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX6ERhX3ameMprjsmIafuYQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 23, 2020, 11:18:28 AM
Quote from: mapman on September 23, 2020, 01:41:34 AM
SignBridge, I think you're correct.  There's a fire station a few blocks away off Elizabeth Street.
What does the blank out sign say then?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 23, 2020, 11:26:16 AM
I may have mentioned a similar style a few pages back, but I just do not like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7052856,-93.2543864,3a,75y,270.99h,88.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM_sA6DCARq6AERHPraCKxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). From Sedalia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 23, 2020, 04:09:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 23, 2020, 11:13:37 AM
Quote from: mapman on September 23, 2020, 01:41:34 AM
SignBridge, I think you're correct.  There's a fire station a few blocks away off Elizabeth Street.

Not a few blocks away, but right there there is something that involves fire trucks:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3255632,-79.8565186,3a,37.5y,195.18h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX6ERhX3ameMprjsmIafuYQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

There is also a sign in the other direction that shows "ambulance exit": https://goo.gl/maps/xZ2Mpnqcx5crPNvg9

Something tells me that one of the buildings on this corner used to be a fire station.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 23, 2020, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 23, 2020, 11:26:16 AM
I may have mentioned a similar style a few pages back, but I just do not like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7052856,-93.2543864,3a,75y,270.99h,88.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM_sA6DCARq6AERHPraCKxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). From Sedalia.
Found another one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7136022,-90.2840128,3a,18.5y,207.11h,96.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ3az5nEp2HmMkICs4QILVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) even closer afield. Things must not've worked out though, since the signal got its ball chopped off (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7135769,-90.2839858,3a,15y,214.45h,98.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3noJvoUPtUzhcKHuNw-R5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) recently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 24, 2020, 01:22:08 AM
Couple things in California:

* Span-wire temporary signal (https://goo.gl/maps/N8vVJ8GFdjvXVG2L9) in Roseville; northern ramp terminus between CA-65 and Galleria Blvd (since removed (https://goo.gl/maps/QusAjfY9H5FEbtBLA))

* Ramp meter with orange retroreflective border (https://goo.gl/maps/WE4YSHRxbQovEnSh6) in Pacoima; on-ramp to westbound 210 Freeway from Foothill Blvd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 24, 2020, 07:40:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 24, 2020, 01:22:08 AM
Couple things in California:

* Span-wire temporary signal (https://goo.gl/maps/N8vVJ8GFdjvXVG2L9) in Roseville; northern ramp terminus between CA-65 and Galleria Blvd (since removed (https://goo.gl/maps/QusAjfY9H5FEbtBLA))

* Ramp meter with orange retroreflective border (https://goo.gl/maps/WE4YSHRxbQovEnSh6) in Pacoima; on-ramp to westbound 210 Freeway from Foothill Blvd.

I've only seen one wired signal in CA, I'm not even sure if it's a temp set up: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7738812,-118.0384767,3a,75y,16.8h,89.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skGQ9GOIx6Q9Z0mITjGvBkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 24, 2020, 09:13:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 24, 2020, 07:40:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 24, 2020, 01:22:08 AM
Couple things in California:

* Span-wire temporary signal (https://goo.gl/maps/N8vVJ8GFdjvXVG2L9) in Roseville; northern ramp terminus between CA-65 and Galleria Blvd (since removed (https://goo.gl/maps/QusAjfY9H5FEbtBLA))

* Ramp meter with orange retroreflective border (https://goo.gl/maps/WE4YSHRxbQovEnSh6) in Pacoima; on-ramp to westbound 210 Freeway from Foothill Blvd.

I've only seen one wired signal in CA, I'm not even sure if it's a temp set up: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7738812,-118.0384767,3a,75y,16.8h,89.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skGQ9GOIx6Q9Z0mITjGvBkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
It is temp, I think for 405 construction. After the replacement of this wire (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.543206,-121.9084146,3a,75y,353.27h,96.6t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sE00TpSJL50h3M2KmF1u04A!2e0!5s20171001T000000!7i16384!8i8192/) in Carmel Valley off SR-1 with these thick mast arms (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.5432181,-121.9084063,3a,75y,353.27h,96.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snERrThHtVP2vUE93ESxmOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/), it is my knowledge that there are 0 non temp wires in CA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 24, 2020, 09:15:30 AM
Unrelated to my previous post, but: I really like these (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.8291034,-86.8621326,3a,74.2y,312.49h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss67Qr5jXK9tDDY6TYpmZBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) beacons off the Russellville KY bypass. It is a span wire box setup with large stop sign, two beacons each way, and backplates/reflectors on each of the beacons. I wish more beacons were like that as opposed to, say, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7825627,-89.1430868,3a,60y,293.99h,91.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv5AKMKNqRfMUOly3K2quuQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 25, 2020, 08:46:15 AM
I have an update about some of MaineDOT's policies regarding FYA and PPLT in general, specifically, when I asked them about the Stillwater Ave (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E1v6414R7No8Lu5cvGfCInUSOF-Zl424/view?usp=sharing) project:

Why is FYA (or any PPLT with a dedicated LT lane) across two oncoming thru lanes not permitted in Maine? 

I didn't get much from this response, though I did ask the same question again about the signals in Sanford as part of a seperate project, specifally, what data proves unsafe PPLT operation across two thru lanes.

Here's their response for the Stillwater project:

Quote from: MaineDOTPresently, FYA to allow for permissive left-turns across 2 on-coming thru lanes are not permitted in Maine.

As for using FYA TOD phasing as a compromise to reduce left turning delay during the "light" traffic periods:

Quote from: MaineDOTPresently, FYA to allow for permissive left-turns across 2 on-coming thru lanes are not permitted in Maine. In addition, an engineering study would need to be conducted to justify regulatory signing for time-of-day (TOD) restrictions.

Curious to what this "regulatory signing" is.. could it be a changeable message sign about left turn operation, or a static "Left on Green Arrow Only" sign with times that phasing is in effect? The "engineering study" is what's also scratching my head as well.

I also asked them about using FYA for the right turns instead of the shared signals and their response was:

Quote from: MaineDOTPresently, flashing arrows (FRA and/or FYA) for right-turns are not approved for use in Maine.

Understandable, especially since they are just starting to use FYA for PPLT operations and want to see how things are first.

Finally, I thought I throw this in there, this time for College Ave:

Why does the WB Stillwater approach have to lose its right turn lane in favour of having two thru lanes? First, it would hold up the thru traffic which is non-conflicting during the LPI, and second, because of your current "no PPLT against two thru lanes"  policy, it basically bars out PPLT phasing from EB Stillwater Ave to SB College Ave, and third, the right turning traffic would now have to make a full stop unnecessarily during the SB approach's protected left.

Quote from: MaineDOTThe PM peak hour is the critical time of the day, when conflicting Stillwater Ave (NB) thru and college Ave (WB) left-turn movements are at their highest. A SB protected-permissive left turn was not proposed because it would not offer capacity advantages opposing a single NB thru lane in the PM peak hour, and it would add a safety risk to the left-turn movement. A NB Stillwater Ave lane configuration with one lane for each NB movement was considered, but the proposed lane configuration is required to meet forecasted capacity needs for the PM peak hour. "The 2 through lanes are required to meet current and forecast level of service objectives for the critical PM peak hour."

More to come soon as I am still awaiting response for the comments I inquired about the Sanford signal replacement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 25, 2020, 11:18:32 AM
It is unfortunate that Maine is disallowing PPLT across two opposing lanes.  Are they retrofitting older signals to conform with this policy?  Are there any other states with a similar policy out there?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 25, 2020, 01:26:51 PM
This is interesting. Alabama originally had a mast arm here (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3573635,-86.8559237,3a,75y,79.43h,83.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0mSHnCjtNp9WW5wfz4yyUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/), but when the area was rebuilt a few years ago, it was replaced (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3573897,-86.855958,3a,75y,91.23h,83.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4NM2ZYmNxLNQ5wPFSPgxDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) with a span wire. I've seen FL do this, but not other states. Any other examples?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 25, 2020, 03:01:22 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 25, 2020, 08:46:15 AM
I have an update about some of MaineDOT's policies regarding FYA and PPLT in general, specifically, when I asked them about the Stillwater Ave (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E1v6414R7No8Lu5cvGfCInUSOF-Zl424/view?usp=sharing) project:

Without quoting everything: I find it absolutely bizarre that a state DOT would basically surround themselves with "hoops" which they then have to struggle to jump through.

Eg: (hoop 1) protected-only left turn across two turn lanes or (hoop 2) protected-permissive left turn across one lane? Meanwhile, every other state just goes through the door marked "protected permissive left turn across two lanes".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 25, 2020, 05:42:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 25, 2020, 11:18:32 AM
It is unfortunate that Maine is disallowing PPLT across two opposing lanes.  Are they retrofitting older signals to conform with this policy?

Yes. With some exceptions, any signal that is previously PPLT and crosses two lanes, and having their signals upgraded or replaced are being subject to this new policy.  Existing installations may remain until replaced or if an exception is made for that particular location.

Quote from: mrsman on September 25, 2020, 11:18:32 AM
Are there any other states with a similar policy out there?

I don't think NHDOT has such policy, though from my observations, they will install protected only by default, especially if it's in a buissness district and/or crossing 2+ thru lanes. NH FYA's are usually installed on rural roads with a SL of ≤45mph crossing a single lane with good sight lines, but they can and will install FYA's on approaches with 2+ thru lanes. Heck, some NHDOT installs were recently converted to protected only (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8889318,-70.8716102,3a,75y,169.04h,83.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJFBO3WcZUpsn97YUW9P_eg!2e0!5s20171001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) to FYA PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8888718,-70.8715417,3a,75y,177.86h,84.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD06gH_NskU2UGUMCbNGARQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) under those conditions*!

*older GSV from 2012 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8890182,-70.8716264,3a,56.1y,169.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTOkXlXT7kYVOYpseSUV8LA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) shows a PPLT 5-section signal before NHDOT took over signal control.

Unsure about MassDOT (maybe Amtrakprod or anyone in the local area can elaborate on that), RIDOT or ConnDOT's policies about that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 25, 2020, 06:16:30 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 25, 2020, 05:42:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 25, 2020, 11:18:32 AM
It is unfortunate that Maine is disallowing PPLT across two opposing lanes.  Are they retrofitting older signals to conform with this policy?

Yes. With some exceptions, any signal that is previously PPLT and crosses two lanes, and having their signals upgraded or replaced are being subject to this new policy.  Existing installations may remain until replaced or if an exception is made for that particular location.

Quote from: mrsman on September 25, 2020, 11:18:32 AM
Are there any other states with a similar policy out there?

I don't think NHDOT has such policy, though from my observations, they will install protected only by default, especially if it's in a buissness district and/or crossing 2+ thru lanes. NH FYA's are usually installed on rural roads with a SL of ≤45mph crossing a single lane with good sight lines, but they can and will install FYA's on approaches with 2+ thru lanes. Heck, some NHDOT installs were recently converted to protected only (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8889318,-70.8716102,3a,75y,169.04h,83.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJFBO3WcZUpsn97YUW9P_eg!2e0!5s20171001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) to FYA PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8888718,-70.8715417,3a,75y,177.86h,84.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD06gH_NskU2UGUMCbNGARQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) under those conditions*!

*older GSV from 2012 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8890182,-70.8716264,3a,56.1y,169.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTOkXlXT7kYVOYpseSUV8LA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) shows a PPLT 5-section signal before NHDOT took over signal control.

Unsure about MassDOT (maybe Amtrakprod or anyone in the local area can elaborate on that), RIDOT or ConnDOT's policies about that.

MassDOT is pretty free about this stuff. I've seen 3 conflicting lanes have permissive left. https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286323,-71.2742908,3a,75y,112.79h,89.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMKxe8TK2Ab_CN6rOfWY7hg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Typically the rule is 2 or less lanes though for permissive. MassDOT doesn't really have a standard rule about this. They study every light specifically for designs. Pretty neat!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 25, 2020, 08:29:25 PM
I'm fairly certain that quite a few states have no rules on number of opposing lanes. WSDOT has a suggestion for no more than two, but it's widely disregarded by them and cities and counties.

In fact, I think in most states, the guidelines for signalization are simply suggestions, with individual engineers being able to make the call. Maine seems odd in having such tight controls.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 26, 2020, 03:06:56 PM
It's kinda hard to see, but this (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.0786455,-80.7150771,3a,16.6y,328.45h,91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6A0xABb3FAzoD_K8j-RXyQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) doghouse has two green arrows instead of a green ball/green arrow. Of course, now that the new Ellis Road is completed, this has probably gone away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on September 30, 2020, 12:08:56 PM
OK, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3291114,-85.7113209,3a,25y,126.04h,95.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si_K41x4_rMVDl1IKvVYsvg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) you've got to see.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2020, 01:05:38 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 30, 2020, 12:08:56 PM
OK, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3291114,-85.7113209,3a,25y,126.04h,95.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si_K41x4_rMVDl1IKvVYsvg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) you've got to see.

I guess the mast on the left wasn't good enough?? And the height?? :crazy:

That seems like it would blow over in a gust of wind.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 01, 2020, 08:53:12 AM
MA traffic lights near me:
this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4472121,-71.2269973,3a,32.8y,324.57h,96.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spro0LhyyZp-bCDr8IObaog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.435019,-71.2104413,3a,75y,165.51h,86.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suuGvsvwDDxGcsZdp_b1rKw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4243217,-71.1832793,3a,75y,108.01h,88.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smNFsjSZxgm4-0wB1dxxA3A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4155365,-71.1535134,3a,60y,113.63h,90.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3ZWFr_pn82t13kVobwuuTg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) , and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.405669,-71.1422215,3a,60y,345.24h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFC9EHKqFOmEIug4a6XOiUQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) .
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 01, 2020, 09:57:40 AM
Possibly bad signal placement...why don't they put the relevant signals facing the sidestreet on the mast arm coming from the left?  https://goo.gl/maps/KAmd65KTKKpW2miD9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 01, 2020, 10:47:19 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 01, 2020, 01:05:38 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 30, 2020, 12:08:56 PM
OK, this (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3291114,-85.7113209,3a,25y,126.04h,95.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si_K41x4_rMVDl1IKvVYsvg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) you've got to see.

I guess the mast on the left wasn't good enough?? And the height?? :crazy:

That seems like it would blow over in a gust of wind.
Here's another (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3185803,-85.7638459,3a,24.6y,92.81h,89.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUcM4OIbtcx9Ocpjq_jq_pA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) doghouse oddity a few miles away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 01, 2020, 11:53:30 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 26, 2020, 03:06:56 PM
It's kinda hard to see, but this (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.0786455,-80.7150771,3a,16.6y,328.45h,91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6A0xABb3FAzoD_K8j-RXyQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) doghouse has two green arrows instead of a green ball/green arrow. Of course, now that the new Ellis Road is completed, this has probably gone away.
Similar to this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3692686,-71.1171894,3a,31.7y,211.86h,92.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGHI-_R3gDL5neC5F74DGoQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2020, 04:32:53 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 01, 2020, 08:53:12 AM
MA traffic lights near me:
this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4472121,-71.2269973,3a,32.8y,324.57h,96.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spro0LhyyZp-bCDr8IObaog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.435019,-71.2104413,3a,75y,165.51h,86.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suuGvsvwDDxGcsZdp_b1rKw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4243217,-71.1832793,3a,75y,108.01h,88.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smNFsjSZxgm4-0wB1dxxA3A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) , this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4155365,-71.1535134,3a,60y,113.63h,90.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3ZWFr_pn82t13kVobwuuTg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) , and this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.405669,-71.1422215,3a,60y,345.24h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFC9EHKqFOmEIug4a6XOiUQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) .

Very clean installs! I like how Mass is willing to consider the individual nuances of each intersection when considering where to place signals, rather than a one size-fits all approach that you see in most places. This could easily become a bad thing if misused (i.e. not doing enough or making a mess of signal placement), but that generally doesn't seem to happen in Mass.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 01, 2020, 04:48:45 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 01, 2020, 09:57:40 AM
Possibly bad signal placement...why don't they put the relevant signals facing the sidestreet on the mast arm coming from the left?  https://goo.gl/maps/KAmd65KTKKpW2miD9

I think if it were on the mast arm from the left, they'd be too close to the stop line and thus not within the required cone of vision. They only just barely seem to be within the cone of vision as placed, although the signals on the other mast arm might actually be blocking the vision of the signals on the "further" mast arm...that's a really mess setup!!

Easiest thing would have been to have shorter mast arms, with the doghouse on the far left of the mast arm, and the through signal on the mast itself. But what do I know....
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 01, 2020, 05:52:44 PM
While I like either the side-by-side arrangement or a vertical 5-stack for overhead signals, I think post mounted signals look better (neater, cleaner) with a vertical stack. Just my preference
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 01, 2020, 10:54:10 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5718441,-77.3822751,3a,29.6y,312.65h,100.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAZE3wqvOVpbSDjsMV4H3sw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is unusual in Virginia. Double-red arrows. Also seen some in MD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 02, 2020, 06:57:20 AM
https://youtu.be/Zpnq0lp6OS0


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 02, 2020, 10:13:23 AM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2003725,-85.9510973,3a,80.6y,219.33h,90.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smCIbmPsgeGbWXe3Vh9KFHQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) may well be the thickest span wire support pole you ever see. Also note the gantry holding up signals on SR-46 WB. Indiana is an interesting place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 02, 2020, 02:14:18 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 02, 2020, 06:57:20 AM
https://youtu.be/Zpnq0lp6OS0

That's pretty cool, although I'd prefer to see the FYA active only when there are pedestrians. Otherwise the distinction for drivers will be lost when the crosswalk is actually active.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 02, 2020, 07:48:56 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201002/3de2086b05c1661d5c48c26171cae27a.jpg)
Reprogrammed! (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201002/830b6762f51df68cec4ee338dd584e5b.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201002/5ee93f3f258ebebc22d4638274df9af8.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201002/3ba76b36776482726c605fb45d5910f8.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on October 03, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Didn't get a chance to see how this one works, but this seems to be an answer to preventing crashes when the cross street makes a U-turn on a green left arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/bv55twxR3BaNSeJw9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 03, 2020, 02:46:05 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 03, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Didn't get a chance to see how this one works, but this seems to be an answer to preventing crashes when the cross street makes a U-turn on a green left arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/bv55twxR3BaNSeJw9
From 2007, 11, and 15 GSV, it looks like the four aspect signal is (from top to bottom):
Red
Red arrow
Yellow
Green
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 03, 2020, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 03, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Didn't get a chance to see how this one works, but this seems to be an answer to preventing crashes when the cross street makes a U-turn on a green left arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/bv55twxR3BaNSeJw9

That's an option, to prevent RTOR specifically when U-turns are occurring. But that may not always be necessary. Something that allows traffic to move but intuitively tells traffic to watch for U-turns at the same time seems to be the ideal approach. Regular RTOR isn't great because traffic doesn't really know where to look, but another specific signal could be designed to do this. Like a flashing right yellow arrow with a supplemental "yield to U-turns on FYA" sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2020, 09:38:39 PM
Saw this today. (https://goo.gl/maps/ytvRArKPGjm33aiMA)  On a T intersection, the green balls seem redundant.  Except by providing them, the city or county doesn't have to provide two right turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 04, 2020, 02:42:16 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2020, 09:38:39 PM
Saw this today. (https://goo.gl/maps/ytvRArKPGjm33aiMA)  On a T intersection, the green balls seem redundant.  Except by providing them, the city or county doesn't have to provide two right turn signals.

I see there is a crosswalk on the leg that left turning traffic would from this view would be using. I'd be interested to see what happens when the ped signal is activated...would the left green arrow from this approach still come on, or get the green ball without the arrow? (Or would there be no green entirely leaving an exclusive phase for the peds?)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 04, 2020, 03:37:50 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2020, 09:38:39 PM
Saw this today. (https://goo.gl/maps/ytvRArKPGjm33aiMA)  On a T intersection, the green balls seem redundant.  Except by providing them, the city or county doesn't have to provide two right turn signals.

Looks good, but I'd take out the left turn arrow section on the left signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on October 04, 2020, 05:00:32 PM
Found this old 4-way signal with extended visors facing the side street and a 12-inch adapter.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8350323,-79.1284817,3a,18.7y,-2.63h,107.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srZA4lOOvBzl25kvJ6p2VRg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 04, 2020, 05:53:05 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 04, 2020, 02:42:16 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2020, 09:38:39 PM
Saw this today. (https://goo.gl/maps/ytvRArKPGjm33aiMA)  On a T intersection, the green balls seem redundant.  Except by providing them, the city or county doesn't have to provide two right turn signals.

I see there is a crosswalk on the leg that left turning traffic would from this view would be using. I'd be interested to see what happens when the ped signal is activated...would the left green arrow from this approach still come on, or get the green ball without the arrow? (Or would there be no green entirely leaving an exclusive phase for the peds?)

The strangest thing about that signal, to me, is that the right signal does not appear to have a bimodal right-facing arrow. When the left turn from WLS Pkwy is on, there is no way for a green arrow to be active (unless the green arrow activated simultaneous with a lagging protected left, but even that might not end with terminating road getting a green light). That seems like an odd omission, especially if the right turn is busy enough to warrant placing the crosswalk across the left turn and that arrows were installed to begin with.

If that left turn across the crosswalk was a yield, the most basic setup for that turn would have been two green orbs for the approach for left and right turns, and a bimodal green/yellow arrow for the right turn.

I'll have to go up and check out the operation of the signal soon. I'm very interested.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:54 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 04, 2020, 05:00:32 PM
Found this old 4-way signal with extended visors facing the side street and a 12-inch adapter.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8350323,-79.1284817,3a,18.7y,-2.63h,107.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srZA4lOOvBzl25kvJ6p2VRg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i13312!8i6656
That's the longest I've ever seen!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on October 04, 2020, 06:34:04 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:54 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 04, 2020, 05:00:32 PM
Found this old 4-way signal with extended visors facing the side street and a 12-inch adapter.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8350323,-79.1284817,3a,18.7y,-2.63h,107.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srZA4lOOvBzl25kvJ6p2VRg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i13312!8i6656
That's the longest I've ever seen!

...and a true Frankensignal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mccojm on October 05, 2020, 01:27:33 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:54 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 04, 2020, 05:00:32 PM
Found this old 4-way signal with extended visors facing the side street and a 12-inch adapter.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8350323,-79.1284817,3a,18.7y,-2.63h,107.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srZA4lOOvBzl25kvJ6p2VRg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i13312!8i6656
That's the longest I've ever seen!

I think this tops longest tunnels ever on signal
https://goo.gl/maps/oZZWZjmcZafzyJ7X7 (https://goo.gl/maps/oZZWZjmcZafzyJ7X7)
I believe they're 24"  and it's due to the severe skew of Jayne Blvd with busier ny-347. The tunnels are so long they act as wind sails and keep twisting the heads.

Here's more at NY-27 & Windsor Ave
https://goo.gl/maps/bkLp7c8RwEHnGdZ26 (https://goo.gl/maps/bkLp7c8RwEHnGdZ26)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 05, 2020, 08:25:08 PM
The ones on Rt. 347 are very long angle visors for angled cross streets. Agreed they are too long for free swinging signals. They were also used on Rt.110 at the first intersection south of Northern State Pkwy. But those appear to be installed incorrectly with the long side of the visor on top instead of to one side as per the angle of the intersection.

NYS DOT Region 10 is also on a backplate binge installing them on virtually all new and rebuilt signals lately. And just like 25 years ago, they are cracking and falling away within a few years of installation. Maybe they should use aluminum instead of plastic?



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 05, 2020, 09:14:31 PM
Quote from: Mccojm on October 05, 2020, 01:27:33 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 04, 2020, 06:10:54 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 04, 2020, 05:00:32 PM
Found this old 4-way signal with extended visors facing the side street and a 12-inch adapter.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8350323,-79.1284817,3a,18.7y,-2.63h,107.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srZA4lOOvBzl25kvJ6p2VRg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i13312!8i6656
That's the longest I've ever seen!

I think this tops longest tunnels ever on signal
https://goo.gl/maps/oZZWZjmcZafzyJ7X7 (https://goo.gl/maps/oZZWZjmcZafzyJ7X7)
I believe they're 24"  and it's due to the severe skew of Jayne Blvd with busier ny-347. The tunnels are so long they act as wind sails and keep twisting the heads.

Here's more at NY-27 & Windsor Ave
https://goo.gl/maps/bkLp7c8RwEHnGdZ26 (https://goo.gl/maps/bkLp7c8RwEHnGdZ26)
I should've clarified; longest non-angled visors. Cali has a lot of those twisted tunnels on their streets, though I've never seen an angled visor here in Missouri (we use programmables and louvers when (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5845637,-90.4432289,3a,41.3y,228.55h,90.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUxbASlkMyPboZijNUaAX6w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) the (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6991031,-90.35012,3a,34.4y,95.5h,91.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skTC9bs3gyHAbTFpfPwaqDA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) need (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5124548,-90.2905702,3a,71.7y,163.73h,84.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sftKxEVcbZpj7RCp_GyObeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) arises (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.068829,-94.520069,3a,23.3y,292.26h,92.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sadtgyGzI8h0zTo1Q7WrnCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 06, 2020, 07:19:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 03, 2020, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 03, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Didn't get a chance to see how this one works, but this seems to be an answer to preventing crashes when the cross street makes a U-turn on a green left arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/bv55twxR3BaNSeJw9

That's an option, to prevent RTOR specifically when U-turns are occurring. But that may not always be necessary. Something that allows traffic to move but intuitively tells traffic to watch for U-turns at the same time seems to be the ideal approach. Regular RTOR isn't great because traffic doesn't really know where to look, but another specific signal could be designed to do this. Like a flashing right yellow arrow with a supplemental "yield to U-turns on FYA" sign.

It seems that Tuscon has the best answer for this.  Someone had posted on it a while ago (but I forget if it was here or in Mtn West forum).  Tucson has a 5 aspect RYG-YA-FYA signal.  Only when the corresponding left has green arrow - the right arrow displays a FYA as a warning to watch for u-turns.  When cross traffic has green, the right turn signal displays a normal red orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Check out this four section PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8327032,-77.1968665,3a,15y,174.91h,96.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HjpFtl209pA2oJtwyUNZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Virginia. Green ball in the yellow ball position.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 01:35:37 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 06, 2020, 07:19:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 03, 2020, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on October 03, 2020, 12:01:30 PM
Didn't get a chance to see how this one works, but this seems to be an answer to preventing crashes when the cross street makes a U-turn on a green left arrow.

https://goo.gl/maps/bv55twxR3BaNSeJw9

That's an option, to prevent RTOR specifically when U-turns are occurring. But that may not always be necessary. Something that allows traffic to move but intuitively tells traffic to watch for U-turns at the same time seems to be the ideal approach. Regular RTOR isn't great because traffic doesn't really know where to look, but another specific signal could be designed to do this. Like a flashing right yellow arrow with a supplemental "yield to U-turns on FYA" sign.

It seems that Tuscon has the best answer for this.  Someone had posted on it a while ago (but I forget if it was here or in Mtn West forum).  Tucson has a 5 aspect RYG-YA-FYA signal.  Only when the corresponding left has green arrow - the right arrow displays a FYA as a warning to watch for u-turns.  When cross traffic has green, the right turn signal displays a normal red orb.

That's exactly what I had in mind, although according to this post (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2983.msg2535686#msg2535686) in the "unique" thread by JKRhodes, any examples of signage accompanying those signals have long since bit the dust. Which is too bad, since I don't know how intuitive the flashing yellow right arrow would be during the overlapping protected left turn without any sort of signage to indicate the purpose of the FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Check out this four section PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8327032,-77.1968665,3a,15y,174.91h,96.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HjpFtl209pA2oJtwyUNZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Virginia. Green ball in the yellow ball position.

Took me a minute to figure this out, although it's still odd. Since the side-street has no left turn onto the main road, there is no reason to display a yellow or red signal. I'm guessing the signal on top is a red orb for when power goes out.

I don't know the rule in the US, but in Canada, green and yellow orbs can be "moved up" in the stack, but they cannot be switched with one another. For example, this signal in Vancouver (video by me) with only two lenses: constant green orb on top, bimodal green/yellow arrow on the bottom. Bit strange, but definitely permitted as there is no yellow or red orbs; I think it would be OK in the US as well (apart from the flashing green arrow).

https://youtu.be/6-K46IWuHoQ
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 06, 2020, 08:12:51 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

Hmmm.........Not sure but I think in the first photo that pole mounted head with the green arrow above the circular green is probably not Manual compliant. Looks like they used the horizontal mount placement in the head and just turned the arrow lens. Interesting backplates. I don't know if they are reqd. to be any specific shape.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2
Everything about that is excessive--the backplates, the aluminum poles, the streetlights. I've seen it before, but it never fails to shock.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 09:02:50 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 06, 2020, 08:12:51 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

Hmmm.........Not sure but I think in the first photo that pole mounted head with the green arrow above the circular green is probably not Manual compliant. Looks like they used the horizontal mount placement in the head and just turned the arrow lens.

The exact opposite problem that I would expect in areas where vertical signals are the norm but where a horizontal signal has to be used for whatever reason: simply transposing the signal up and then over. Here, we have something even rarer: an area where horizontal signals are the norm, and the signal was simply transposed over and then down.

This is exactly why I don't like horizontal signal requirements. It really should be as simply as transposing the standard vertical signal up and over. Otherwise, stuff like this happens. Not to mention confusion around the normal layout of horizontal signals. Living in area without them, I only know how they are laid out thanks to Google Street View.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 07, 2020, 12:05:50 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 09:02:50 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 06, 2020, 08:12:51 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

Hmmm.........Not sure but I think in the first photo that pole mounted head with the green arrow above the circular green is probably not Manual compliant. Looks like they used the horizontal mount placement in the head and just turned the arrow lens.

The exact opposite problem that I would expect in areas where vertical signals are the norm but where a horizontal signal has to be used for whatever reason: simply transposing the signal up and then over. Here, we have something even rarer: an area where horizontal signals are the norm, and the signal was simply transposed over and then down.

This is exactly why I don't like horizontal signal requirements. It really should be as simply as transposing the standard vertical signal up and over. Otherwise, stuff like this happens. Not to mention confusion around the normal layout of horizontal signals. Living in area without them, I only know how they are laid out thanks to Google Street View.
And the weird thing is I know someone who knows the traffic engineer who designed that project.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on October 07, 2020, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Check out this four section PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8327032,-77.1968665,3a,15y,174.91h,96.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HjpFtl209pA2oJtwyUNZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Virginia. Green ball in the yellow ball position.

Took me a minute to figure this out, although it's still odd. Since the side-street has no left turn onto the main road, there is no reason to display a yellow or red signal. I'm guessing the signal on top is a red orb for when power goes out.

I don't know the rule in the US, but in Canada, green and yellow orbs can be "moved up" in the stack, but they cannot be switched with one another. For example, this signal in Vancouver (video by me) with only two lenses: constant green orb on top, bimodal green/yellow arrow on the bottom. Bit strange, but definitely permitted as there is no yellow or red orbs; I think it would be OK in the US as well (apart from the flashing green arrow).



I grew up near the Annandale, VA area, so I know this intersection very well.  The opmost signal heads on both signals are yellow balls, and activate only when the signals enter flash mode, which was a very rare occurrence.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 08, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on October 07, 2020, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Check out this four section PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8327032,-77.1968665,3a,15y,174.91h,96.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HjpFtl209pA2oJtwyUNZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Virginia. Green ball in the yellow ball position.

Took me a minute to figure this out, although it's still odd. Since the side-street has no left turn onto the main road, there is no reason to display a yellow or red signal. I'm guessing the signal on top is a red orb for when power goes out.


I grew up near the Annandale, VA area, so I know this intersection very well.  The opmost signal heads on both signals are yellow balls, and activate only when the signals enter flash mode, which was a very rare occurrence.

This all makes sense, but I think the unique aspects of this can be quite confusing.  It may be more worthwhile to have a doghouse on the left and a regular RYG on the right.  The red signal may never light, and the yellow only during flash mode, but at least the meaning makes consistent sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2020, 04:06:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 08, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on October 07, 2020, 12:15:13 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 06, 2020, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM
Check out this four section PPLT (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8327032,-77.1968665,3a,15y,174.91h,96.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1HjpFtl209pA2oJtwyUNZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Virginia. Green ball in the yellow ball position.

Took me a minute to figure this out, although it's still odd. Since the side-street has no left turn onto the main road, there is no reason to display a yellow or red signal. I'm guessing the signal on top is a red orb for when power goes out.


I grew up near the Annandale, VA area, so I know this intersection very well.  The opmost signal heads on both signals are yellow balls, and activate only when the signals enter flash mode, which was a very rare occurrence.

This all makes sense, but I think the unique aspects of this can be quite confusing.  It may be more worthwhile to have a doghouse on the left and a regular RYG on the right.  The red signal may never light, and the yellow only during flash mode, but at least the meaning makes consistent sense.

Just wondering...are the 2 lanes going into this intersection from Maple needed?  It appears the road is 1 lane wide, and the left lane doesn't allow right turns on red.  If anything, it's a bit confusing for those not in the know.  There's no signage indicating there's 2 lanes, and no road markings for the right lane to turn right.  A single white solid line without any other indicators, and with it being the only lane with right turn markings, almost makes it appears it's a shoulder line at the intersection. 

As for the traffic light - no reason a conventional signal couldn't be used here as mrsman indicates. But there's an issue with the lack of a pedestrian crossing as well.

All told, the intersection itself is fine, but the traffic light system is a total mess.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 08, 2020, 08:37:35 PM
Either this doghouse signal in Danvers, MA is running in Dallas Phasing (LEFT TURN SIGNAL & YIELD ON GREEN signs), or simply just running in protected only mode... I'll have to check it out on my next Boston run this weekend. Based on some GSV views it does also run in protected/permissive mode as well...

Nov 2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5482346,-70.9427224,3a,75y,63.84h,88.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szCRD0HzhyGeepFcxfLaG3w!2e0!5s20171101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Sep 2018 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5482217,-70.9426907,3a,50y,63.84h,88.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCovsG3yLmu_nujc5iz1_Fw!2e0!5s20180901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Video showing all red to protected only (https://youtu.be/uPBRJYipwhk?t=882)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2020, 09:00:05 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

I remember seeing those signals in Houston several years ago. Even as a 12 year old when my family visited there I thought they looked incredibly ugly. No thanks. :thumbdown:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 10:50:46 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2020, 09:00:05 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

I remember seeing those signals in Houston several years ago. Even as a 12 year old when my family visited there I thought they looked incredibly ugly. No thanks. :thumbdown:
Houston as a whole can be somewhat insistent, going from this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6264786,-95.2667006,3a,75y,256.82h,87.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM_OpBT7gyuat9leP45W4DA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8134647,-95.3174512,3a,71.3y,73.51h,87.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ29qZovtwfxc-YLxuCDgsQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7340948,-95.8105342,3a,75y,50.56h,87.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm6Vn9gh5UTv-mpIoHKFpig!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) to this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793639,-95.3111439,3a,75y,353.99h,91.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWlwISeaA60NqWnN3X3CyCw!2e0!5s20071201T000000!7i3328!8i1664/) (updated (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793677,-95.3111277,3a,43.2y,361.29h,93.86t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scv5Z-n4sy8UfKLjMdQplOA!2e0!5s20110301T000000!7i13312!8i6656/) twice (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793497,-95.3111321,3a,75y,1.29h,93.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-7oMbF8DS9Z0DLn1gs8XTg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) since 2007) to even this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539201,-95.3674312,3a,75y,65.71h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFN6btvTbdLpMKi2lLXdOKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Here's some vertical action (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7579877,-95.3630616,3a,75y,120.8h,91.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_ZtrTW1sDw9D6HNDoyqWPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) as well.

Second example has an interesting bike signal, btw.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 09, 2020, 03:45:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 10:50:46 AM
(updated (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793677,-95.3111277,3a,43.2y,361.29h,93.86t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scv5Z-n4sy8UfKLjMdQplOA!2e0!5s20110301T000000!7i13312!8i6656/) twice (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793497,-95.3111321,3a,75y,1.29h,93.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-7oMbF8DS9Z0DLn1gs8XTg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) since 2007)

That example is really odd. I didn't realize, at any point in the last twenty years, that new signals were still being installed with only one signal head per direction. Very odd!! No wonder it was eventually replaced.

As a side-note: where the in the hell are you finding all these interesting things? I thought I spent a lot of time on GSV, but holy shit!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on October 09, 2020, 04:27:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicoleJust wondering...are the 2 lanes going into this intersection from Maple needed?
For the most part, no.  There are times when there are ~5-7 cars in the rightmost turn lane that there was little to none potential time saved from avoiding the leftmost lane's no turn on red.  (Also of note, the green time on northbound Annandale Rd and Maple Pl is split almost evenly.)  The only reason I believe its still there is because VDOT hopes drivers will use the left lane so they don't try and immediately move over to make an immediate left at Markham St (next signal north).  This of course doesn't happen.

QuoteAs for the traffic light - no reason a conventional signal couldn't be used here as mrsman indicates. But there's an issue with the lack of a pedestrian crossing as well.
When these signals are finally replaced, I suspect it'll be similar to those set up at southbound Commerce St's left exit to I-495 north (https://goo.gl/maps/GMdoybKiiZDNMwGU6).  A ped crossing of Annandale Rd would definitely necessitate the need for standard signals instead though, and a PPLT on northbound Annandale Rd would not be unwelcome, given that pedestrians crossing Maple Pl is not very common at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 06:15:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 09, 2020, 03:45:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 10:50:46 AM
(updated (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793677,-95.3111277,3a,43.2y,361.29h,93.86t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1scv5Z-n4sy8UfKLjMdQplOA!2e0!5s20110301T000000!7i13312!8i6656/) twice (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8793497,-95.3111321,3a,75y,1.29h,93.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-7oMbF8DS9Z0DLn1gs8XTg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) since 2007)

That example is really odd. I didn't realize, at any point in the last twenty years, that new signals were still being installed with only one signal head per direction. Very odd!! No wonder it was eventually replaced.

As a side-note: where the in the hell are you finding all these interesting things? I thought I spent a lot of time on GSV, but holy shit!
I have some photos from trips I've taken, and pull some examples from there. It's also a matter of knowing where to look; if the neighborhood looks older or seems like there's been a lot of depopulation, there may be some interesting signals
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on October 09, 2020, 10:15:18 PM
I'm from Chattanooga, TN but my home town has been using flashing left arrow traffic lights for more than two years
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0459906,-85.3126286,3a,81.6y,114.38h,92.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLPq-R9qFxlgsEUWkz9cVag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1382829,-85.2477746,3a,75y,168.9h,90.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sauV5F405PZWPfuibeygzag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2020, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.

Again, nothing good comes from discussing work st a bar at 1am.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on October 09, 2020, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.

Why isn't traffic allowed to go straight there?

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2020, 12:02:02 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 09, 2020, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.

Why isn't traffic allowed to go straight there?

It is. It's just saying traffic can turn right without stopping.

PA is know for their "STOP" "EXCEPT RIGHT TURNS" signage. This i guess is their signalized version of it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 10, 2020, 12:34:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2020, 12:02:02 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 09, 2020, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.

Why isn't traffic allowed to go straight there?

It is. It's just saying traffic can turn right without stopping.

PA is know for their "STOP" "EXCEPT RIGHT TURNS" signage. This i guess is their signalized version of it.

But there is a sign clearly stating "ALL TRAFFIC MUST TURN RIGHT (https://goo.gl/maps/f8637uzt5fSum2sLA)".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 10, 2020, 08:24:02 PM
Uhhhhhhh wow. Never thought I'd see an intersection with these two things: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.301627,-157.8488057,3a,23.2y,290.54h,93.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOxyH1NHRJ5Xb6vd0oY8gZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3015221,-157.8489198,3a,16.4y,127.69h,95.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBzXxVTQu3-s5mC2MAUjnqQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 10, 2020, 08:39:18 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 10, 2020, 08:24:02 PM
Uhhhhhhh wow. Never thought I'd see an intersection with these two things: https://www.google.com/maps/@21.301627,-157.8488057,3a,23.2y,290.54h,93.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOxyH1NHRJ5Xb6vd0oY8gZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3015221,-157.8489198,3a,16.4y,127.69h,95.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBzXxVTQu3-s5mC2MAUjnqQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

What exactly are we looking at? I see some round-door Bullseyes and a bike signal. Also some wicked short mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on October 11, 2020, 10:17:40 AM
Here's something you don't see that often anymore for traffic lights. In Sandusky, Ohio (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4522211,-82.7018034,3a,15y,323.08h,101.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqz0kkbnhnJUQB9kc0yLtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 11, 2020, 12:53:44 PM
Flipped pedestrian indications (countdown at top, ped signal indications on bottom) at NH Route 28 at Route 102 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8818746,-71.3241676,3a,25.4y,218.25h,90.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1MBtjoNpmDOjKhV5u7FPQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Derry NH.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2020, 01:00:03 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 11, 2020, 10:17:40 AM
Here's something you don't see that often anymore for traffic lights. In Sandusky, Ohio (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4522211,-82.7018034,3a,15y,323.08h,101.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqz0kkbnhnJUQB9kc0yLtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

That could very well be the best and cleanest remaining example of those older wonky arrows.

I was never a fan, since they were basically reserved for split-phasing, which I find to be the work of the devil, but to say they're anything less than very interesting is an understatement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 11, 2020, 02:46:56 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 11, 2020, 10:17:40 AM
Here's something you don't see that often anymore for traffic lights. In Sandusky, Ohio (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4522211,-82.7018034,3a,15y,323.08h,101.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqz0kkbnhnJUQB9kc0yLtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
I've seen some Ohio arrow-fuckery elsewhere. It seems to be specific to that state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadsguy on October 11, 2020, 03:31:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 10, 2020, 12:34:01 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2020, 12:02:02 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 09, 2020, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 09, 2020, 09:20:17 PM
Ok, check this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8699093,-75.2511062,3a,34.3y,184.51h,93.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scf735kOHiOEXlxgD-NpXCQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) out. In Pen Argyl.

Why isn't traffic allowed to go straight there?

It is. It's just saying traffic can turn right without stopping.

PA is know for their "STOP" "EXCEPT RIGHT TURNS" signage. This i guess is their signalized version of it.

But there is a sign clearly stating "ALL TRAFFIC MUST TURN RIGHT (https://goo.gl/maps/f8637uzt5fSum2sLA)".

Yet the signal segments above the green arrows seem to be flashing red despite there being no reason to stop there. Perhaps it was once a Stop/Except Right Turn setup, but they decided to make it right turn only and forgot/didn't bother to remove/disable the flashing red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 11:16:02 AM
I didn't know NJ was getting into the bulky mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6826851,-74.2355119,3a,75.3y,36.57h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szEGn3m01mUT6EGvE0tNnbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) game.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 11:16:02 AM
I didn't know NJ was getting into the bulky mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6826851,-74.2355119,3a,75.3y,36.57h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szEGn3m01mUT6EGvE0tNnbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) game.

How could you have not known? You posted a link to one yourself:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2511088#msg2511088

Quote
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #2964 on: June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM »
ReplyQuote
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 11:39:37 AM
Quote from: Chumbawamba
– Do you suffer from long term memory loss?
– I don't remember.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:09:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 11:39:37 AM
Quote from: Chumbawamba
– Do you suffer from long term memory loss?
– I don't remember.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't keep track of all the traffic signals in NJ.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 12:13:35 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:09:21 PM
I don't keep track of all the traffic signals in NJ.

What!  And you call yourself a roadgeek...   :awesomeface:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 12:35:04 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:09:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 11:39:37 AM
Quote from: Chumbawamba
– Do you suffer from long term memory loss?
– I don't remember.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't keep track of all the traffic signals in NJ.

No one is asking you to keep track of every signal in a state. But when you post an example of one; others come back with further examples of others, and then 4 months later you state you didn't know they even existed, you're getting called out on it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:40:57 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 12:35:04 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:09:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 11:39:37 AM
Quote from: Chumbawamba
– Do you suffer from long term memory loss?
– I don't remember.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't keep track of all the traffic signals in NJ.

No one is asking you to keep track of every signal in a state. But when you post an example of one; others come back with further examples of others, and then 4 months later you state you didn't know they even existed, you're getting called out on it.
I would beg to differ but this isn't a rabbit hole I want to go down.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 12, 2020, 12:49:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 11:36:55 AM
How could you have not known?

Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 12:35:04 PM
you're getting called out on it.

Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:40:57 PM
I would beg to differ

Maybe you would beg to differ, but you really can't.  You are, in point of fact, getting called out on it.



Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 12:40:57 PM
... but this isn't a rabbit hole I want to go down.

Good.  I'm sure jeffandnicole had no ill will when posting the original reply–nor did I when posting those two lines from Amnesia.  We're all just kidding each other around here.  All too often, the lightheartedness of a comment gets lost in translation on a web forum.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: renegade on October 12, 2020, 03:44:45 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 11, 2020, 02:46:56 PM
Quote from: CJResotko on October 11, 2020, 10:17:40 AM
Here's something you don't see that often anymore for traffic lights. In Sandusky, Ohio (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4522211,-82.7018034,3a,15y,323.08h,101.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqz0kkbnhnJUQB9kc0yLtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
I've seen some Ohio arrow-fuckery elsewhere. It seems to be specific to that state.
I always thought those were pretty cool.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: skquinn on October 12, 2020, 07:00:09 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 06, 2020, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 06, 2020, 07:43:39 PM
Oh my goodness: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7537374,-95.4577105,3a,26.2y,13.86h,94.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTJvdn1OvNS7sNO_zfOZjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7539393,-95.4575452,3a,21.5y,345.38h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_cSsXSz_bKxD3Bj1pSfkXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e2
Everything about that is excessive--the backplates, the aluminum poles, the streetlights. I've seen it before, but it never fails to shock.

It's the Uptown area of Houston (the area around The Galleria shopping mall), what did you expect?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: skquinn on October 12, 2020, 08:06:38 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 25, 2020, 08:46:15 AM
I have an update about some of MaineDOT's policies regarding FYA and PPLT in general, specifically, when I asked them about the Stillwater Ave (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E1v6414R7No8Lu5cvGfCInUSOF-Zl424/view?usp=sharing) project:

Why is FYA (or any PPLT with a dedicated LT lane) across two oncoming thru lanes not permitted in Maine? 
come soon as I am still awaiting response for the comments I inquired about the Sanford signal replacement.
[...]

I am within 2-3 miles of a couple of intersections here in Houston that allow PPLT across two lanes; a few of them in fact have three oncoming lanes. Some have not yet been converted to FYA though and still have the old-style ball/arrow signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 13, 2020, 10:00:08 AM
I just stumbled across this wonky intersection with a jog (https://goo.gl/maps/giAX9qyDP96TbmJY6) in Carthage, MO, while planning an upcoming trip.

One old post-mounted stoplight per direction.  On a state highway (also Old US-66).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 13, 2020, 12:42:04 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 13, 2020, 10:00:08 AM
I just stumbled across this wonky intersection with a jog (https://goo.gl/maps/giAX9qyDP96TbmJY6) in Carthage, MO, while planning an upcoming trip.

One old post-mounted stoplight per direction.  On a state highway (also Old US-66).

Talk about a minimal install right there. It would be so easy to miss there even being a signal at this intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on October 13, 2020, 08:39:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).

That ramp looks a little off at the start too, like its gravel at the start of the it veering off
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 13, 2020, 09:09:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).

I did get a good zoom on it. Appears to just be three orb displays (https://goo.gl/maps/HAgqBR68arkNL4WZ8). I'm guessing it might be a meter of some kind?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 14, 2020, 10:18:53 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).

Nope, don't know what it's for.  The corresponding exit in the other direction (https://goo.gl/maps/VTcq62QrxfGf93xL8) has no such signal.  (By the way, the university the exit serves is currently in the process of shutting down operations, so, if the signal is campus-related, then its relevance has probably already ceased to exist.)

'Obedezca las señales' is a very common sign that's seen all over the highway network, not something specific to this location.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 15, 2020, 02:34:42 PM
Can't pinpoint exactly, but something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2364241,-90.0555851,3a,70y,333.56h,101.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr7P-U9WBFnHSn-jfa6BLLg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) is just wonky. In Kennett, MO.

Also, check out these arrows (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2366748,-90.0569667,3a,43.7y,102.52h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbyK2Z-mxKOIVD2Bd7KctmQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a block over.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2020, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 15, 2020, 02:34:42 PM
Also, check out these arrows (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2366748,-90.0569667,3a,43.7y,102.52h,90.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbyK2Z-mxKOIVD2Bd7KctmQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a block over.

That left turn signal (for the traffic from the left) is mounted very low for no obvious reason. I do like it though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 15, 2020, 07:35:47 PM
Those look okay to me. A little unconventional but effective for those locations. Though I would prefer mast-arms over span-wire.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 16, 2020, 11:52:49 PM
There may have been a more specific topic about pedestrian countdowns that go past yellow, but I can't find it.  Here the countdown goes to 4 before the light turns red, which everyone ignores anyway.  (The overheight sensor preempts the pedestrian phase.)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on October 17, 2020, 12:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2020, 09:09:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).

I did get a good zoom on it. Appears to just be three orb displays (https://goo.gl/maps/HAgqBR68arkNL4WZ8). I'm guessing it might be a meter of some kind?

I remember seeing signals alternately flashing the two outside lights and the center light used as warning lights in Mexico City. Maybe something similar with the exit ramp, since it's pretty narrow and abrupt?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on October 19, 2020, 01:13:32 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 08, 2020, 08:37:35 PM
Either this doghouse signal in Danvers, MA is running in Dallas Phasing (LEFT TURN SIGNAL & YIELD ON GREEN signs), or simply just running in protected only mode... I'll have to check it out on my next Boston run this weekend. Based on some GSV views it does also run in protected/permissive mode as well...

Nov 2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5482346,-70.9427224,3a,75y,63.84h,88.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szCRD0HzhyGeepFcxfLaG3w!2e0!5s20171101T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Sep 2018 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5482217,-70.9426907,3a,50y,63.84h,88.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCovsG3yLmu_nujc5iz1_Fw!2e0!5s20180901T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Video showing all red to protected only (https://youtu.be/uPBRJYipwhk?t=882)

That is definitely different than it used to be (I lived near there for a long time and worked in Liberty Tree Mall in the 90s but got back there relatively frequently until 2007 or so, then infrequently since).  It reminds me of some signals on US 36 in Boulder, Colorado that had doghouses for the left turn signal but a red arrow at the top, which would be better in this case (better still would be a FYA 4-stack).  It's definitely a Danvers install, not state.  I remember in the very late 80s or possibly early 90s when they replaced a lot of the signals and poles for the pole-mounts, which are now themselves almost all knocked down and replaced.  The one on the island on the other side with the yellow pole and octagon base is an oddball on Endicott St. where they had been quite meticulous once with them all appearing the same.  The Helvetica LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN sign dates to when Danvers first installed doghouses here and at Sylvan and Endicott.  They didn't know what to do at the latter intersection when they first installed them and had the green ball off when it should have been on as I recall, leading to a dark signal that would suddenly turn red while the others were green balls.  Some people would sit and wait and others just go; it is the Boston area after all so anything goes!

The intersection in question used to have a Midas muffler shop with signalized access instead of the Taco Bell which is now there.  So, heading down Endicott Street toward 128, you passed mufflers, hamburgers, mufflers, hamburgers.  (Speedy Muffler King, now Monro; Wendy's which has been there forever, losing the beads at the line area and getting a SuperBar and now having the modern look; Midas; Burger King which still looks the same after all these years.)  The signals overall are virtually the same but the left turn operation is quite odd.

If you look on Commonwealth Ave (the Liberty Tree Mall driveway at this intersection), it is amazing to see the very, very faded 128 and 114 shields (both square) still kicking from the 70s.  They looked better when I worked inside the mall and would pass them, but the signs and I were both a lot younger then. 
https://goo.gl/maps/dpWnT3VbMyGXe3257
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 19, 2020, 06:00:46 AM
Quote from: djlynch on October 17, 2020, 12:49:53 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 13, 2020, 09:09:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 13, 2020, 07:25:16 PM
Does anybody have any clue what this (https://www.google.com/maps/@18.8964347,-96.9806503,3a,30.6y,140.32h,93.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFcW4sk8qJw7ABcIH9HYs7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) is about? It's a small signal hanging from an overpass in Cordoba, Veracruz, MX. It appears to be inoperative in the GSV but is preceded by a sign that says "Obedezca las señales" (obey the signals).

I did get a good zoom on it. Appears to just be three orb displays (https://goo.gl/maps/HAgqBR68arkNL4WZ8). I'm guessing it might be a meter of some kind?

I remember seeing signals alternately flashing the two outside lights and the center light used as warning lights in Mexico City. Maybe something similar with the exit ramp, since it's pretty narrow and abrupt?

Possibly, although you'd have to wonder why they installed "OBEY THE SIGNALS" (in Spanish) if the lights are just object warning devices. And then why they aren't flashing in the GSV imagery, of which there are several pass-throughs available but none show the signal active.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on October 19, 2020, 04:10:13 PM
I think "señales" means signs, not signals. A traffic light is "semáforo". kphoger can probably correct me if I'm wrong.

I do know that "Obedezca las señales" is a standard sign that appears strewn all over Mexico and doesn't necessarily indicate anything in particular.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 19, 2020, 07:44:35 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3188696,-121.8823014,3a,27.7y,19.22h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGJFF9QkoM_32NxJPZoJyPA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) an interesting signal in San Jose, CA. The city has a lot of guy wire arms and 12-8-8 signals, as well as 8-8-8 sidemounts (often missing visors).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 19, 2020, 08:48:47 PM
Those San Jose signals are obviously very old, and poorly maintained. My guess would be they date back to the 1960's or 70's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on October 20, 2020, 01:19:49 AM
Mission Street (CA 1 in my hometown of Santa Cruz) had a few of those signals prior to their upgrade in the early 2000s.  Heck, the timing on those old signals defaulted to flashing reds and yellows during the late nights and early mornings up until they were removed!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 20, 2020, 03:56:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2020, 06:00:46 AM

Quote from: djlynch on October 17, 2020, 12:49:53 AM
I remember seeing signals alternately flashing the two outside lights and the center light used as warning lights in Mexico City. Maybe something similar with the exit ramp, since it's pretty narrow and abrupt?

Possibly, although you'd have to wonder why they installed "OBEY THE SIGNALS" (in Spanish) if the lights are just object warning devices. And then why they aren't flashing in the GSV imagery, of which there are several pass-throughs available but none show the signal active.

As I already mentioned but probably didn't make clear enough, the 'OBEDEZCA LAS SEÃ'ALES' sign is unrelated to the signal.  That sign is ubiquitous on Mexican highways.  They're all over the place, along with other ones like 'NO MANEJE CANSADO', 'NO REBASE CON RAYA CONTINUA', and a host of other nanny signs.

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 19, 2020, 04:10:13 PM
I think "señales" means signs, not signals. A traffic light is "semáforo". kphoger can probably correct me if I'm wrong.

I do know that "Obedezca las señales" is a standard sign that appears strewn all over Mexico and doesn't necessarily indicate anything in particular.

Exactly.  "Señales" means "signs".  The word for "signal" is "semáforo".  This sign means "OBEY SIGNS".



Whatever it is, GSV reveals that it was installed between August 2017 (https://goo.gl/maps/JgCmDT187hSr9fwEA) and September 2018 (https://goo.gl/maps/Y23cbtPshdVXnA51A).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
^^^
Thank you. Apparently, three years of Spanish wasn't enough for me to catch that :pan: (even after the real meaning was pointed out by Scott).

Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 20, 2020, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?

Ah, such naivete...  searching for order in chaos...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 20, 2020, 07:49:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
^^^
Thank you. Apparently, three years of Spanish wasn't enough for me to catch that :pan: (even after the real meaning was pointed out by Scott).

Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?
Like the TX "Obey warning signs--state law"?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on October 20, 2020, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 20, 2020, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?

Ah, such naivete...  searching for order in chaos...

From anything I've read about Mexican signage practices, it sounds about like what would happen if you took the MUTCD and standard fonts away from ODOT and turned them loose.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 08:32:45 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 20, 2020, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?

Ah, such naivete...  searching for order in chaos...

Wait, are you saying anytime someone says (to the effect of) "in Mexico, they...", I should just laugh? :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 20, 2020, 11:57:05 PM
Another (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.643697,-80.6967477,3a,75y,188.36h,83.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWtaP37WIp1AB6ZEZUPOfmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) all side-mount install, near the NASA airfield.
Nearby is a similar (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5259269,-80.6533606,3a,75y,72.5h,83.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szot3HIHtx1HdaYVS4jGLgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) install that looks even older.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 12:03:56 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 20, 2020, 11:57:05 PM
Another (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.643697,-80.6967477,3a,75y,188.36h,83.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWtaP37WIp1AB6ZEZUPOfmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) all side-mount install, near the NASA airfield.
Nearby is a similar (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.5259269,-80.6533606,3a,75y,72.5h,83.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szot3HIHtx1HdaYVS4jGLgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) install that looks even older.

Better signal placement than 99% of other Florida installs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 21, 2020, 09:59:38 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 20, 2020, 07:51:47 PM

Quote from: kphoger on October 20, 2020, 04:31:03 PM

Quote from: jakeroot on October 20, 2020, 04:05:39 PM
Are those signs installed with regularity every so many kilometres, or are they installed with regularity with certain conditions (off-ramps, intersections, etc)?

Ah, such naivete...  searching for order in chaos...

From anything I've read about Mexican signage practices, it sounds about like what would happen if you took the MUTCD and standard fonts away from ODOT and turned them loose.

Mmmmm.... I'm not sure I'd go that far.  Let's not forget who came up with the Craig County sign even with said MUTCD and standard fonts.



Off-topic:

For those interested, Mexico certainly does have a manual and standard fonts.  The 2014 version of the Manual for Road Signs and Safety Devices is available here (http://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Manuales/NUEVO-SENALAMIENTO/manualSenalamientoVialDispositivosSeguridad.pdf) (large .pdf warning).  Font specifications are on pages 637-670.

For .dwg files of all five series available for zip download, refer to the SCT digital workbench (http://www.sct.gob.mx/bancodigital/) and navigate through the [Letras y números para señales] sidebar.  Once you've made your selections, "Descargar" is the "Download" button.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 21, 2020, 12:59:06 PM
Look what I just found in Rolla (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9531551,-91.7715795,3a,30.4y,6.47h,92.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svYyuYWCPzqie8Uwy8u40yQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). A 12-8-12-12, a 12-8-12, and a standard 12-12-12-12.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 21, 2020, 01:07:07 PM
How common are FYA signals with only three sections (Red arrow - Steady yellow arrow - Flashing yellow)?

I just went through this intersection in Springfield, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/dou8LSmbBt3K7hoK6), and it's the first one like it I remember encountering.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 21, 2020, 02:19:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 21, 2020, 01:07:07 PM
How common are FYA signals with only three sections (Red arrow - Steady yellow arrow - Flashing yellow)?

I just went through this intersection in Springfield, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/dou8LSmbBt3K7hoK6), and it's the first one like it I remember encountering.
They (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7987191,-92.1389274,3a,53.4y,244.55h,96.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sflPsfOvo7asYZn50i0wU_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US/) are (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5925667,-90.5019949,3a,75y,150.99h,93.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTkfmFhkCXPnnMrCZWEeZIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) fairly (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5472491,-90.3477931,3a,42.1y,145.54h,94.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suiC3nUWinxuirw5B3Lrpvw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) common (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5562824,-90.3953261,3a,24.1y,83.97h,90.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF9uJuWLE-aiMpcJYPyUkyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) in (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4833551,-90.3848605,3a,54.1y,105.52h,94.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMef3KHr5hg2mRU_QLWWgxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) Missouri (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4944172,-90.345018,3a,41.4y,120.87h,88.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAV7ulAKvDtRstXWiwhzvaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on October 21, 2020, 02:27:27 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 21, 2020, 02:19:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 21, 2020, 01:07:07 PM
How common are FYA signals with only three sections (Red arrow - Steady yellow arrow - Flashing yellow)?

I just went through this intersection in Springfield, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/dou8LSmbBt3K7hoK6), and it's the first one like it I remember encountering.
They (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7987191,-92.1389274,3a,53.4y,244.55h,96.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sflPsfOvo7asYZn50i0wU_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US/) are (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5925667,-90.5019949,3a,75y,150.99h,93.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTkfmFhkCXPnnMrCZWEeZIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) fairly (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5472491,-90.3477931,3a,42.1y,145.54h,94.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suiC3nUWinxuirw5B3Lrpvw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) common (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5562824,-90.3953261,3a,24.1y,83.97h,90.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF9uJuWLE-aiMpcJYPyUkyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) in (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4833551,-90.3848605,3a,54.1y,105.52h,94.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMef3KHr5hg2mRU_QLWWgxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) Missouri (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4944172,-90.345018,3a,41.4y,120.87h,88.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAV7ulAKvDtRstXWiwhzvaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US/).

Arkansas has a few, as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:25:36 PM
I've seen some in WA as well.

One notable approach (both directions of Mercer where it meets Queen Anne Ave N) in Seattle has seen rapid change, with a non-protected FYA in play for a while:

2011: fully permissive 'yield on green' (https://goo.gl/maps/mzAHHuRhT7bDK4rd7)
early 2014: full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/FDbARRn9CLmkQhjPA)
late 2014: three-section FYA, no protected phase (https://goo.gl/maps/XfESCAvLp8UAo15a6)
2017: back to full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/Q2kpPU1CxYQrQfJB6)
today: fully protected (no GSV imagery), left on red OK after stop (per WA law).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 21, 2020, 03:57:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:25:36 PM
I've seen some in WA as well.

One notable approach (both directions of Mercer where it meets Queen Anne Ave N) in Seattle has seen rapid change, with a non-protected FYA in play for a while:

2011: fully permissive 'yield on green' (https://goo.gl/maps/mzAHHuRhT7bDK4rd7)
early 2014: full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/FDbARRn9CLmkQhjPA)
late 2014: three-section FYA, no protected phase (https://goo.gl/maps/XfESCAvLp8UAo15a6)
2017: back to full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/Q2kpPU1CxYQrQfJB6)
today: fully protected (no GSV imagery), left on red OK after stop (per WA law).

My only question is if they installed a full FYA signal in 2014 and 2017, why didn't they just change the programming to permissive only (late 2014) and protected only (present) without having to swap out the heads? Unless I'm missing something, I thought that was one of the benefits of FYA, having the luxury of switching between protected only, permissive only and PPLT with just some programming changes in the controller.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 09:40:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 21, 2020, 03:57:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:25:36 PM
I've seen some in WA as well.

One notable approach (both directions of Mercer where it meets Queen Anne Ave N) in Seattle has seen rapid change, with a non-protected FYA in play for a while:

2011: fully permissive 'yield on green' (https://goo.gl/maps/mzAHHuRhT7bDK4rd7)
early 2014: full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/FDbARRn9CLmkQhjPA)
late 2014: three-section FYA, no protected phase (https://goo.gl/maps/XfESCAvLp8UAo15a6)
2017: back to full FYA signal (https://goo.gl/maps/Q2kpPU1CxYQrQfJB6)
today: fully protected (no GSV imagery), left on red OK after stop (per WA law).

My only question is if they installed a full FYA signal in 2014 and 2017, why didn't they just change the programming to permissive only (late 2014) and protected only (present) without having to swap out the heads? Unless I'm missing something, I thought that was one of the benefits of FYA, having the luxury of switching between protected only, permissive only and PPLT with just some programming changes in the controller.

My guess is that, when they switched Mercer from one-way to two-way, they realized they would never have enough green time to use a green arrow at any point, so the entire signal was just removed (or perhaps only the green arrow portion was removed?). Still, yeah, they could have kept the original signal. Why exactly they got rid of it, instead of changing its operation, I couldn't say.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 11:49:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

I see that it's also like that on Germania St, on the other side of the channel.

Certainly an interesting situation. Given the other install like this posted before, I'm guessing this must be a legal combo?

Side-note: great signal placement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 23, 2020, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

When uploading from mobile, please let us know where to look.  This is what pulled up for me, and I do indeed see pavement every day.  (I figured it out eventually.)

(https://i.imgur.com/fbR5iN1.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: renegade on October 23, 2020, 03:23:47 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.
I see pavement every day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 24, 2020, 11:35:12 PM
Well okay:

https://youtu.be/NMXMfC_WP_E


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on October 25, 2020, 05:49:18 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 24, 2020, 11:35:12 PM
Well okay:

https://youtu.be/NMXMfC_WP_E


iPhone

Interesting! I wonder if this was programmed by a Japanese traffic engineer.

Japan has the unusual standard of displaying green arrows alongside a red ball and then terminating them with the yellow ball.

https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74 (https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 25, 2020, 12:26:53 PM
^^^
That's a great point! Japan was the first thing I thought of when I watched the video. How odd, although drivers seem to be figuring it out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 04:29:18 PM
Odd light placement and a miniscule street sign at Kuda Ct/Watson Rd. https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5788623,-90.3276109,3a,27.5y,216.54h,93.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIEz6lBus1oIita2cmCmQPg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on October 25, 2020, 07:04:53 PM
Don't know if I posted this previously:
Sedalia, MO 2002  (no longer exist)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3414/3205748984_5bbd6d83d6_c_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3268/3204548644_82cf2a59d4_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 25, 2020, 08:56:46 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 04:29:18 PM
Odd light placement and a miniscule street sign at Kuda Ct/Watson Rd. https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5788623,-90.3276109,3a,27.5y,216.54h,93.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIEz6lBus1oIita2cmCmQPg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Cali-style there. I would think near-side on a pole would have had better visibility.

Quote from: US71 on October 25, 2020, 07:04:53 PM
Don't know if I posted this previously:
Sedalia, MO 2002  (no longer exist)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3414/3205748984_5bbd6d83d6_c_d.jpg) (https://live.staticflickr.com/3268/3204548644_82cf2a59d4_z_d.jpg)

I don't know either, but those are lovely. I can see they were still there as of 2008 (https://goo.gl/maps/gmJZqGhyAbCfMokY9). The signals that replaced them don't look much newer than about 2011.

I think the "wait" with the red border around it is my favorite part, but that weirdly-shaped green orb is pretty interesting too. GSV shows the red orbs for a couple approaches having the same fading issue (if that's what it is).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 26, 2020, 01:47:51 PM
Quote from: US71 on October 25, 2020, 07:04:53 PM
Don't know if I posted this previously:
Sedalia, MO 2002  (no longer exist)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3414/3205748984_5bbd6d83d6_c_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3268/3204548644_82cf2a59d4_z_d.jpg)

That's crazy to think those pictures was taken in 2002. Looks like it should be much older than that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on October 26, 2020, 02:59:01 PM
I'm just amazed that Ford station wagon was still running in 2002.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 27, 2020, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: US71 on October 25, 2020, 07:04:53 PM
Don't know if I posted this previously:
Sedalia, MO 2002  (no longer exist)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3414/3205748984_5bbd6d83d6_c_d.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3268/3204548644_82cf2a59d4_z_d.jpg)
That "wait" signal is really awesome. I've not seen one like that before. Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 28, 2020, 10:06:54 AM
Jake you know anything about this light:

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2753607,-122.465339,3a,37.7y,4.69h,85.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suAYVV0RBaLtFE1K3VOjZuA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:16:51 AM
Quote from: Jet380 on October 25, 2020, 05:49:18 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 24, 2020, 11:35:12 PM
Well okay:

https://youtu.be/NMXMfC_WP_E


iPhone

Interesting! I wonder if this was programmed by a Japanese traffic engineer.

Japan has the unusual standard of displaying green arrows alongside a red ball and then terminating them with the yellow ball.

https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74 (https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74)

The newer signals in MA are quite nice.  Many of the older signals, like this one, are just plain weird.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:42:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 11:49:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

I see that it's also like that on Germania St, on the other side of the channel.

Certainly an interesting situation. Given the other install like this posted before, I'm guessing this must be a legal combo?

Side-note: great signal placement.

These signals are interesting, but given that we want to avoid driver confusion, similar situations should probably just feature a 4-aspect FYA signal (where the red arrow never lights up).

Another interesting aspect is that they even put an interchange here in the first place.  From I-55's perspective, this is a normal diamond interchange.  But how do they expect people to be able to get to I-55 north from here?  It would seem to make more sense to not put an entrance and exit so close to the channel so that people can use both directions of the freeway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 28, 2020, 02:58:17 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 28, 2020, 10:06:54 AM
Jake you know anything about this light:

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2753607,-122.465339,3a,37.7y,4.69h,85.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suAYVV0RBaLtFE1K3VOjZuA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think it was brought up before.

The red orb on top is for traffic on the far side of the railway crossing, and the lower red orb is for traffic at the stop line. The setup is out of date and should be replaced with a standard three-orb RYG setup. Despite having two red orbs, both are difficult to see in practice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 28, 2020, 03:02:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:42:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 11:49:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

I see that it's also like that on Germania St, on the other side of the channel.

Certainly an interesting situation. Given the other install like this posted before, I'm guessing this must be a legal combo?

Side-note: great signal placement.

These signals are interesting, but given that we want to avoid driver confusion, similar situations should probably just feature a 4-aspect FYA signal (where the red arrow never lights up).

Another interesting aspect is that they even put an interchange here in the first place.  From I-55's perspective, this is a normal diamond interchange.  But how do they expect people to be able to get to I-55 north from here?  It would seem to make more sense to not put an entrance and exit so close to the channel so that people can use both directions of the freeway.

I think an FYA signal would be acceptable for Germania St, although not necessarily allowed on the other side since the left turn from Carondolet involves an option lane.

I have to wonder not just about the interchange itself, but how busy those left turns actually are. St Louis traffic never really struck me as "busy", and these two interchanges seem pretty quiet even by STL standards. I really wonder if it's necessary to even have those signals anymore.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 28, 2020, 08:54:34 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:16:51 AM
Quote from: Jet380 on October 25, 2020, 05:49:18 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 24, 2020, 11:35:12 PM
Well okay:

https://youtu.be/NMXMfC_WP_E


iPhone

Interesting! I wonder if this was programmed by a Japanese traffic engineer.

Japan has the unusual standard of displaying green arrows alongside a red ball and then terminating them with the yellow ball.

https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74 (https://youtu.be/nzBtz_WeAC4?t=74)

The newer signals in MA are quite nice.  Many of the older signals, like this one, are just plain weird.
Yeah our old lights are so embarrassing tbh compared to our new ones.

Old: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201029/d7552be84787e16761e9ec8f83fc6978.jpg)

New:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201029/0bb5d796d60ae03b0dd9a08d614e8ff9.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on October 28, 2020, 11:28:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 28, 2020, 03:02:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:42:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 11:49:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

I see that it's also like that on Germania St, on the other side of the channel.

Certainly an interesting situation. Given the other install like this posted before, I'm guessing this must be a legal combo?

Side-note: great signal placement.

These signals are interesting, but given that we want to avoid driver confusion, similar situations should probably just feature a 4-aspect FYA signal (where the red arrow never lights up).

Another interesting aspect is that they even put an interchange here in the first place.  From I-55's perspective, this is a normal diamond interchange.  But how do they expect people to be able to get to I-55 north from here?  It would seem to make more sense to not put an entrance and exit so close to the channel so that people can use both directions of the freeway.

I think an FYA signal would be acceptable for Germania St, although not necessarily allowed on the other side since the left turn from Carondolet involves an option lane.

I have to wonder not just about the interchange itself, but how busy those left turns actually are. St Louis traffic never really struck me as "busy", and these two interchanges seem pretty quiet even by STL standards. I really wonder if it's necessary to even have those signals anymore.
I just noticed Germania has one of the span wires attached to a billboard pole (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5528681,-90.2702107,3a,79.8y,219.72h,94.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3ushdcVOiGcMeXpglT1LMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 29, 2020, 01:20:04 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 28, 2020, 11:28:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 28, 2020, 03:02:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 28, 2020, 11:42:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 22, 2020, 11:49:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 22, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5534,-90.2715092,3a,27.4y,-11.07h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stW1Ubaf_Ic58ovV47xOt9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) something you don't see every day.

I see that it's also like that on Germania St, on the other side of the channel.

Certainly an interesting situation. Given the other install like this posted before, I'm guessing this must be a legal combo?

Side-note: great signal placement.

These signals are interesting, but given that we want to avoid driver confusion, similar situations should probably just feature a 4-aspect FYA signal (where the red arrow never lights up).

Another interesting aspect is that they even put an interchange here in the first place.  From I-55's perspective, this is a normal diamond interchange.  But how do they expect people to be able to get to I-55 north from here?  It would seem to make more sense to not put an entrance and exit so close to the channel so that people can use both directions of the freeway.

I think an FYA signal would be acceptable for Germania St, although not necessarily allowed on the other side since the left turn from Carondolet involves an option lane.

I have to wonder not just about the interchange itself, but how busy those left turns actually are. St Louis traffic never really struck me as "busy", and these two interchanges seem pretty quiet even by STL standards. I really wonder if it's necessary to even have those signals anymore.
I just noticed Germania has one of the span wires attached to a billboard pole (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5528681,-90.2702107,3a,79.8y,219.72h,94.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3ushdcVOiGcMeXpglT1LMA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).

I think that's actually attached to a power pole behind one of the signal masts (https://goo.gl/maps/XsTHuGe5xgnPiFK99). If you follow the wire from the billboard, you can see it run behind the signal mast and into the power pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 29, 2020, 08:55:22 PM
Why are NYC's traffic lights so out of date?

I feel like this needs to be said because new NYC installs still use 8-inch signals AFAIK, and no signal per lane is ever followed basically. In the last 20 years, I've only seen the addition of countdown crosswalks, FYAs (Thank god!), and bicycle signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 29, 2020, 09:17:53 PM
While on the topic of NYC traffic lights, uhhh what is going on here: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7203695,-73.9939986,3a,16.4y,316.06h,97.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWf4dmukbO-FGFxncwkEY_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 29, 2020, 10:16:43 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 29, 2020, 08:55:22 PM
Why are NYC's traffic lights so out of date?

I feel like this needs to be said because new NYC installs still use 8-inch signals AFAIK, and no signal per lane is ever followed basically. In the last 20 years, I've only seen the addition of countdown crosswalks, FYAs (Thank god!), and bicycle signals.

8" signals are permitted on 30 mph and slower roadways when the light is no more than 120 feet from the stop line.

The 1 signal per lane requirement is when the speed limit or 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or greater.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 29, 2020, 10:25:28 PM
J&N, the one signal per lane as it relates to the 85th percentile speed is a recommendation, not a required standard. See. Sec. 4D-11, table 4D-1 on P.461 of the 2009 manual.

The only actual standard (requirement) is for a minimum of two signals for every approach. There are of course, many recommendations for additional heads in various situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 29, 2020, 10:49:01 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on October 29, 2020, 10:25:28 PM
J&N, the one signal per lane as it relates to the 85th percentile speed is a recommendation, not a required standard. See. Sec. 4D-11, table 4D-1 on P.461 of the 2009 manual.

The only actual standard (requirement) is for a minimum of two signals for every approach. There are of course, many recommendations for additional heads in various situations.

True, bad wording on my part.

Either way, either standard/recommendation most likely is not applicable to the NYC intersections referenced above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 30, 2020, 12:52:38 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 29, 2020, 08:55:22 PM
Why are NYC's traffic lights so out of date?

I feel like this needs to be said because new NYC installs still use 8-inch signals AFAIK, and no signal per lane is ever followed basically. In the last 20 years, I've only seen the addition of countdown crosswalks, FYAs (Thank god!), and bicycle signals.

In the span wire thread, I made this point about 8 inch signals:

Quote from: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 12:53:38 AM
I think the primary argument [for British Columbia recommending 8-inch/200mm signals for decades] was that 300mm signals did not provide enough additional visibility for them to absolutely require it. 300mm signals have always been an option, and they've been installed under all circumstances (primary, secondary, auxiliary) for decades. The difference being that it's never been a requirement. It's similar to the "category b" section of MUTCD 2E: destinations can be 20" UC, but this is not strictly necessary, as 16" UC provides sufficient readability under most circumstances. Similarly, 200mm signals provide sufficient visibility under most circumstances. I suspect the change to 300mm signals will make signals cheaper and easier to install, especially in terms of mounting hardware, with improved visibility being only a small benefit (and only under certain circumstances at that).

Basically: it's really not necessary to use 12 inch signals as they do not provide a substantial benefit under a certain speed and within a certain distance of the stop line.

We wouldn't require signals right on the stop line to be 12 inches, right? That would be overkill (WSDOT calls for 8 inch signal heads for stop-line signals (https://goo.gl/maps/Zx2KWrGNkjvgd2xj9)). The permitting of 8 inch arrows is under very specific circumstances (only so far from the stop line, and only under certain speeds) because, within those circumstances, 8 inch signals are perfectly visible. 12 inch signal heads would be overkill. The same way that 48" stop signs would be overkill at a small neighborhood intersection :-D.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 01, 2020, 06:56:05 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 29, 2020, 09:17:53 PM
While on the topic of NYC traffic lights, uhhh what is going on here: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7203695,-73.9939986,3a,16.4y,316.06h,97.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWf4dmukbO-FGFxncwkEY_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Theres other examples of this setup, mostly where traffic gets a lagging or on-red/overlap protected right

Not saying its right but....

https://maps.app.goo.gl/M5HbDKCJ7hkbdooe9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 03, 2020, 09:48:51 AM
HAWK signal on a span wire in Garden City, Georgia.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50563329062/in/dateposted-public/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 03, 2020, 12:27:41 PM
Get a load of this (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.9920034,-102.1004616,3a,31.9y,256.43h,95.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saCRcOB57MJu5OChWwuI1SA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). Midland, TX.

Also; does anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352559,-102.0590104,3a,22.7y,85.09h,93.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soIdl0e_PWKMEbVNYVkTqtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) works? There's a three section FYA (with a red ball) and a five-section signal that says "thru proceed on flashing yellow."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 03, 2020, 02:57:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 03, 2020, 12:27:41 PM
Also; does anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352559,-102.0590104,3a,22.7y,85.09h,93.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soIdl0e_PWKMEbVNYVkTqtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) works? There's a three section FYA (with a red ball) and a five-section signal that says "thru proceed on flashing yellow."

So, the opposing left has an FYA signal, so the flashing yellow orb is not meant to give precedent to someone else.

My guess is that the gate is sometimes closed, so instead of having a green orb which may inadvertently lead to drivers going full speed into the gate, they installed flashing yellow orbs to encourage traffic to use caution when going straight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 04, 2020, 08:56:55 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 03, 2020, 09:48:51 AM
HAWK signal on a span wire in Garden City, Georgia.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50563329062/in/dateposted-public/

I'm actually surprised GA installed a HAWK on a wire span. It would've made more sense to me (sad to say) if one of the Carolinas would've done it first.

Quote from: jakeroot on November 03, 2020, 02:57:10 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 03, 2020, 12:27:41 PM
Also; does anyone know how this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352559,-102.0590104,3a,22.7y,85.09h,93.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soIdl0e_PWKMEbVNYVkTqtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) works? There's a three section FYA (with a red ball) and a five-section signal that says "thru proceed on flashing yellow."

So, the opposing left has an FYA signal, so the flashing yellow orb is not meant to give precedent to someone else.

My guess is that the gate is sometimes closed, so instead of having a green orb which may inadvertently lead to drivers going full speed into the gate, they installed flashing yellow orbs to encourage traffic to use caution when going straight.

That's what I was thinking as well. Still an odd install.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 04, 2020, 05:44:28 PM
Just came across this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2385458,-101.4655005,3a,75y,352.44h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUvwxHZUlNqRoCoe3rY-wBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) DC-style install in Big Spring, TX.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 04, 2020, 05:59:01 PM
Also out of West Texas (Sweetwater): this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.472364,-100.4085506,3a,81.3y,333.74h,92.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRFAy58TSXrbUlLG15wpbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) ancient four-way beacon.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 04, 2020, 06:26:11 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 04, 2020, 05:44:28 PM
Just came across this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2385458,-101.4655005,3a,75y,352.44h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUvwxHZUlNqRoCoe3rY-wBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) DC-style install in Big Spring, TX.

Hmmm. That's very odd. I must wonder why didn't they just rotate the left-most signal on each pole 90 degrees clockwise? That way there'd be two green orbs for each approach, as there is now, but there'd be one on each side of the approach rather than all on the right.

For the record, I recognize that some municipalities avoid posting solid green orbs on the left-most side of an intersection, but this rule is generally disregarded when only pole-mounted signals are used.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 01:06:46 AM
Flashing yellow bike signal, and 4 section signal with a flashing right arrow in the bottom section. WTH MN?
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473283,-93.0887404,3a,75y,170.68h,90.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saABzKVarAMUIiK1BvwUAng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 07, 2020, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 01:06:46 AM
Flashing yellow bike signal, and 4 section signal with a flashing right arrow in the bottom section. WTH MN?
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473283,-93.0887404,3a,75y,170.68h,90.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saABzKVarAMUIiK1BvwUAng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think that 4-section signal is for regular traffic, and the flashing yellow right arrow reinforces the need to yield when turning right (to the cycle path). Seems like a clean and straightforward setup to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 07, 2020, 05:28:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 04, 2020, 06:26:11 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 04, 2020, 05:44:28 PM
Just came across this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2385458,-101.4655005,3a,75y,352.44h,89.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUvwxHZUlNqRoCoe3rY-wBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) DC-style install in Big Spring, TX.

Hmmm. That's very odd. I must wonder why didn't they just rotate the left-most signal on each pole 90 degrees clockwise? That way there'd be two green orbs for each approach, as there is now, but there'd be one on each side of the approach rather than all on the right.

For the record, I recognize that some municipalities avoid posting solid green orbs on the left-most side of an intersection, but this rule is generally disregarded when only pole-mounted signals are used.

That installation is not compliant when you consider signal head separation. But jakeroot's suggestion would be an easy fix to bring this into compliance (obviously it also takes some rewiring). But I almost question whether the signal is needed at all...

Quote from: jakeroot on November 07, 2020, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 01:06:46 AM
Flashing yellow bike signal, and 4 section signal with a flashing right arrow in the bottom section. WTH MN?
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473283,-93.0887404,3a,75y,170.68h,90.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saABzKVarAMUIiK1BvwUAng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think that 4-section signal is for regular traffic, and the flashing yellow right arrow reinforces the need to yield when turning right (to the cycle path). Seems like a clean and straightforward setup to me.

It might not be a MUTCD-standard setup, but I like this as well. Since there's not dedicated turn lanes, you can't use an all-arrow display, so this seems to be the next best way to call attention that drivers must yield across the bike lane using signalization. There's even a similar left turn implementation (https://goo.gl/maps/gqXu2RTKvotcBXmG8) several blocks away where the street has two-way travel.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 05:51:25 PM
My issue with those signals is not the 4 section with the FYA section, but the Flashing yellow bike signal. Bikes should always have a green instead; it's dangerous to make bikes yield. It's weird.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 11:16:16 PM
This one is really cool:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8870279,-77.0499678,3a,28.3y,171.04h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85z7Kx8NfNQ8XM9KQ8ikDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 05:51:25 PM
My issue with those signals is not the 4 section with the FYA section, but the Flashing yellow bike signal. Bikes should always have a green instead; it's dangerous to make bikes yield. It's weird.


iPhone

Impossible for a bike signal to always be green. By default, cross traffic would never be permitted to cross then.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 11:16:16 PM
This one is really cool:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8870279,-77.0499678,3a,28.3y,171.04h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85z7Kx8NfNQ8XM9KQ8ikDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Referring to the worded Don't Walk sign? That was the previous standard for a Walk/Don't Walk sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 08, 2020, 08:40:34 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 05:51:25 PM
My issue with those signals is not the 4 section with the FYA section, but the Flashing yellow bike signal. Bikes should always have a green instead; it's dangerous to make bikes yield. It's weird.
iPhone
Impossible for a bike signal to always be green. By default, cross-traffic would never be permitted to cross then.

I want to take a guess that maybe the bikes and pedestrians have either a leading or lagging protected interval for a few seconds, hence the reason for having the green indication?

Examples: 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9506229,-93.0919026,3a,26.1y,152.46h,87.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfcsW-yCFKwZDXUKqzykcyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9488704,-93.090207,3a,75y,190.28h,89.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGANp90au9pZDK8fHNbRBPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9514042,-93.0925984,3a,22.9y,159.29h,88.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI0zBlAjkLVNRohnpTsxrug!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Since I'm guessing the green ball + flashing yellow arrow in both of those examples for motor vehicles are permissive only, and end simultaneously, is there a need for a steady yellow arrow, or can both be terminated with circular yellow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 08, 2020, 08:43:37 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 11:16:16 PM
This one is really cool:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8870279,-77.0499678,3a,28.3y,171.04h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85z7Kx8NfNQ8XM9KQ8ikDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Referring to the worded Don't Walk sign? That was the previous standard for a Walk/Don't Walk sign.

I'm also taking a wild guess that those are 3M pedestrian signals, judging from the housing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 09:01:12 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 08, 2020, 08:43:37 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 11:16:16 PM
This one is really cool:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8870279,-77.0499678,3a,28.3y,171.04h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85z7Kx8NfNQ8XM9KQ8ikDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Referring to the worded Don't Walk sign? That was the previous standard for a Walk/Don't Walk sign.

I'm also taking a wild guess that those are 3M pedestrian signals, judging from the housing.

Nah. Again, that was the standard look of ped signals before the "Man/Hand" signals became standard. There was some variations of housing for pedestrians signals with words, but two square housings like this was one of the more common setups.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 08, 2020, 09:58:59 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 08, 2020, 08:43:37 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 11:16:16 PM
This one is really cool:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8870279,-77.0499678,3a,28.3y,171.04h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85z7Kx8NfNQ8XM9KQ8ikDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Referring to the worded Don't Walk sign? That was the previous standard for a Walk/Don't Walk sign.

I'm also taking a wild guess that those are 3M pedestrian signals, judging from the housing.
Correct. I never understood why anyone would need these tho


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on November 08, 2020, 11:41:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 07, 2020, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 01:06:46 AM
Flashing yellow bike signal, and 4 section signal with a flashing right arrow in the bottom section. WTH MN?
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473283,-93.0887404,3a,75y,170.68h,90.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saABzKVarAMUIiK1BvwUAng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think that 4-section signal is for regular traffic, and the flashing yellow right arrow reinforces the need to yield when turning right (to the cycle path). Seems like a clean and straightforward setup to me.

The flashing yellow bicycle signal may be part of an FHWA approved experiment - see https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/reqdetails.asp?id=1460 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/reqdetails.asp?id=1460).

There are also a number of experiments where there are conflicts with the green bicycle indication.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 08, 2020, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 08, 2020, 08:40:34 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 08, 2020, 01:03:39 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 05:51:25 PM
My issue with those signals is not the 4 section with the FYA section, but the Flashing yellow bike signal. Bikes should always have a green instead; it's dangerous to make bikes yield. It's weird.
iPhone
Impossible for a bike signal to always be green. By default, cross-traffic would never be permitted to cross then.

I want to take a guess that maybe the bikes and pedestrians have either a leading or lagging protected interval for a few seconds, hence the reason for having the green indication?

Examples: 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9506229,-93.0919026,3a,26.1y,152.46h,87.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfcsW-yCFKwZDXUKqzykcyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9488704,-93.090207,3a,75y,190.28h,89.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGANp90au9pZDK8fHNbRBPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9514042,-93.0925984,3a,22.9y,159.29h,88.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI0zBlAjkLVNRohnpTsxrug!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Since I'm guessing the green ball + flashing yellow arrow in both of those examples for motor vehicles are permissive only, and end simultaneously, is there a need for a steady yellow arrow, or can both be terminated with circular yellow?

Why do those signals use a red ball for the right turn instead of an arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 09, 2020, 07:58:20 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 08, 2020, 11:23:31 PM
Why do those signals use a red ball for the right turn instead of an arrow?

I'm not sure about MN's stance on turning right (and left from one way to one way) on a red arrow after stop, but in states where right on red arrow is prohibited, but the agency wants to use an LPI (can include NTOR) but allow right on red when the cross street has it's phase, this is the type of FYA signal to use to allow separate signal control from other movements (left and thru).

Refer to MUTCD Figure 4D-19 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_19_longdesc.htm) for this configuration. The red ball must be visibility limited or louvred when operating as a dedicated right turn signal, otherwise, the RIGHT TURN SIGNAL is required.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on November 09, 2020, 08:04:49 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 09, 2020, 07:58:20 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 08, 2020, 11:23:31 PM
Why do those signals use a red ball for the right turn instead of an arrow?

I'm not sure about MN's stance on turning right (and left from one way to one way) on a red arrow after stop, but in states where right on red arrow is prohibited, but the agency wants to use an LPI (can include NTOR) but allow right on red when the cross street has it's phase, this is the type of FYA signal to use to allow separate signal control from other movements (left and thru).

Refer to MUTCD Figure 4D-19 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_19_longdesc.htm) for this configuration. The red ball must be visibility limited or louvred when operating as a dedicated right turn signal, otherwise, the RIGHT TURN SIGNAL is required.

As I've said before, if MN is a "no turn on red arrow" state, it should be a solid red arrow when RTOR is prohibited and a flashing red arrow when it is allowed. I don't know of a single signal that actually does this (switching between flashing/solid instead of using a light-up NTOR sign), but the meanings of flashing and solid red arrows are already defined.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 09, 2020, 12:50:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 07, 2020, 05:28:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 07, 2020, 01:09:57 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 01:06:46 AM
Flashing yellow bike signal, and 4 section signal with a flashing right arrow in the bottom section. WTH MN?
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473283,-93.0887404,3a,75y,170.68h,90.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saABzKVarAMUIiK1BvwUAng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I think that 4-section signal is for regular traffic, and the flashing yellow right arrow reinforces the need to yield when turning right (to the cycle path). Seems like a clean and straightforward setup to me.

It might not be a MUTCD-standard setup, but I like this as well. Since there's not dedicated turn lanes, you can't use an all-arrow display, so this seems to be the next best way to call attention that drivers must yield across the bike lane using signalization. There's even a similar left turn implementation (https://goo.gl/maps/gqXu2RTKvotcBXmG8) several blocks away where the street has two-way travel.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 07, 2020, 05:51:25 PM
My issue with those signals is not the 4 section with the FYA section, but the Flashing yellow bike signal. Bikes should always have a green instead; it's dangerous to make bikes yield. It's weird.

I don't think the purpose of the flashing yellow bike signal is to make bikes yield. I think it's used to alert cyclists, much like a solid yellow orb for traffic, that you can proceed with the right-of-way, but you should exercise caution while doing so. As is the case with solid yellow orbs, there is the possibility of cross-traffic. You still have the right-of-way, but they want to keep you alert.

In Alexandria, VA, there is a cycle path that parallels the GW Pkwy. The pathway manages to avoid intersecting with the parkway for the most part, but at Thornton Road south of the beltway (may not actually be part of GW Pkwy...DC natives: help!!), where the left turns off the parkway are "yield on green", the cycle path has a flashing yellow orb in place of a green orb (https://goo.gl/maps/sLT2Pox8PtVHHY2G6). I live a bit north of here and ride my bike around here, but haven't been this far south yet to actually see it and take a picture of it yet. Until you posted those examples from St Paul, I'd never seen them anywhere else.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 09, 2020, 01:27:06 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 09, 2020, 08:04:49 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 09, 2020, 07:58:20 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 08, 2020, 11:23:31 PM
Why do those signals use a red ball for the right turn instead of an arrow?

I'm not sure about MN's stance on turning right (and left from one way to one way) on a red arrow after stop, but in states where right on red arrow is prohibited, but the agency wants to use an LPI (can include NTOR) but allow right on red when the cross street has it's phase, this is the type of FYA signal to use to allow separate signal control from other movements (left and thru).

Refer to MUTCD Figure 4D-19 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_19_longdesc.htm) for this configuration. The red ball must be visibility limited or louvred when operating as a dedicated right turn signal, otherwise, the RIGHT TURN SIGNAL is required.

As I've said before, if MN is a "no turn on red arrow" state, it should be a solid red arrow when RTOR is prohibited and a flashing red arrow when it is allowed. I don't know of a single signal that actually does this (switching between flashing/solid instead of using a light-up NTOR sign), but the meanings of flashing and solid red arrows are already defined.

At the very least, they could use a red arrow but then install "right on red OK after stop" signage, if they don't feel like making it flash. Although yes, I think a flashing red arrow would be better overall.

I don't fully understand the idea of installing a dedicated turn signal with red orbs to allow turns on red, with an accompanying "xxx TURN SIGNAL" sign, when an arrow signal and accompanying "turn on red arrow OK after stop" sign could be used instead. Same number of lenses and signs, but at least you wouldn't have a weird green orb + red orb combo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 09, 2020, 10:26:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 09, 2020, 01:27:06 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 09, 2020, 08:04:49 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 09, 2020, 07:58:20 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on November 08, 2020, 11:23:31 PM
Why do those signals use a red ball for the right turn instead of an arrow?

I'm not sure about MN's stance on turning right (and left from one way to one way) on a red arrow after stop, but in states where right on red arrow is prohibited, but the agency wants to use an LPI (can include NTOR) but allow right on red when the cross street has it's phase, this is the type of FYA signal to use to allow separate signal control from other movements (left and thru).

Refer to MUTCD Figure 4D-19 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4d_19_longdesc.htm) for this configuration. The red ball must be visibility limited or louvred when operating as a dedicated right turn signal, otherwise, the RIGHT TURN SIGNAL is required.

As I've said before, if MN is a "no turn on red arrow" state, it should be a solid red arrow when RTOR is prohibited and a flashing red arrow when it is allowed. I don't know of a single signal that actually does this (switching between flashing/solid instead of using a light-up NTOR sign), but the meanings of flashing and solid red arrows are already defined.

At the very least, they could use a red arrow but then install "right on red OK after stop" signage, if they don't feel like making it flash. Although yes, I think a flashing red arrow would be better overall.

I don't fully understand the idea of installing a dedicated turn signal with red orbs to allow turns on red, with an accompanying "xxx TURN SIGNAL" sign, when an arrow signal and accompanying "turn on red arrow OK after stop" sign could be used instead. Same number of lenses and signs, but at least you wouldn't have a weird green orb + red orb combo.
Agreed Jake. I hate left turn signal and right turn signal signs.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 10, 2020, 04:01:41 PM
Found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5190437,-94.6848929,3a,21.6y,296.38h,91.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPN3-w-aBL0PsecwRWzWDQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) Wisconsin-style 6-aspect signal in Longview, TX, complete with a "Left Turn Yield" blank-out sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on November 10, 2020, 04:17:06 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 10, 2020, 04:01:41 PM
Found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5190437,-94.6848929,3a,21.6y,296.38h,91.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPN3-w-aBL0PsecwRWzWDQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) Wisconsin-style 6-aspect signal in Longview, TX, complete with a "Left Turn Yield" blank-out sign.

Side by side is rare.  It's normally one vertical signal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 10, 2020, 10:07:50 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 10, 2020, 04:01:41 PM
Found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5190437,-94.6848929,3a,21.6y,296.38h,91.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPN3-w-aBL0PsecwRWzWDQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) Wisconsin-style 6-aspect signal in Longview, TX, complete with a "Left Turn Yield" blank-out sign.

Perhaps the first (and maybe only) double-red doghouse/side-by-side?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 10, 2020, 10:10:35 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 10, 2020, 10:07:50 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 10, 2020, 04:01:41 PM
Found this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5190437,-94.6848929,3a,21.6y,296.38h,91.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snPN3-w-aBL0PsecwRWzWDQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) Wisconsin-style 6-aspect signal in Longview, TX, complete with a "Left Turn Yield" blank-out sign.

Perhaps the first (and maybe only) double-red doghouse/side-by-side?
May very well be (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5192623,-94.6853104,3a,23.6y,321.53h,87.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQcqkP8E-wH-hWkWUXggjQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/). I scoured Longview for others like it but came back empty-handed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 12, 2020, 04:34:17 PM
I found a traffic signal in Brewer ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7720164,-68.7294515,3a,16.7y,63.9h,93.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D301.4413%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), in which the protected only right turn causes yellow trap on the oncoming permissive left turn when its phase get's recalled. The right turn operates in protected only mode and you can only turn right on the green arrow (ME law prohibits right turn on red arrow), even though traffic on Dirigo Dr is usually super light. And it dosen't even operate as a normal right turn overlap when the cross street gets it's phase...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 12, 2020, 06:51:11 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 12, 2020, 04:34:17 PM
I found a traffic signal in Brewer ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7720164,-68.7294515,3a,16.7y,63.9h,93.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D301.4413%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), in which the protected only right turn causes yellow trap on the oncoming permissive left turn when its phase get's recalled. The right turn operates in protected only mode and you can only turn right on the green arrow (ME law prohibits right turn on red arrow), even though traffic on Dirigo Dr is usually super light. And it dosen't even operate as a normal right turn overlap when the cross street gets it's phase...
I'm sorry, why?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 12, 2020, 07:52:13 PM
3M signals in Chile: https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.4602685,-70.6564386,3a,44.9y,282.91h,89.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYEcZOOmHezjx7q27B5JdVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on November 12, 2020, 08:23:51 PM
Those have been there a long time....30+ years.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3187/2629469859_bdf0707a3f_z_d.jpg) Southbound 571

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3178/2629469487_d702fb8c1d_z_d.jpg) Westbound 4th St

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3040/2630288882_6f6b279c66_z_d.jpg)Northbound 571

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3186/2629468735_f68d11f860_z_d.jpg) Eastbound Oak (old 66)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 12, 2020, 09:05:15 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 12, 2020, 04:34:17 PM
I found a traffic signal in Brewer ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7720164,-68.7294515,3a,16.7y,63.9h,93.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D301.4413%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), in which the protected only right turn causes yellow trap on the oncoming permissive left turn when its phase get's recalled. The right turn operates in protected only mode and you can only turn right on the green arrow (ME law prohibits right turn on red arrow), even though traffic on Dirigo Dr is usually super light. And it dosen't even operate as a normal right turn overlap when the cross street gets it's phase...

That is freakin' weird. Why the hell is that light red at all? Who is this light protecting?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 13, 2020, 10:30:39 AM
Quote from: US71 on November 12, 2020, 08:23:51 PM
Those have been there a long time....30+ years.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3187/2629469859_bdf0707a3f_z_d.jpg) Southbound 571

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3178/2629469487_d702fb8c1d_z_d.jpg) Westbound 4th St

With the posts too close to the roadway, I'm surprised they didn't get knocked down by traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 12:56:00 PM
^^^^
I had to go and locate the signals using Google Maps using the very little information provided ("southbound 571"? "Westbound 4th St"?)

Fortunately there was the street blade in the third image showing "Powers Museum" which took me to...Carthage, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/yneDgEADC3G3d8vS7).

There's a bike lane along the edge of the street, so cars don't end up being that close to the lights.

If you want to see signals close to traffic lanes, just go to BC (https://goo.gl/maps/uStCf7MBsr6j4SXw5):

(https://i.imgur.com/oW45JNO.png)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 13, 2020, 03:08:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 12:56:00 PM
^^^^
I had to go and locate the signals using Google Maps using the very little information provided ("southbound 571"? "Westbound 4th St"?)

Fortunately there was the street blade in the third image showing "Powers Museum" which took me to...Carthage, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/yneDgEADC3G3d8vS7).
Hoger showed this a few pages back. Or maybe in a different signal thread.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 05:34:28 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 13, 2020, 03:08:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 12:56:00 PM
^^^^
I had to go and locate the signals using Google Maps using the very little information provided ("southbound 571"? "Westbound 4th St"?)

Fortunately there was the street blade in the third image showing "Powers Museum" which took me to...Carthage, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/yneDgEADC3G3d8vS7).
Hoger showed this a few pages back. Or maybe in a different signal thread.

I can't remember where, but I remember him sharing them before too. Not until I saw the GSV did I realize it, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on November 13, 2020, 10:43:02 PM
Quote from: US71 on November 12, 2020, 08:23:51 PM
Those have been there a long time....30+ years.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3187/2629469859_bdf0707a3f_z_d.jpg) Southbound 571

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3178/2629469487_d702fb8c1d_z_d.jpg) Westbound 4th St

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3040/2630288882_6f6b279c66_z_d.jpg)Northbound 571

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3186/2629468735_f68d11f860_z_d.jpg) Eastbound Oak (old 66)

More like 40 plus years old, judging from the heads
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on November 14, 2020, 03:24:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 12:56:00 PM
^^^^
I had to go and locate the signals using Google Maps using the very little information provided ("southbound 571"? "Westbound 4th St"?)

Fortunately there was the street blade in the third image showing "Powers Museum" which took me to...Carthage, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/yneDgEADC3G3d8vS7).

There's a bike lane along the edge of the street, so cars don't end up being that close to the lights.

If you want to see signals close to traffic lanes, just go to BC (https://goo.gl/maps/uStCf7MBsr6j4SXw5):

(https://i.imgur.com/oW45JNO.png)
NY 104 at NY 390 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2068094,-77.6763083,3a,75y,278.37h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSi4mhPaF6MJldmyqTN0D2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0). The low side mount signals are really close to the traffic lanes here. These were installed here due to an overpass that obstructs the overhead signals which are horizontal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 14, 2020, 04:18:08 PM
If you want to see traffic lights installed close to traffic, just look at US 130 (among other routes) in NJ.  Poles, some with masts, are installed in a break in the jersey barrier.  Along much of 130 in Camden & Burlington Counties in NJ, the left shoulder is usually less than 2 feet.  A right shoulder doesn't exist.  Speed limits vary, maxing out at 55 mph.

https://goo.gl/maps/9cCXgQbLbPBSBwLU9

https://goo.gl/maps/6Yrfn1LapxKpDzCn8

https://goo.gl/maps/qm1bzzvta4myadtu6

https://goo.gl/maps/zNW8WjH2meVFqmqd8

Note...this was the old-school method NJDOT used.  When intersections are upgraded, they generally place the pole to the right, and go with the Overhead-signal-per-lane method.

An example of old and new school on NJ 73 at Fellowship Road: https://goo.gl/maps/dV2nvrv9Zu6Yr3jW7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 14, 2020, 05:34:04 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 14, 2020, 04:18:08 PM
If you want to see traffic lights installed close to traffic, just look at US 130 (among other routes) in NJ.  Poles, some with masts, are installed in a break in the jersey barrier.  Along much of 130 in Camden & Burlington Counties in NJ, the left shoulder is usually less than 2 feet.  A right shoulder doesn't exist.  Speed limits vary, maxing out at 55 mph.

The installations in British Columbia have always reminded me of those median signals in New Jersey. The primary difference being that BC still installs them. The one in the above photo was only installed in 2014 (another narrow one (https://goo.gl/maps/xGTrrfPT29X6xMjq8) installed in 2018; older example (https://goo.gl/maps/5zDDXMdYjZup8Ujq7) showing how the standard hasn't changed). There are other places with median signals, especially those placed to help with visibility, but there's usually a wider median than the few feet we're seeing in these BC and NJ examples.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 14, 2020, 08:14:12 PM
Ever notice how New Jersey's long mast-arms seem to droop. Some other states build them with a slight upward angle to avoid that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 14, 2020, 08:18:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 12, 2020, 09:05:15 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 12, 2020, 04:34:17 PM
I found a traffic signal in Brewer ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7720164,-68.7294515,3a,16.7y,63.9h,93.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D301.4413%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), in which the protected only right turn causes yellow trap on the oncoming permissive left turn when its phase get's recalled. The right turn operates in protected only mode and you can only turn right on the green arrow (ME law prohibits right turn on red arrow), even though traffic on Dirigo Dr is usually super light. And it dosen't even operate as a normal right turn overlap when the cross street gets it's phase...

That is freakin' weird. Why the hell is that light red at all? Who is this light protecting?

At first, I thought it was the oncoming permissive left turn, however, that didn't make sense because the oncoming LT still has to yield to the thru traffic.

Then I thought it was for pedestrians but that also didn't make sense because the one and only crosswalk runs perpendicular to that protected right turn.

At this point, I'm guessing the signal is improperly programmed, or maybe whoever designed and programmed that light may have been accounting for something I'm not aware of.

Then again, as you said, I'm not sure who or what the right turn is being protected against...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 14, 2020, 08:25:31 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 14, 2020, 08:18:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 12, 2020, 09:05:15 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 12, 2020, 04:34:17 PM
I found a traffic signal in Brewer ME (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7720164,-68.7294515,3a,16.7y,63.9h,93.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DLW3W87R0ogRigaARYNnTtg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D301.4413%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), in which the protected only right turn causes yellow trap on the oncoming permissive left turn when its phase get's recalled. The right turn operates in protected only mode and you can only turn right on the green arrow (ME law prohibits right turn on red arrow), even though traffic on Dirigo Dr is usually super light. And it dosen't even operate as a normal right turn overlap when the cross street gets it's phase...

That is freakin' weird. Why the hell is that light red at all? Who is this light protecting?

At first, I thought it was the oncoming permissive left turn, however, that didn't make sense because the oncoming LT still has to yield to the thru traffic.

Then I thought it was for pedestrians but that also didn't make sense because the one and only crosswalk runs perpendicular to that protected right turn.

At this point, I'm guessing the signal is improperly programmed, or maybe whoever designed and programmed that light may have been accounting for something I'm not aware of.

Then again, as you said, I'm not sure who or what the right turn is being protected against...

If you look at older view, the right turn signal is green with thru traffic: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.772048,-68.7293465,3a,19.9y,57.1h,93.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHpGjHKd0kFmmLkvWBt6eJA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 14, 2020, 10:42:20 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 14, 2020, 08:25:31 PM
If you look at older view, the right turn signal is green with thru traffic: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.772048,-68.7293465,3a,19.9y,57.1h,93.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHpGjHKd0kFmmLkvWBt6eJA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

I'm guessing one of two things in that scenario:
1. The camera car triggered the sensor for the green arrow to appear.
2. The right turn was programmed concurrently with the thru signals at the time of that capture.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 11:02:25 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 14, 2020, 08:25:31 PM
If you look at older view, the right turn signal is green with thru traffic: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.772048,-68.7293465,3a,19.9y,57.1h,93.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHpGjHKd0kFmmLkvWBt6eJA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664
Go home, Maine, you're drunk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 15, 2020, 11:06:21 AM
Time-of-day based left turn in Independence, Ohio at Rockside Rd to the SB I-77 on-ramp. Single lane protected-permissive left turn, and double lane protected only left turn. Notice the 4 section signal to the right of the FYA. Not sure if the arrow is bimodal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3968064,-81.6533776,3a,20.6y,301.27h,92.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKiZ4oskn3_v0ysO3554mw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 15, 2020, 12:11:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 15, 2020, 11:06:21 AM
Time-of-day based left turn in Independence, Ohio at Rockside Rd to the SB I-77 on-ramp. Single lane protected-permissive left turn, and double lane protected only left turn. Notice the 4 section signal to the right of the FYA. Not sure if the arrow is bimodal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3968064,-81.6533776,3a,20.6y,301.27h,92.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKiZ4oskn3_v0ysO3554mw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You can see the FYA in operation here (https://goo.gl/maps/buXgv2qwSLs9X2RT8) while the #2 lane is set to straight-ahead.

That's an odd setup. Looks like the 4-section shared signal has a three orb setup with a green arrow on the bottom. This isn't really ideal, as when it's set to left turn mode, it displays a red orb as you've shown in your link. During straight-ahead mode, it looks acceptable (https://goo.gl/maps/p5cPpdYvLu7ZMUxM7) with a standard green orb. Seems the only way to make it compliant would be to use a blank out "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

In my area, when the left turn becomes busy enough that it needs a second lane, it is either made into a double permissive left (https://goo.gl/maps/88ToQkiLQH4aKCRi9) or a double protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/aWYzJJoxRBQDK5gLA). I'd love if anyone in the Cleveland area could describe a bit more about this setup and why it was necessary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 15, 2020, 04:34:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 15, 2020, 12:11:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 15, 2020, 11:06:21 AM
Time-of-day based left turn in Independence, Ohio at Rockside Rd to the SB I-77 on-ramp. Single lane protected-permissive left turn, and double lane protected only left turn. Notice the 4 section signal to the right of the FYA. Not sure if the arrow is bimodal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3968064,-81.6533776,3a,20.6y,301.27h,92.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKiZ4oskn3_v0ysO3554mw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You can see the FYA in operation here (https://goo.gl/maps/buXgv2qwSLs9X2RT8) while the #2 lane is set to straight-ahead.

That's an odd setup. Looks like the 4-section shared signal has a three orb setup with a green arrow on the bottom. This isn't really ideal, as when it's set to left turn mode, it displays a red arrow orb as you've shown in your link. During straight-ahead mode, it looks acceptable (https://goo.gl/maps/p5cPpdYvLu7ZMUxM7) with a standard green orb. Seems the only way to make it compliant would be to use a blank out "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

In my area, when the left turn becomes busy enough that it needs a second lane, it is either made into a double permissive left (https://goo.gl/maps/88ToQkiLQH4aKCRi9) or a double protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/aWYzJJoxRBQDK5gLA). I'd love if anyone in the Cleveland area could describe a bit more about this setup and why it was necessary.

FTFY, Jakeroot

They could probably make this semi-compliant with louvers on the circular red and yellow sections, but the blank out "Left turn signal" idea is probably best.

I think this is a somewhat clever setup. I can think of a location near me where a similar use case could potentially be beneficial.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 02:52:40 AM
Quote from: roadfro on November 15, 2020, 04:34:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 15, 2020, 12:11:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 15, 2020, 11:06:21 AM
Time-of-day based left turn in Independence, Ohio at Rockside Rd to the SB I-77 on-ramp. Single lane protected-permissive left turn, and double lane protected only left turn. Notice the 4 section signal to the right of the FYA. Not sure if the arrow is bimodal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3968064,-81.6533776,3a,20.6y,301.27h,92.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKiZ4oskn3_v0ysO3554mw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You can see the FYA in operation here (https://goo.gl/maps/buXgv2qwSLs9X2RT8) while the #2 lane is set to straight-ahead.

That's an odd setup. Looks like the 4-section shared signal has a three orb setup with a green arrow on the bottom. This isn't really ideal, as when it's set to left turn mode, it displays a red arrow orb as you've shown in your link. During straight-ahead mode, it looks acceptable (https://goo.gl/maps/p5cPpdYvLu7ZMUxM7) with a standard green orb. Seems the only way to make it compliant would be to use a blank out "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

In my area, when the left turn becomes busy enough that it needs a second lane, it is either made into a double permissive left (https://goo.gl/maps/88ToQkiLQH4aKCRi9) or a double protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/aWYzJJoxRBQDK5gLA). I'd love if anyone in the Cleveland area could describe a bit more about this setup and why it was necessary.

FTFY, Jakeroot

They could probably make this semi-compliant with louvers on the circular red and yellow sections, but the blank out "Left turn signal" idea is probably best.

I think this is a somewhat clever setup. I can think of a location near me where a similar use case could potentially be beneficial.

Thank you. Fixed!

Honestly, my preferred fix would be a single FYA signal over the middle of the two left lanes, and a second FYA signal on the far left corner. There would be a blank out sign to the right of the overhead signal to indicate whether turns were permitted or not (based on time of day, it would either show a left arrow or straight arrow). The FYA would go protected-only during peak hours, as I'm guessing Ohio would prefer, and there'd still be the ideal minimum two signals for when the protected double left mode was active (there'd be an extra signal when it was operating as protected-permissive) but without the confusion of "which movement is this signal for?".

Yet further proof, in my opinion, that signal per lane is not always ideal, and that moving the second or third signal onto a pole allows for greater flexibility.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 16, 2020, 02:08:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 02:52:40 AM
Quote from: roadfro on November 15, 2020, 04:34:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 15, 2020, 12:11:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 15, 2020, 11:06:21 AM
Time-of-day based left turn in Independence, Ohio at Rockside Rd to the SB I-77 on-ramp. Single lane protected-permissive left turn, and double lane protected only left turn. Notice the 4 section signal to the right of the FYA. Not sure if the arrow is bimodal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3968064,-81.6533776,3a,20.6y,301.27h,92.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soKiZ4oskn3_v0ysO3554mw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

You can see the FYA in operation here (https://goo.gl/maps/buXgv2qwSLs9X2RT8) while the #2 lane is set to straight-ahead.

That's an odd setup. Looks like the 4-section shared signal has a three orb setup with a green arrow on the bottom. This isn't really ideal, as when it's set to left turn mode, it displays a red arrow orb as you've shown in your link. During straight-ahead mode, it looks acceptable (https://goo.gl/maps/p5cPpdYvLu7ZMUxM7) with a standard green orb. Seems the only way to make it compliant would be to use a blank out "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign.

In my area, when the left turn becomes busy enough that it needs a second lane, it is either made into a double permissive left (https://goo.gl/maps/88ToQkiLQH4aKCRi9) or a double protected left (https://goo.gl/maps/aWYzJJoxRBQDK5gLA). I'd love if anyone in the Cleveland area could describe a bit more about this setup and why it was necessary.

FTFY, Jakeroot

They could probably make this semi-compliant with louvers on the circular red and yellow sections, but the blank out "Left turn signal" idea is probably best.

I think this is a somewhat clever setup. I can think of a location near me where a similar use case could potentially be beneficial.

Thank you. Fixed!

Honestly, my preferred fix would be a single FYA signal over the middle of the two left lanes, and a second FYA signal on the far left corner. There would be a blank out sign to the right of the overhead signal to indicate whether turns were permitted or not (based on time of day, it would either show a left arrow or straight arrow). The FYA would go protected-only during peak hours, as I'm guessing Ohio would prefer, and there'd still be the ideal minimum two signals for when the protected double left mode was active (there'd be an extra signal when it was operating as protected-permissive) but without the confusion of "which movement is this signal for?".

Yet further proof, in my opinion, that signal per lane is not always ideal, and that moving the second or third signal onto a pole allows for greater flexibility.

Another possible solution... keep the 4-section head, but have the circular red and yellow be able to change to arrows when the time of day restrictions are in place. That would eliminate the need of placing a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign and the red ball over a left turn lane. If Ohio is intending to use protected-only operation during the time two left turn lanes are active, that would work (circular green is not permitted over dedicated left-turn lanes), although you could change out the bottom green arrow for a bimodal green/yellow arrow for FYA operation.

Example in Utah where they have flex lanes in use, the circular red changes to an arrow:

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2020, 02:37:35 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 14, 2020, 08:14:12 PM
Ever notice how New Jersey's long mast-arms seem to droop. Some other states build them with a slight upward angle to avoid that.

Of those that do, they seem designed to do that, and there really isn't any additional droppage later in its life.   The newer, thicker mast arms shoot straight out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 03:48:55 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 16, 2020, 02:08:03 PM
Another possible solution... keep the 4-section head, but have the circular red and yellow be able to change to arrows when the time of day restrictions are in place. That would eliminate the need of placing a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign and the red ball over a left turn lane. If Ohio is intending to use protected-only operation during the time two left turn lanes are active, that would work (circular green is not permitted over dedicated left-turn lanes), although you could change out the bottom green arrow for a bimodal green/yellow arrow for FYA operation.

Example in Utah where they have flex lanes in use, the circular red changes to an arrow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs1iix82hc4&ab_channel=ChrisDay

That could work too. Seems awfully technical for such a simple setup, but it could work.

Seems like my suggestion would be simpler. I do think UDOT's creativeness is pretty cool, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on November 16, 2020, 05:39:38 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 16, 2020, 02:08:03 PM
Example in Utah where they have flex lanes in use, the circular red changes to an arrow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs1iix82hc4&ab_channel=ChrisDay

It looks like something is missing in the changeover phase.  About 2:37 into the video the green left arrow clearout phase for lane four is complete, followed by a yellow left turn until almost 2:40, then everything goes blank and the left turn is transferred over to a red left turn arrow in lane three.  But if someone was driving hard in lane four to try to beat the cycle, they never see a red signal.  Seems like it would be too easy to get stuck in no-man's-land. 

For the record, I'm a railroad signal engineer with some experience in traffic signals associated with railroad crossings.  Obviously, I have a bias since we are required to make this kind of operation fail-safe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 17, 2020, 08:52:24 AM
Noticed how GA uses a box suspended away from the strain poles.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50612503926_98a6bd05c7_4k_d.jpg

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50612503926_98a6bd05c7_4k_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 17, 2020, 01:38:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 03:48:55 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 16, 2020, 02:08:03 PM
Another possible solution... keep the 4-section head, but have the circular red and yellow be able to change to arrows when the time of day restrictions are in place. That would eliminate the need of placing a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign and the red ball over a left turn lane. If Ohio is intending to use protected-only operation during the time two left turn lanes are active, that would work (circular green is not permitted over dedicated left-turn lanes), although you could change out the bottom green arrow for a bimodal green/yellow arrow for FYA operation.

Example in Utah where they have flex lanes in use, the circular red changes to an arrow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs1iix82hc4&ab_channel=ChrisDay

That could work too. Seems awfully technical for such a simple setup, but it could work.

Seems like my suggestion would be simpler. I do think UDOT's creativeness is pretty cool, though.

Another possibility for the Ohio situation would be if the signal over the #2 lane were a 6-aspect doghouse:

RA-R
YA-Y
GA-G

During straight ahead hours, only RYG would be used.  During left turn hours, RA-YA-GA would be used. 

UDOT's system is good too and perhaps with LED it may be quite simple to convert an "orb" (array of LED lights that look like a circle from far) to an arrow disply quite easily.  [Much of the complexity in UDOT's video also had to do with the reversible lane changeover - the Ohio situation doesn't have that.  All lanes in question are always westbound, its just that the #2 lane is sometimes straight only and sometimes left only.]*

Given the fancy stuff you see people using programmable LEDs for in some of the grander versions of Christmas light displays, I'm sure just using LEDs to change from a circle to an arrow (or to change color from red to yellow to green) is a piece of cake.

And while I can't speak to the specific situation here in Cleveland, I definitely know of other situations where a left turn is so heavy during rush hour that the straight lane on an optional lane setting is a de facto left turn lane, while during other times of day, the left turn is not so busy and it would be better for all with a single dedicated left turn lane allowing permissive/protected turning.  In a jurisdiction where permissive double lefts are discouraged, something like this accommodates the best of all worlds - limited double lefts during peak and single permissive lefts at other times.


* On another thread (or perhaps on this thread a few months ago, IDK), someone mentioned the reversible setup on Nicholasville Rd outside of Lexington, KY.  The road is five lanes, but reversible setups allow for 3-L-1, 2-L-2, or 1-L-3 depending upon the time of day.  They also have the issue of four aspect signals in a strange way that would force during parts of the day for a red orb to act like a red arrow without the ability to use a "left turn signal" sign, unless it were lit up (which it doesn't).  I also posited the suggestion of a 6-aspect doghouse for any lane that is sometimes straight or sometimes left.  (all lefts are protected only).


https://www.google.com/maps/@38.0191844,-84.5139557,3a,75y,38.36h,79.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-Cj4vL1QVpzP4LuBEm0ZNA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 05:43:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What are we looking at?

Quote from: mrsman on November 17, 2020, 01:38:43 PM
UDOT's system is good too and perhaps with LED it may be quite simple to convert an "orb" (array of LED lights that look like a circle from far) to an arrow disply quite easily.  [Much of the complexity in UDOT's video also had to do with the reversible lane changeover - the Ohio situation doesn't have that.  All lanes in question are always westbound, its just that the #2 lane is sometimes straight only and sometimes left only.]*

My primary concern with lights that change their displayed "shapes" is that it might be confusing for drivers who rely on reasonably-consistent engineering practices to safely operate their vehicle. It seems to me that a signal that can change its shape may lead to drivers misinterpreting the meaning of that signal. If a signal goes from a solid green orb to solid green arrow, or vice-versa, drivers who are used to that signal being displayed one way or the other may continue to believe that it's displaying the signal "it always does" even after the switch, especially if they only catch a passing glance of the signal as they move down the highway.

My other concern is that LEDs are prone to failure for various reasons, and the LED orbs can sometimes become a random shape of LEDs; the point being that there is a potential integrity issue with this type of signal. This type of failure isn't too common (although a glance around New Orleans (https://goo.gl/maps/SQcx8Bc1SEHPqDen8) shows how common it can actually be), but I would not want to rely on a signal being able to change shape. That UDOT signal appears to use a bunch of tiny LEDs to change the shape. Which is cool, but again, I would be worried about LED cluster failures.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on November 17, 2020, 05:48:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 05:43:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What are we looking at?

My guess would be that there's a signal on the far left despite left turns being banned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on November 17, 2020, 07:02:59 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9915909,-85.2522514,3a,75y,204.54h,86.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5ROQHcBPQvfRh-PbsrJOkg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

the only reason I posted this without a description is that I don't know what kind of traffic light that is
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 08:02:49 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 17, 2020, 05:48:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 05:43:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What are we looking at?

My guess would be that there's a signal on the far left despite left turns being banned.

Not likely. That's normal in many states, including Arizona.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 08:04:08 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on November 17, 2020, 07:02:59 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9915909,-85.2522514,3a,75y,204.54h,86.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5ROQHcBPQvfRh-PbsrJOkg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Can we please stop with description-less links?

Again, no idea what to look at here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 17, 2020, 08:28:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 08:04:08 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on November 17, 2020, 07:02:59 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9915909,-85.2522514,3a,75y,204.54h,86.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5ROQHcBPQvfRh-PbsrJOkg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Can we please stop with description-less links?

Again, no idea what to look at here.

It's pretty obvious. The green sign is pointing at the yellow lights with white arrows.   :paranoid:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 17, 2020, 11:31:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 08:02:49 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 17, 2020, 05:48:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2020, 05:43:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What are we looking at?

My guess would be that there's a signal on the far left despite left turns being banned.

Not likely. That's normal in many states, including Arizona.
Yeah, I still don't know what the link is referring to. Amtrakprod, if you'd like to clear the air...?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on November 18, 2020, 09:07:17 AM
8-8-8 signal with a 12-inch adapter in Taylor, MI: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2520016,-83.2601358,3a,15y,239.26h,126.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smxjGSkBKofVI_6geTsDfvg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 18, 2020, 09:14:20 AM
Interesting sight to see. Two doghouses with back plate corners missing in Thomson, GA.(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50613954206_5bc452a046_3k_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 18, 2020, 12:11:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 17, 2020, 04:44:35 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1971473,-111.647808,3a,75y,311.65h,99.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHwaiOss7FNE1xOQjDm2UnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Don't know why this link sent. I meant to send anothe street view link and now I forgot what I was going to send. Sorry about this!


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 18, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.

I've wondered this myself as well. I've seen both around my area, although the "full square" style is more common by about 8 to 1. I can't quite figure out what the advantage is. Wind loading requirements seems like a decent explanation, although I've seen the two combined at one intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 03:37:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.

I've wondered this myself as well. I've seen both around my area, although the "full square" style is more common by about 8 to 1. I can't quite figure out what the advantage is. Wind loading requirements seems like a decent explanation, although I've seen the two combined at one intersection.
MO has the full square style mostly, with a few exceptions (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6396237,-90.443464,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQZU5nC26oi18YQcpHpmpHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Ohio's the only state I've seen that predominantly uses the outline backplate. Well, also some in CO and WV (using their weirdly aligned backplates (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7728887,-104.9406117,3a,75y,201.62h,87.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIi6zgk0FdlLCWyYsQ0cCnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 18, 2020, 05:11:50 PM
Green Bay with another strange use of an arrow.  A  signal head has been recently replaced and it contains a 4-section split phase head.  It is left-most signal.  The signal behaves normally as a split phase.  The problem is instead of the normal vertical R-Y-G-GA, it has a R-YA-G-GA configuration.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 18, 2020, 08:28:10 PM
Re: the durability of backplates, there must be different levels of quality in backplates or different materials used in different states. In Calif. and the Chicago area they seem to remain intact for many years. Yet in Long Island, NY where NYSDOT Region-10 goes on a campaign of new backplate installations every twenty-five years or so, they seem to disappear over time. I assume they are poor quality and just crack, break away and fall to the roadway.

In one good example, in front of the Home Depot on S.R. 25 in the Westbury-Jericho area, new signals were erected within the last five years and half the backplates are already gone.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 19, 2020, 12:31:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.

I've wondered this myself as well. I've seen both around my area, although the "full square" style is more common by about 8 to 1. I can't quite figure out what the advantage is. Wind loading requirements seems like a decent explanation, although I've seen the two combined at one intersection.

Utah does not install backplates on 99% of its doghouses despite using them very consistently on all of its other signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 04:01:09 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 03:37:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.

I've wondered this myself as well. I've seen both around my area, although the "full square" style is more common by about 8 to 1. I can't quite figure out what the advantage is. Wind loading requirements seems like a decent explanation, although I've seen the two combined at one intersection.
MO has the full square style mostly, with a few exceptions (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6396237,-90.443464,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQZU5nC26oi18YQcpHpmpHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Ohio's the only state I've seen that predominantly uses the outline backplate. Well, also some in CO and WV (using their weirdly aligned backplates (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7728887,-104.9406117,3a,75y,201.62h,87.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIi6zgk0FdlLCWyYsQ0cCnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)).

I've always preferred side-by-side 5-section assemblies. The central red orb, to me, seems unnecessary, and I consider left or right turn arrows to be additions to the signal, and thus should be placed to the left or right of a regular three-orb RYG signal (with respect to the direction it is facing). CO and WV get this, but otherwise, this seems to be a rare opinion. Although I wouldn't normally be a fan of cutout backplates, I think the cutout style used in CO and WV is pretty slick and probably would be my preference in areas that use side-by-side 5-section assemblies.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 04:04:00 AM
Quote from: US 89 on November 19, 2020, 12:31:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 18, 2020, 10:32:49 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 18, 2020, 10:12:02 AM
There are tons of doghouses with backplates partially missing. Broken backplates seem to be more common on doghouses; I think it has something to do with the signal design requiring more exposed backplate.

The doghouses in my area (and in Massachusetts as well) sometimes use a full "square" backplate (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4024388,-70.7186036,3a,50.2y,312.97h,91.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSGMpyf5er8YPeNSJmmOig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (most common I've seen in ME), and some, just around the outline. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8179413,-68.7739866,3a,17.7y,176.52h,101.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8CSz_93cQP5SGUicM91iXg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D217.5382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) (most common I've seen in MA)

Not sure what is more advantageous or disadvantageous in terms of visibility, (wind) loading, etc.

I've wondered this myself as well. I've seen both around my area, although the "full square" style is more common by about 8 to 1. I can't quite figure out what the advantage is. Wind loading requirements seems like a decent explanation, although I've seen the two combined at one intersection.

Utah does not install backplates on 99% of its doghouses despite using them very consistently on all of its other signals.

This is a practice I've seen in WA as well (example here (https://goo.gl/maps/MjEHrZye5GKWibWm7), both on-ramps). Although, with the adoption of FYA signals, and installation of 4-section bimodal right turn signals becoming far more common than 5-section doghouse signals, I have no idea if this practice would still continue today. All new signals in areas that use backplates, now have backplates, with very few exceptions.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 04:26:06 PM
Jakeroot, the side-by-side design is used extensively on Long Island by both NYSDOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW. Not sure what Suffolk County does. Happily, no more doghouses here. And I completely agree with your logic re: the S-B-S configuration.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on November 19, 2020, 04:50:00 PM
This is the first 3-section FYA signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5475883,-83.1957824,3a,15y,146.73h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIDhxDUG8vlQb_gA9ffn5qg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that I've seen in Michigan.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 05:12:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 04:26:06 PM
Jakeroot, the side-by-side design is used extensively on Long Island by both NYSDOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW. Not sure what Suffolk County does. Happily, no more doghouses here. And I completely agree with your logic re: the S-B-S configuration.

I also saw them for years in Richland and Kennewick, both in Washington State, but the overwhelming majority seems to be in those two states I've mentioned. Although yes, that area of New York does seem to be full of them, much to my delight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 19, 2020, 05:59:20 PM
This is the link I meant to send: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3749527,-71.1399545,3a,21.7y,113.22h,91.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJF3KxTNQd16USUb91zhi8Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 07:24:00 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 19, 2020, 05:59:20 PM
This is the link I meant to send: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3749527,-71.1399545,3a,21.7y,113.22h,91.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJF3KxTNQd16USUb91zhi8Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

All good.

It's the exact opposite of the bus queue jump signals seen in British Columbia; in BC, the solid white vertical line is above the red (https://goo.gl/maps/uJzoPb6bzLgu9NQH7).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 19, 2020, 09:52:45 PM
Saw these bus signals around E Buena Vista Dr in Disney World:

1. Do bus signals need left turn signal signs or all arrow displays for bus dedicated turn lanes? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.3695747,-81.5256961,3a,22.5y,270.05h,88.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shbTnCqrlOgjFgAgwzm1hBw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

2. On the upside-down T signal for the buses, what indication is that on the right-hand side? A turn arrow? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.369745,-81.5349173,3a,15.1y,258.4h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI7rix3QF6jdbQhKK139zPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

BONUS: And this U-turn RYG signal not too far away: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.3701254,-81.5139167,3a,24.2y,253.86h,114.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqrysj-OgFbWlMaQjl18ffQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 10:59:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 19, 2020, 09:52:45 PM
2. On the upside-down T signal for the buses, what indication is that on the right-hand side? A turn arrow? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.369745,-81.5349173,3a,15.1y,258.4h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI7rix3QF6jdbQhKK139zPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Managed to find a GSV shot. It displays an angled white arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/2qPkVLLEmBqe3e6M6).

Based on this, it seems the standard for bus and transit turn signals is to display a white line at an angle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2020, 11:01:14 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.

Well, they're also not like the arms Jersey used, which were designed to droop.  If they weren't designed that way but drooped anyway, they would be getting hit by trucks.

And their more recent preferred version doesn't either:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/NYmVQpoYFuyoc7747

https://maps.app.goo.gl/dB7aB1CYQBFM1KAF6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 20, 2020, 07:53:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 10:59:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 19, 2020, 09:52:45 PM
2. On the upside-down T signal for the buses, what indication is that on the right-hand side? A turn arrow? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.369745,-81.5349173,3a,15.1y,258.4h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI7rix3QF6jdbQhKK139zPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Managed to find a GSV shot. It displays an angled white arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/2qPkVLLEmBqe3e6M6).

Based on this, it seems the standard for bus and transit turn signals is to display a white line at an angle.

I know in Los Angeles, for the clearance indication for the light rail vehicles, they use an angled indication for such indication. IIRC, is the new standard for transit clearance a white triangle?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 20, 2020, 10:21:50 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 20, 2020, 07:53:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 10:59:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 19, 2020, 09:52:45 PM
2. On the upside-down T signal for the buses, what indication is that on the right-hand side? A turn arrow? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.369745,-81.5349173,3a,15.1y,258.4h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI7rix3QF6jdbQhKK139zPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Managed to find a GSV shot. It displays an angled white arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/2qPkVLLEmBqe3e6M6).

Based on this, it seems the standard for bus and transit turn signals is to display a white line at an angle.

I know in Los Angeles, for the clearance indication for the light rail vehicles, they use an angled indication for such indication. IIRC, is the new standard for transit clearance a white triangle?

Here's the 2009 MUTCD figure that gives the meaning of light rail signals (which have been used by many communities for dedicated bus lane or bus queue jump signals, per an option in section 4D.27). These have been standard since at least the 2000 MUTCD.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/images/fig8c_03.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
They're thicker. NJ's new masts are normal size or thinner, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3916149,-74.5310287,3a,75.4y,84.5h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRGf4XMK7tUdI-1nvChNb7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Florida does a good job using relatively thick masts--when it uses masts, of course.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 12:58:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 20, 2020, 10:21:50 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 20, 2020, 07:53:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2020, 10:59:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 19, 2020, 09:52:45 PM
2. On the upside-down T signal for the buses, what indication is that on the right-hand side? A turn arrow? Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.369745,-81.5349173,3a,15.1y,258.4h,93.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI7rix3QF6jdbQhKK139zPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Managed to find a GSV shot. It displays an angled white arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/2qPkVLLEmBqe3e6M6).

Based on this, it seems the standard for bus and transit turn signals is to display a white line at an angle.

I know in Los Angeles, for the clearance indication for the light rail vehicles, they use an angled indication for such indication. IIRC, is the new standard for transit clearance a white triangle?

Here's the 2009 MUTCD figure that gives the meaning of light rail signals (which have been used by many communities for dedicated bus lane or bus queue jump signals, per an option in section 4D.27). These have been standard since at least the 2000 MUTCD.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/images/fig8c_03.gif)

Thank you for posting that. I've not seen it before.

Here in Tacoma, our trolley system (Sound Transit "T" Line) has been using these transit signals since 2003 when the system opened. I was confused why all of the transit signals only used two orbs. I now see, based on the bottom of that image, that a flashing "go" signal can also be used to indicate "prepare to stop". This is how this system operates (https://goo.gl/maps/AszMQWbTCGU5SMot7).

Armed with this information, I've begun to look around at the rest of WA to see what the standard is. It would appear that the three-head option (ostensibly the "standard" design) is not used here, with the two preferred types being (A) the two lens variant with flashing "go" signals (even for (https://goo.gl/maps/YCjCif8bSLfveu2H6) bus lanes (https://goo.gl/maps/WgTpsm4YJrEWPg9UA)), or (B) louvered/3M signals with standard RYG orbs (pretty much exclusively in Seattle and some areas to the north, and certainly not my preferred option).

Only thing I'm not seeing is an explanation for why Tacoma's two-lens system uses amber horizontal lines (to indicate "STOP"), when the MUTCD clearly indicates that white must be used. I have to assume that either the 2000 MUTCD allowed the use of amber for the horizontal "STOP" indications, or the system was designed before the 2000 MUTCD and used colors/signals found outside the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2020, 01:25:02 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
They're thicker. NJ's new masts are normal size or thinner, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3916149,-74.5310287,3a,75.4y,84.5h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRGf4XMK7tUdI-1nvChNb7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Florida does a good job using relatively thick masts--when it uses masts, of course.

How new could they be when they are the same exact mast arms that show up in the 2008 GSV?  https://goo.gl/maps/LhUZVz1equS2MQEC9

Not only did I respond with examples of new masts that are, you know, newer...

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2020, 11:01:14 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/NYmVQpoYFuyoc7747

https://maps.app.goo.gl/dB7aB1CYQBFM1KAF6

...but we've already gone thru with you on this subject before.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 12, 2020, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 12, 2020, 11:16:02 AM
I didn't know NJ was getting into the bulky mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6826851,-74.2355119,3a,75.3y,36.57h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szEGn3m01mUT6EGvE0tNnbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) game.

How could you have not known? You posted a link to one yourself:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2511088#msg2511088

Quote
Re: Traffic signal
« Reply #2964 on: June 24, 2020, 10:35:41 PM »
ReplyQuote
I wish NJ would do sexy thick mast arms like this more often  :clap:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@39.4870372,-75.0431734,3a,75y,278.83h,93.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl1J3c-LOME5kHvY4uBWw2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

At some point, get it together man about NJ's traffic light masts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 01:35:35 PM
^^^
I think some of our younger users (although all of us occasionally too) have a tendency to post before thinking. Things like, "have I posted this before?", "am I making a consistent argument?", or even "is this the correct link?" are things we all must ask before posting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 01:42:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2020, 01:25:02 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
They're thicker. NJ's new masts are normal size or thinner, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3916149,-74.5310287,3a,75.4y,84.5h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRGf4XMK7tUdI-1nvChNb7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Florida does a good job using relatively thick masts--when it uses masts, of course.

How new could they be when they are the same exact mast arms that show up in the 2008 GSV?  https://goo.gl/maps/LhUZVz1equS2MQEC9
Actually, those aren't the same masts.
2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915921,-74.5306959,3a,75y,310.28h,92.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssJV7nw0vUZhtjdNrnMF43w!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656/)
2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915905,-74.530657,3a,68.3y,295.96h,92.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOfF1a4UT3PjmYUZN3PgD7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
You're getting a bit worked up about this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 02:00:05 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 01:42:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2020, 01:25:02 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
They're thicker. NJ's new masts are normal size or thinner, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3916149,-74.5310287,3a,75.4y,84.5h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRGf4XMK7tUdI-1nvChNb7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Florida does a good job using relatively thick masts--when it uses masts, of course.

How new could they be when they are the same exact mast arms that show up in the 2008 GSV?  https://goo.gl/maps/LhUZVz1equS2MQEC9
Actually, those aren't the same masts.
2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915921,-74.5306959,3a,75y,310.28h,92.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssJV7nw0vUZhtjdNrnMF43w!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656/)
2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915905,-74.530657,3a,68.3y,295.96h,92.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOfF1a4UT3PjmYUZN3PgD7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
You're getting a bit worked up about this.

In fairness, you have (on at least a couple occasions) posted the same thing before, which does drive a few of us a little mad.

But, you make a good point that those are different mast arms. Although if your point is that NJ uses thinner (or normal size), droopier mast arms these days, that doesn't seem backed up by those links that jeffandnicole provided of newer mast arms that are quite thick.

It seems that NJ is like every state: they use the appropriate mast arm size depending on numerous factors. To imply that one state has a single standard or even a tendency is perhaps a bit misleading when every state is going to have variations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2020, 02:08:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 01:35:35 PM
^^^
I think some of our younger users (although all of us occasionally too) have a tendency to post before thinking. Things like, "or even "is this the correct link?" are things we all must ask before posting.

Haha yes now I'm double checking. I never had this issue on chrome so I never had to double check before.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 02:36:45 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 20, 2020, 02:08:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 01:35:35 PM
^^^
I think some of our younger users (although all of us occasionally too) have a tendency to post before thinking. Things like, "or even "is this the correct link?" are things we all must ask before posting.

Haha yes now I'm double checking. I never had this issue on chrome so I never had to double check before.

Not saying I was thinking of you when I said that, but

Always good to double-check! I've made that error many times too. We all appreciate you (and everyone else) taking the extra time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2020, 03:58:28 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 01:42:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 20, 2020, 01:25:02 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 20, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on November 19, 2020, 10:25:51 PM
Note that those Florida mast-arms don't droop the way New Jersey's do.
They're thicker. NJ's new masts are normal size or thinner, like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3916149,-74.5310287,3a,75.4y,84.5h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRGf4XMK7tUdI-1nvChNb7Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Florida does a good job using relatively thick masts--when it uses masts, of course.

How new could they be when they are the same exact mast arms that show up in the 2008 GSV?  https://goo.gl/maps/LhUZVz1equS2MQEC9
Actually, those aren't the same masts.
2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915921,-74.5306959,3a,75y,310.28h,92.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssJV7nw0vUZhtjdNrnMF43w!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656/)
2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3915905,-74.530657,3a,68.3y,295.96h,92.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOfF1a4UT3PjmYUZN3PgD7g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/)
You're getting a bit worked up about this.

You got me on that one. Very identical though.

But overall though, NJ does use thicker masts for current installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 20, 2020, 08:29:27 PM
J&N, you said above that NJ's earlier installed mast-arms were designed to droop. You'll have to humor me here. Why would anyone deliberately design mast-arms to droop? They look horrible and give the appearance of being inadequate for the load, like they're going to collapse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on November 20, 2020, 11:11:21 PM
Wyoming, I appreciate the effort. I really do. But this  (https://goo.gl/maps/Eex1v2x2rxXdKpAQA)has got to stop. Just mount the signs on the mast arm or (even better) on the side of the road in advance of the intersection like every other state.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 21, 2020, 01:19:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2020, 12:58:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 20, 2020, 10:21:50 AM
Here's the 2009 MUTCD figure that gives the meaning of light rail signals (which have been used by many communities for dedicated bus lane or bus queue jump signals, per an option in section 4D.27). These have been standard since at least the 2000 MUTCD.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/images/fig8c_03.gif)

Thank you for posting that. I've not seen it before.

Here in Tacoma, our trolley system (Sound Transit "T" Line) has been using these transit signals since 2003 when the system opened. I was confused why all of the transit signals only used two orbs. I now see, based on the bottom of that image, that a flashing "go" signal can also be used to indicate "prepare to stop". This is how this system operates (https://goo.gl/maps/AszMQWbTCGU5SMot7).

Armed with this information, I've begun to look around at the rest of WA to see what the standard is. It would appear that the three-head option (ostensibly the "standard" design) is not used here, with the two preferred types being (A) the two lens variant with flashing "go" signals (even for (https://goo.gl/maps/YCjCif8bSLfveu2H6) bus lanes (https://goo.gl/maps/WgTpsm4YJrEWPg9UA)), or (B) louvered/3M signals with standard RYG orbs (pretty much exclusively in Seattle and some areas to the north, and certainly not my preferred option).

Only thing I'm not seeing is an explanation for why Tacoma's two-lens system uses amber horizontal lines (to indicate "STOP"), when the MUTCD clearly indicates that white must be used. I have to assume that either the 2000 MUTCD allowed the use of amber for the horizontal "STOP" indications, or the system was designed before the 2000 MUTCD and used colors/signals found outside the US.

I'm guessing that Tacoma must have designed their system based on something that existed elsewhere before the 2000 MUTCD. The 2000 MUTCD did not have options for colored symbols used in light rail signals–the figure remains virtually unchanged from the 2000 to 2009 manuals. I believe the light rail signal section was new to the 2000 MUTCD, as I could did not find similarly-titled chapters in the 1988 MUTCD.


Unrelated: Can we talk about that doghouse signal head from your "bus lanes" link (https://goo.gl/maps/CrXVkvvnH4HCiNpr9)? My god is that a wonky sight... And it's not like they really needed programmable visibility for just the left turn aspects here...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on November 21, 2020, 02:33:06 PM
Does anyone know what kind of traffic light this is on the far right in this link https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1138601,-85.2601656,3a,68.7y,240.96h,91.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjl4oySCT3_T1zgGZxjZ56w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
and most of the time when I'm with my dad in his car the traffic light on the right always has a green arrow and today I noticed that the light changed to red
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 21, 2020, 11:25:11 PM
^^ Looks like they are using signal per lane on supplemental signals.  Left signal is primary for through traffic.  Middle signal is also primary for through traffic with the right arrow indicating the middle lane can go straight or right.  The right signal you are asking about is saying right turn only from right lane.  I don't see why it would turn red since there is no opposing traffic using that lane.  There are no pedestrian signals for the traffic to stop for.  Was there an emergency vehicle nearby where the signals would pre-emptively turn red?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on November 21, 2020, 11:43:49 PM
today it did turn red
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 22, 2020, 09:34:28 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on November 21, 2020, 11:43:49 PM
today it did turn red
You didn't answer their question.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 22, 2020, 10:08:26 AM
Off-topic, but this is a very similar configuration for this double right turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8257501,-71.4153617,3a,45y,187.27h,89.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIyLkZlvzPN28aKpx78UTtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (thru-right, right turn lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8263583,-71.4154635,3a,25.1y,199.55h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3y6sMbOmRc7C_eiFYeM3EQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) in Providence RI.  Notice the NTOR sign on the pole. When the right turn overlap activates, the right turn signal goes green, but the middle signal's arrows disappear and there is just a red ball. Even with the overlap, does that technically prohibit a RTOR from the thru-right lane? There's no sign saying "RIGHT TURN ON RED FROM RIGHT LANE ONLY", and the arrow on the middle signal isn't bimodal...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 22, 2020, 04:06:34 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 21, 2020, 11:25:11 PM
Was there an emergency vehicle nearby where the signals would pre-emptively turn red?

Do those signals even have preëmption?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 22, 2020, 06:55:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 22, 2020, 10:08:26 AM
Off-topic, but this is a very similar configuration for this double right turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8257501,-71.4153617,3a,45y,187.27h,89.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIyLkZlvzPN28aKpx78UTtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (thru-right, right turn lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8263583,-71.4154635,3a,25.1y,199.55h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3y6sMbOmRc7C_eiFYeM3EQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) in Providence RI.  Notice the NTOR sign on the pole. When the right turn overlap activates, the right turn signal goes green, but the middle signal's arrows disappear and there is just a red ball. Even with the overlap, does that technically prohibit a RTOR from the thru-right lane? There's no sign saying "RIGHT TURN ON RED FROM RIGHT LANE ONLY", and the arrow on the middle signal isn't bimodal...

Nearly-identical setup exists at the exit from a shopping center (https://goo.gl/maps/HGZ2zSPaTaUEPRrD7) in Tacoma, WA (spin camera around to see lane configuration, although it's also shown on the overhead signs).

Basically, from what I've seen, if the green arrow is lit, you can make the right turn from any lane that allows right turns. The usage of signal-per lane setups (technically not the case here but damn-near) does not override what the signals themselves indicate. Which is that, if a green is shown, you may turn without stopping, assuming there is nothing obstructing you from doing so.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 23, 2020, 06:04:35 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 22, 2020, 10:08:26 AM
Off-topic, but this is a very similar configuration for this double right turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8257501,-71.4153617,3a,45y,187.27h,89.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIyLkZlvzPN28aKpx78UTtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (thru-right, right turn lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8263583,-71.4154635,3a,25.1y,199.55h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3y6sMbOmRc7C_eiFYeM3EQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) in Providence RI.  Notice the NTOR sign on the pole. When the right turn overlap activates, the right turn signal goes green, but the middle signal's arrows disappear and there is just a red ball. Even with the overlap, does that technically prohibit a RTOR from the thru-right lane? There's no sign saying "RIGHT TURN ON RED FROM RIGHT LANE ONLY", and the arrow on the middle signal isn't bimodal...

Also off topic (actually way off topic lmao) but in your first link if you spin the camera to the right and look in the distance you'll see a BGS where they stuck a narrow I-195 shield on a faded wide one. Looks pretty funky.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 24, 2020, 07:28:11 PM
Not sure how this was allowed to be installed: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3648275,-71.1355121,3a,75.7y,266.8h,100.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr28FBInQsPwqezSGXIzqJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on November 24, 2020, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on November 20, 2020, 11:11:21 PM
Wyoming, I appreciate the effort. I really do. But this  (https://goo.gl/maps/Eex1v2x2rxXdKpAQA)has got to stop. Just mount the signs on the mast arm or (even better) on the side of the road in advance of the intersection like every other state.

They could follow Oregon's example. (https://goo.gl/maps/bjsDjhuf5qXWMmBW8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 25, 2020, 01:11:42 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 24, 2020, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on November 20, 2020, 11:11:21 PM
Wyoming, I appreciate the effort. I really do. But this  (https://goo.gl/maps/Eex1v2x2rxXdKpAQA)has got to stop. Just mount the signs on the mast arm or (even better) on the side of the road in advance of the intersection like every other state.

They could follow Oregon's example. (https://goo.gl/maps/bjsDjhuf5qXWMmBW8)

That's awful. Oregon can be so messy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 25, 2020, 01:12:02 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 24, 2020, 07:28:11 PM
Not sure how this was allowed to be installed: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3648275,-71.1355121,3a,75.7y,266.8h,100.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr28FBInQsPwqezSGXIzqJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Combining a green arrow with an oncoming green orb seems like a massive no-no.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 25, 2020, 01:12:09 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 22, 2020, 10:08:26 AM
Off-topic, but this is a very similar configuration for this double right turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8257501,-71.4153617,3a,45y,187.27h,89.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIyLkZlvzPN28aKpx78UTtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (thru-right, right turn lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8263583,-71.4154635,3a,25.1y,199.55h,86.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3y6sMbOmRc7C_eiFYeM3EQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) in Providence RI.  Notice the NTOR sign on the pole. When the right turn overlap activates, the right turn signal goes green, but the middle signal's arrows disappear and there is just a red ball. Even with the overlap, does that technically prohibit a RTOR from the thru-right lane? There's no sign saying "RIGHT TURN ON RED FROM RIGHT LANE ONLY", and the arrow on the middle signal isn't bimodal...

Hmm.  This is interesting.  So the right lane's signal will display green arrow when adjacent thru signals are green and during the time of the corresponding left turn.  The middle lane's signal will only display the green arrow when thru signals are green.

I think the proper interpretation is that right turns are allowed for any time there is a green arrow from either the right or the middle lane.  I think one of the concerns that the local authority may have is what happens if someone in the middle lane wants to turn right, but someone in front of them wants to go straight.  Obviously, too bad for that person, he has to wait for the green orb to turn right, since the car in front is blocking him.  And to prevent honking or other aggressive behavior, they will not display the right arrow for this lane, since the car in front cannot proceed on red orb.  While there is no (easy) way to know if the lead car at the intersection in that lane wants to go straight or right, they err on the side of caution to not display the right arrow.  But of course, when the green orb is lit, straight and right can go without restriction (there aren't even pedestrians for right turn traffic to concern itself with) and both green orb and green arrow are lit for this lane.

I notice in my area, and probably others as well, that if the rightmost lane is not right turn only, a right arrow will not be displayed, even if the majority of cars in that lane do turn right.  It probably has something to do with the line of thinking I mentioned in the previous paragraph - not encouraging honking from the right turners when the car in front can legally go straight and has to wait for green.

Take a look at this intersection, Georgia at Forest Glen in Silver Spring, MD.  The far right lane can go straight or right and will end soon after crossing the intersection.  In practice, because the lane does end soon after the intersection, most cars in this lane do turn right - but not every car.  It would be nice to have a right turn arrow coordinated with the left from Forest Glen to Georgia, but the MD SHA will not do it because it is not an exclusive right turn lane.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0154139,-77.0424888,3a,75y,347.27h,81.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5UIr8q920ftI1gLga7nMGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Contrast with this corner, where a right turn arrow is displayed for a right turn lane.  In this case, buses are permitted to go straight in the right turn lane and a bus can hold up right turning traffic, despite the right green arrow.  In practice, the transit buses do try to merge into the next lane (when they can) to avoid holding up the significant right turns that are here, but they aren't required to and don't always do it.  If a bus is in front of you, honking won't help.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0355936,-77.0257272,3a,37.5y,302.19h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sROWZ1yI04R8-iNCV0xlJ-A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 25, 2020, 03:54:52 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201125/74745ce1e47582a885bed3d0ebaae6b6.jpg)
They fixed the stuck red arrow here


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 25, 2020, 11:48:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 25, 2020, 01:12:02 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 24, 2020, 07:28:11 PM
Not sure how this was allowed to be installed: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3648275,-71.1355121,3a,75.7y,266.8h,100.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr28FBInQsPwqezSGXIzqJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Combining a green arrow with an oncoming green orb seems like a massive no-no.

There used to be an intersection exactly like that (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672148,-71.0777099,3a,75y,289.34h,87.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6KNdosd0msCMxQ8F9zoMCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in nearby Cambridge where the two-way street had left/right green arrows, and the one-way street, circular green. Both were lit up at the same time and people from the two-way street (with the green arrows) assumed they had the ROW, but didn't know oncoming traffic also had a circular green.

This intersection on the two-way side has since been replaced with left and right facing FYA's (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672431,-71.0776322,3a,37.6y,277.46h,92.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4rtuy3as0MTxDhFzBF0d1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 26, 2020, 12:19:51 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 25, 2020, 11:48:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 25, 2020, 01:12:02 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 24, 2020, 07:28:11 PM
Not sure how this was allowed to be installed: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3648275,-71.1355121,3a,75.7y,266.8h,100.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr28FBInQsPwqezSGXIzqJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Combining a green arrow with an oncoming green orb seems like a massive no-no.

There used to be an intersection exactly like that (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672148,-71.0777099,3a,75y,289.34h,87.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6KNdosd0msCMxQ8F9zoMCA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in nearby Cambridge where the two-way street had left/right green arrows, and the one-way street, circular green. Both were lit up at the same time and people from the two-way street (with the green arrows) assumed they had the ROW, but didn't know oncoming traffic also had a circular green.

This intersection on the two-way side has since been replaced with left and right facing FYA's (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672431,-71.0776322,3a,37.6y,277.46h,92.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4rtuy3as0MTxDhFzBF0d1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Was going to link this! Yep! First FYAs in the state too IIRC. Atleast first 3 section.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on November 26, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
When your mast arm ain't long enough, buy an extension (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0375254,-123.0800716,3a,24.9y,54.53h,104.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBaA2bFpqe0gEjnq2t728g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
In British Columbia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 28, 2020, 04:55:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 26, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
When your mast arm ain't long enough, buy an extension (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0375254,-123.0800716,3a,24.9y,54.53h,104.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBaA2bFpqe0gEjnq2t728g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
In British Columbia.

Strange as it may seem, it was actually installed that way. There's quite a few mast arms like this around BC.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 28, 2020, 05:09:51 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 26, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
When your mast arm ain't long enough, buy an extension (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0375254,-123.0800716,3a,24.9y,54.53h,104.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBaA2bFpqe0gEjnq2t728g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
In British Columbia.

Reminds me of a few signals I've seen in Utah that were retrofitted within the past few years in order to accommodate a FYA where there previously wasn't room for one. Problem is...the extensions look nothing like the original mast arm that was already there, and so the whole setup ends up looking sort of gross. Here's one on Foothill Drive (SR 186) in eastern Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/TxpGaRAKGfJcoAKt6).

It's sort of weird that they went with the mastarm extension plus FYA setup here. Although Salt Lake City has been going nuts in the past few years adding new FYAs and replacing doghouses with them, UDOT will usually opt to replace the original left 3-section signal with a doghouse (see this intersection in nearby Bountiful (https://goo.gl/maps/bvx5o32icPuEGjQQ9) and compare to older imagery (https://goo.gl/maps/hD1FAi7Q67f5ja5q8) for a good example of that).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 28, 2020, 05:09:51 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 26, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
When your mast arm ain't long enough, buy an extension (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0375254,-123.0800716,3a,24.9y,54.53h,104.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBaA2bFpqe0gEjnq2t728g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
In British Columbia.

Reminds me of a few signals I've seen in Utah that were retrofitted within the past few years in order to accommodate a FYA where there previously wasn't room for one. Problem is...the extensions look nothing like the original mast arm that was already there, and so the whole setup ends up looking sort of gross. Here's one on Foothill Drive (SR 186) in eastern Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/TxpGaRAKGfJcoAKt6).

It's sort of weird that they went with the mastarm extension plus FYA setup here. Although Salt Lake City has been going nuts in the past few years adding new FYAs and replacing doghouses with them, UDOT will usually opt to replace the original left 3-section signal with a doghouse (see this intersection in nearby Bountiful (https://goo.gl/maps/bvx5o32icPuEGjQQ9) and compare to older imagery (https://goo.gl/maps/hD1FAi7Q67f5ja5q8) for a good example of that).
That's a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on November 28, 2020, 08:18:45 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 28, 2020, 05:09:51 PM

Reminds me of a few signals I've seen in Utah that were retrofitted within the past few years in order to accommodate a FYA where there previously wasn't room for one. Problem is...the extensions look nothing like the original mast arm that was already there, and so the whole setup ends up looking sort of gross. Here's one on Foothill Drive (SR 186) in eastern Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/TxpGaRAKGfJcoAKt6).



Wow that looks terrible. I know a lot of places (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7469627,-87.9409745,3a,16.9y,347.14h,88.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssfqgc_kZJmExRTJbjUIauA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) put an FYA in the median, but that's hard to do there with no median. Seems like a tough situation to me.

Or maybe Virginia was right in providing extra room at the end of masts ;)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on November 30, 2020, 09:15:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 28, 2020, 04:55:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 26, 2020, 07:46:12 PM
When your mast arm ain't long enough, buy an extension (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0375254,-123.0800716,3a,24.9y,54.53h,104.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIBaA2bFpqe0gEjnq2t728g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
In British Columbia.

Strange as it may seem, it was actually installed that way. There's quite a few mast arms like this around BC.

Plenty of mast arms are installed that way in Illinois, too, when they exceed a certain length.  I think it might be because the mast arms will be manufactured in say, 5 foot increments...so if you want a precise length like 53 feet, you need a 45-foot arm plus an 8-foot extension, for example. https://goo.gl/maps/vbW7NqCASAWwJBpR8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
That's a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg)

This is what I've seen in WA as well. Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

Example here for large intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/JCjY2Wb9r8Wu7YSB6) (previously a doghouse); example here for smaller intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/GFEPLMNsNc4iw5AX8) (use GSV time-slider to compare before and after).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 01, 2020, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
That's a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg)

This is what I've seen in WA as well. Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

Example here for large intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/JCjY2Wb9r8Wu7YSB6) (previously a doghouse); example here for smaller intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/GFEPLMNsNc4iw5AX8) (use GSV time-slider to compare before and after).

Yeah, MassDOT examples:
Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613807,-71.1676569,3a,75y,272.75h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skOWQluw_XhGVDnoP0r6gHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613706,-71.1676358,3a,60y,273.72h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT8e1tyFEhfbqCAoZciB0Cg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343327,-71.2414597,3a,75y,259.93h,90.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPSzNl7oluojRYJ14eE1RHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343052,-71.2414508,3a,75y,261.11h,90.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUlNhe4GmvOA8xAoqCmYP1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250913,-71.2503733,3a,75y,264.7h,89.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY9bUtoxm3rX3zPKAs-TQMg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250966,-71.2503896,3a,75y,269.09h,92.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWCWoHO0-fxYTyIZ6McsgAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before (larger intersection): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286703,-71.274291,3a,46.9y,118.68h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq3Xa6i91L47IzMNeEWTA-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After (intersecting upgrade here): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286351,-71.2742982,3a,32.6y,116.2h,94.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMKxe8TK2Ab_CN6rOfWY7hg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 01, 2020, 09:47:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
That’s a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg)

This is what I've seen in WA as well. Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

Example here for large intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/JCjY2Wb9r8Wu7YSB6) (previously a doghouse); example here for smaller intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/GFEPLMNsNc4iw5AX8) (use GSV time-slider to compare before and after).

It’s not a bad idea, but UDOT has never used a configuration like that. It would appear their standard is to always have at least two overhead signals, and it’s very rare for them to put one on the far-side mast (though there are a couple exceptions, like this one on SR 36 (https://goo.gl/maps/zG4soN9QP9iCNGki6)).

The configuration does exist in Utah at a handful of intersections (example (https://goo.gl/maps/PZKzgKU94BuhAhf16)), but those are all Salt Lake City installs and I can’t think of one that’s not right next to a light rail line. Since the above intersection is on SR 186, the lights are maintained by UDOT.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 01, 2020, 10:35:45 AM
Here is an odd looking signal in Henderson, KY.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50655691733_18d72a62ab_4k_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 01, 2020, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
That's a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg

This is what I've seen in WA as well. Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

Example here for large intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/JCjY2Wb9r8Wu7YSB6) (previously a doghouse); example here for smaller intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/GFEPLMNsNc4iw5AX8) (use GSV time-slider to compare before and after).

Yeah, MassDOT examples:
Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613807,-71.1676569,3a,75y,272.75h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skOWQluw_XhGVDnoP0r6gHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613706,-71.1676358,3a,60y,273.72h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT8e1tyFEhfbqCAoZciB0Cg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343327,-71.2414597,3a,75y,259.93h,90.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPSzNl7oluojRYJ14eE1RHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343052,-71.2414508,3a,75y,261.11h,90.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUlNhe4GmvOA8xAoqCmYP1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250913,-71.2503733,3a,75y,264.7h,89.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY9bUtoxm3rX3zPKAs-TQMg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250966,-71.2503896,3a,75y,269.09h,92.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWCWoHO0-fxYTyIZ6McsgAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before (larger intersection): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286703,-71.274291,3a,46.9y,118.68h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq3Xa6i91L47IzMNeEWTA-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After (intersecting upgrade here): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286351,-71.2742982,3a,32.6y,116.2h,94.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMKxe8TK2Ab_CN6rOfWY7hg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I did just remember another example from Puyallup (https://goo.gl/maps/SxKyNNH6sDiuQtmt7). This one was odd because there was already a post-mounted signal on the right. So the entire install was as easy as replacing the far-left RYG signal with an FYA. Presto!

More examples with post-mounted RYG signals I can think of: compact example in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/YN5MwAnamJ9FhSYA6); this entire corridor in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DXLy8RbZ7asK24PG6) (note the bizarre mismatched backplates...yuck -- I don't know how that happened); most intersections in Federal Way, WA, but perhaps this one (https://goo.gl/maps/QeiyD3XkRQUWCRYE9) most prominently which was upgraded not once (https://goo.gl/maps/zPVr5B3eqin11cZM8), but twice (https://goo.gl/maps/UaRAJAyirZYc59yMA) (to match the current NV-esque standards of the city).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 01:04:52 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 01, 2020, 09:47:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

It's not a bad idea, but UDOT has never used a configuration like that. It would appear their standard is to always have at least two overhead signals, and it's very rare for them to put one on the far-side mast (though there are a couple exceptions, like this one on SR 36 (https://goo.gl/maps/zG4soN9QP9iCNGki6)).

The configuration does exist in Utah at a handful of intersections (example (https://goo.gl/maps/PZKzgKU94BuhAhf16)), but those are all Salt Lake City installs and I can't think of one that's not right next to a light rail line. Since the above intersection is on SR 186, the lights are maintained by UDOT.

UDOT does a lot of things that are very unlike surrounding states. At first, it was that split-phasing rule; I remember you mentioning that intersections without left turn lanes are almost always split-phased. That's definitely not something I've seen anywhere else except as required by heavy left turns or whatever. Yet another thing: they seem to simply refuse to use post-mounted signals even when they would make sense, despite being used by every state surrounding it. I won't sit here and tell you how big of a user of post-mounted signals WSDOT is, because they aren't (although secondary left turn signals are becoming more common along state highways now), but there's a lot of cities in WA that will. Utah, on the other hand, seems to have a very homogenous design used by basically every city.

I guess my point being that I don't fully understand UDOT practices. Although not to spend an entire post shitting on Utah, I find their signing practices to be quite innovative, and I really like their standard road markings (especially compared to Colorado).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 01, 2020, 03:57:14 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2020, 10:35:45 AM
Here is an odd looking signal in Henderson, KY.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50655691733_18d72a62ab_4k_d.jpg)

KY has quite a few of these setups throughout the state. Here's one on US 27 Nickolasville Rd at KY 4 New Circle Rd in Lexington

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201201/8b183a4f594e2f96ee5b538587275ba0.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 01, 2020, 04:15:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2020, 10:35:45 AM
Here is an odd looking signal in Henderson, KY.
(image snipped)

Delaware likes using this signal as well...

https://goo.gl/maps/S8JjrFPXpDp16uGf8

In cases like this, it was their version of the FYA long before the FYA was a thing:

https://goo.gl/maps/HNNDkn8wxLSMs6qXA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 01:04:52 PM

UDOT does a lot of things that are very unlike surrounding states. At first, it was that split-phasing rule; I remember you mentioning that intersections without left turn lanes are almost always split-phased. That's definitely not something I've seen anywhere else except as required by heavy left turns or whatever. Yet another thing: they seem to simply refuse to use post-mounted signals even when they would make sense, despite being used by every state surrounding it.


Wait, do you mind explaining this? The way I know of split phasing is an intersection like this] (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1847108,-78.1344281,3a,53y,0.08h,96.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9UGyieDbgKEVo5BMC8Jf6w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (on the approaches from I-81 and the side street) where one side gets protected green for all directions (including arrows and the like), and then if necessary the other approach also gets all-protected green. I know occasionally this is done with just green balls (no arrows...I believe 7's two Berryville lights about 15 miles east of this intersection give the side streets arrow-less split phasing). How exactly did Utah do their split phasing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 01:04:52 PM
UDOT does a lot of things that are very unlike surrounding states. At first, it was that split-phasing rule; I remember you mentioning that intersections without left turn lanes are almost always split-phased. That's definitely not something I've seen anywhere else except as required by heavy left turns or whatever. Yet another thing: they seem to simply refuse to use post-mounted signals even when they would make sense, despite being used by every state surrounding it.

Wait, do you mind explaining this? The way I know of split phasing is an intersection like this] (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1847108,-78.1344281,3a,53y,0.08h,96.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9UGyieDbgKEVo5BMC8Jf6w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (on the approaches from I-81 and the side street) where one side gets protected green for all directions (including arrows and the like), and then if necessary the other approach also gets all-protected green. I know occasionally this is done with just green balls (no arrows...I believe 7's two Berryville lights about 15 miles east of this intersection give the side streets arrow-less split phasing). How exactly did Utah do their split phasing?

What I mean is an intersection like this (https://goo.gl/maps/z7KAJPNibTc2xwe98). In WA, and many other states, this would be permissive (as it is in that link): left turns would yield to through traffic, and traffic continuing straight or turning right would either wait for that car, or go around them using what is typically a wide-enough area of the intersection to the right of the waiting vehicle to perform those maneuvers. In Utah, however, the general practice seems to be that all left turns without a dedicated left turn lane are split-phased: movements from that approach will have a green ball and green arrow, and no permissive phase, even if the approach is just a single lane. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/nqLryAAt74iiTjhU8) of what I assume is a very quiet intersection but yet split-phasing is used. I don't get it. Utah is very conservative in this regard.

I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:34:02 PM
Oh okay, that makes sense, thanks. I actually don't find that too weird because Virginia loves split phasingexample (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1560471,-77.2754818,3a,75y,53.34h,88.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXVl7EGxdPxLdxxKpgvfb1Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXVl7EGxdPxLdxxKpgvfb1Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D294.22064%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), but now that I think about it, I don't see split phasing that much in other states, and yeah, even your example seems a little excessive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 07:56:41 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:34:02 PM
Oh okay, that makes sense, thanks. I actually don't find that too weird because Virginia loves split phasingexample (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1560471,-77.2754818,3a,75y,53.34h,88.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXVl7EGxdPxLdxxKpgvfb1Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXVl7EGxdPxLdxxKpgvfb1Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D294.22064%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), but now that I think about it, I don't see split phasing that much in other states, and yeah, even your example seems a little excessive.

Funny you'd mention Virginia, as that is probably the second place that I see it as often. Especially at those side approaches to divided highways. Although I spend most of my time in the DMV area where permissive-only is far more common than anything else, so I easily forget that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 02, 2020, 09:43:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 01, 2020, 08:48:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:06:21 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on November 28, 2020, 08:03:34 PM
That's a lot of work for just a FYA. This is what MA does Lmao:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201129/9325791912bf490baeffb6cb3cf908e2.jpg

This is what I've seen in WA as well. Rather than go through the pain in the ass process of installing a bunch of new metal, just move one of the signal heads to the mast, and replace the other overhead signal with the FYA. Way easier, and makes the whole setup better for visibility anyways.

Example here for large intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/JCjY2Wb9r8Wu7YSB6) (previously a doghouse); example here for smaller intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/GFEPLMNsNc4iw5AX8) (use GSV time-slider to compare before and after).

Yeah, MassDOT examples:
Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613807,-71.1676569,3a,75y,272.75h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skOWQluw_XhGVDnoP0r6gHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4613706,-71.1676358,3a,60y,273.72h,88.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT8e1tyFEhfbqCAoZciB0Cg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343327,-71.2414597,3a,75y,259.93h,90.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPSzNl7oluojRYJ14eE1RHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4343052,-71.2414508,3a,75y,261.11h,90.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUlNhe4GmvOA8xAoqCmYP1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250913,-71.2503733,3a,75y,264.7h,89.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY9bUtoxm3rX3zPKAs-TQMg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4250966,-71.2503896,3a,75y,269.09h,92.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWCWoHO0-fxYTyIZ6McsgAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Before (larger intersection): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286703,-71.274291,3a,46.9y,118.68h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq3Xa6i91L47IzMNeEWTA-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
After (intersecting upgrade here): https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6286351,-71.2742982,3a,32.6y,116.2h,94.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMKxe8TK2Ab_CN6rOfWY7hg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I did just remember another example from Puyallup (https://goo.gl/maps/SxKyNNH6sDiuQtmt7). This one was odd because there was already a post-mounted signal on the right. So the entire install was as easy as replacing the far-left RYG signal with an FYA. Presto!

More examples with post-mounted RYG signals I can think of: compact example in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/YN5MwAnamJ9FhSYA6); this entire corridor in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DXLy8RbZ7asK24PG6) (note the bizarre mismatched backplates...yuck -- I don't know how that happened); most intersections in Federal Way, WA, but perhaps this one (https://goo.gl/maps/QeiyD3XkRQUWCRYE9) most prominently which was upgraded not once (https://goo.gl/maps/zPVr5B3eqin11cZM8), but twice (https://goo.gl/maps/UaRAJAyirZYc59yMA) (to match the current NV-esque standards of the city).

Difficult to understand why they changed this last signal two times.  IMO, the second situation did the job adequately, having one post mounted thru signal, one mastarm mounted thru signal, and the FYA signal at the end of the mastarm.  While I am a fan of lest sidemounted signals (especially for permissive left turns so that drivers are looking in the direction of that signal to watch for opposing traffic and pedestrians) and I'm glad to see the left sidemount in the third situation, the additional signal head on the mast arm seems like a waste of money.  Perhaps Federal Way has money to burn on these things (and we all know that it is indeed the federal way to waste money).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 02, 2020, 11:42:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 01:04:52 PM
UDOT does a lot of things that are very unlike surrounding states. At first, it was that split-phasing rule; I remember you mentioning that intersections without left turn lanes are almost always split-phased. That's definitely not something I've seen anywhere else except as required by heavy left turns or whatever. Yet another thing: they seem to simply refuse to use post-mounted signals even when they would make sense, despite being used by every state surrounding it.

Wait, do you mind explaining this? The way I know of split phasing is an intersection like this] (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1847108,-78.1344281,3a,53y,0.08h,96.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9UGyieDbgKEVo5BMC8Jf6w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (on the approaches from I-81 and the side street) where one side gets protected green for all directions (including arrows and the like), and then if necessary the other approach also gets all-protected green. I know occasionally this is done with just green balls (no arrows...I believe 7's two Berryville lights about 15 miles east of this intersection give the side streets arrow-less split phasing). How exactly did Utah do their split phasing?

What I mean is an intersection like this (https://goo.gl/maps/z7KAJPNibTc2xwe98). In WA, and many other states, this would be permissive (as it is in that link): left turns would yield to through traffic, and traffic continuing straight or turning right would either wait for that car, or go around them using what is typically a wide-enough area of the intersection to the right of the waiting vehicle to perform those maneuvers. In Utah, however, the general practice seems to be that all left turns without a dedicated left turn lane are split-phased: movements from that approach will have a green ball and green arrow, and no permissive phase, even if the approach is just a single lane. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/nqLryAAt74iiTjhU8) of what I assume is a very quiet intersection but yet split-phasing is used. I don't get it. Utah is very conservative in this regard.

I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

The situation in Utah that you highlighted seems to be one of the better uses of split phasing.  Split phasing is certainly to be discouraged because by increasing the number of signal phases, you decrease the green time for everyone else.  But in situations where left turns from the side street to the main street are a heavy movment, they are useful.  The two most common situations where I see split phasing is where one or both of the side streets leads to a shopping center and the other situation is where one of the side streets is a collector but dwindles down to a very small residential upon crossing the intersection.  The Utah case is the latter case, where 500 North is a collector to the east of Columbus but a very small residential to the west.  The majority of traffic from the east will turn.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the intersection is designed with a right lane must turn right.  If that lane wasn't designated, then it would be fairly easy is someone wanted to go westbound on 500 north across the intersection to use the right lane to bypass left turning cars, if there was regular signalization.  But given the right turn lane, they are not allowed to.  If so much of the traffic does turn onto Columbus, it makes sense to prioritize right turns with their own lane, so that right turners can make a right on red (as well as green arrow during corresponding left from Columbus) and not be blocked by cars going straight.  Also, for cars coming eastbound, the part of 500 north west of Columbus is very narrow and may not be able to pass a left turner on the right.

Another area that makes widespread use of split-phasing is the unincorporated areas of suburban Sacramento county, especially Arden-Arcade and Carmichael.

Here is an example where the side street (Hurley) is a collector on one side, but a small residential (San Ysidro) on the other side, at the intersection of Watt Avenue.  Somewhat similar to the situation in Utah:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5885923,-121.3830467,3a,75y,106.81h,86.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjlqMr-CQRZsN7kh6bBYS0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here is another example a few blocks away.  Morse is a collector on both sides.  Here, it seems the motivation for split-phasing was to prevent the need to paint left turn pockets so that the bike lane can be continuous through the intersection without widening the street.  Hurley/Morse.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5886642,-121.3922476,3a,75y,173.39h,89.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_7e5u3ypOD5JfKzbLY9RVA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here is one more nearby that is a treat for those who like 12-8-8, 8-8-12, and even a 12-8-8-12 signal faces.  Hurley/Fulton.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5887543,-121.4014607,3a,75y,241.46h,92.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUej78Q7CcFetuJU6PW-mfw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DUej78Q7CcFetuJU6PW-mfw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D222.91882%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This part of town is great in that all collectors and major streets in the area east of Ethan and north of El Camino are named after inventors:  Howe, Bell, Wright, Fulton, Morse, Watt, Marconi, Pope, Whitney, Edison.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 02, 2020, 06:03:02 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 02, 2020, 09:43:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:52:33 PM
More examples with post-mounted RYG signals I can think of: compact example in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/YN5MwAnamJ9FhSYA6); this entire corridor in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DXLy8RbZ7asK24PG6) (note the bizarre mismatched backplates...yuck -- I don't know how that happened); most intersections in Federal Way, WA, but perhaps this one (https://goo.gl/maps/QeiyD3XkRQUWCRYE9) most prominently which was upgraded not once (https://goo.gl/maps/zPVr5B3eqin11cZM8), but twice (https://goo.gl/maps/UaRAJAyirZYc59yMA) (to match the current NV-esque standards of the city).

Difficult to understand why they changed this last signal two times.  IMO, the second situation did the job adequately, having one post mounted thru signal, one mastarm mounted thru signal, and the FYA signal at the end of the mastarm.  While I am a fan of lest sidemounted signals (especially for permissive left turns so that drivers are looking in the direction of that signal to watch for opposing traffic and pedestrians) and I'm glad to see the left sidemount in the third situation, the additional signal head on the mast arm seems like a waste of money.  Perhaps Federal Way has money to burn on these things (and we all know that it is indeed the federal way to waste money).

I would generally agree that "through minus one" is sufficient for traffic signals, whether left or through signals. CA being the most prominent example of this.

As to Federal Way: the city traffic engineer, who I would consider an acquaintance of mine, explained that the city did have a policy of using through minus one for a good six or seven years (great example being this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/Mn2SmSs4guvh4Di36) which I share pretty frequently as I consider it to be one of the best signalized intersections in the city). The policy changed about five years ago to be "signal per lane" instead; this upgraded intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/7X79cnRzbsPzTehM8) is an example of their current policy (which also includes single-lane FYAs opposite a double protected left). He didn't really explain why, but I suspect it's because of MUTCD recommendations* around signal-per-lane. He originally adopted CA-style placement as he is originally from CA, interestingly enough. Neighboring Auburn's head engineer is also from CA, which explains their excellent signal placement strategies (https://goo.gl/maps/YEQdJrYYTauNB1dV6). I guess one of the great things about WA is that many of our engineers come from other western states which largely have better practices than WSDOT.

* Great example of a "recommendation" implementation is this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3ypqtqfKBji9eePFA) down in Clark County, WA, where each approach has a near-side 5-section tower. Their engineer told me that it was installed due to preliminary MUTCD suggestions in the late 2000s that all approaches along 40+ mph roads would require near-side signals. This policy was not implemented, but the signals were installed as so regardless. Kind of too bad, to be honest!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 02, 2020, 07:28:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 02, 2020, 06:03:02 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 02, 2020, 09:43:00 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 12:52:33 PM
More examples with post-mounted RYG signals I can think of: compact example in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/YN5MwAnamJ9FhSYA6); this entire corridor in Puyallup, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DXLy8RbZ7asK24PG6) (note the bizarre mismatched backplates...yuck -- I don't know how that happened); most intersections in Federal Way, WA, but perhaps this one (https://goo.gl/maps/QeiyD3XkRQUWCRYE9) most prominently which was upgraded not once (https://goo.gl/maps/zPVr5B3eqin11cZM8), but twice (https://goo.gl/maps/UaRAJAyirZYc59yMA) (to match the current NV-esque standards of the city).

Difficult to understand why they changed this last signal two times.  IMO, the second situation did the job adequately, having one post mounted thru signal, one mastarm mounted thru signal, and the FYA signal at the end of the mastarm.  While I am a fan of lest sidemounted signals (especially for permissive left turns so that drivers are looking in the direction of that signal to watch for opposing traffic and pedestrians) and I'm glad to see the left sidemount in the third situation, the additional signal head on the mast arm seems like a waste of money.  Perhaps Federal Way has money to burn on these things (and we all know that it is indeed the federal way to waste money).

I would generally agree that "through minus one" is sufficient for traffic signals, whether left or through signals. CA being the most prominent example of this.

As to Federal Way: the city traffic engineer, who I would consider an acquaintance of mine, explained that the city did have a policy of using through minus one for a good six or seven years (great example being this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/Mn2SmSs4guvh4Di36) which I share pretty frequently as I consider it to be one of the best signalized intersections in the city). The policy changed about five years ago to be "signal per lane" instead; this upgraded intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/7X79cnRzbsPzTehM8) is an example of their current policy (which also includes single-lane FYAs opposite a double protected left). He didn't really explain why, but I suspect it's because of MUTCD recommendations* around signal-per-lane. He originally adopted CA-style placement as he is originally from CA, interestingly enough. Neighboring Auburn's head engineer is also from CA, which explains their excellent signal placement strategies (https://goo.gl/maps/YEQdJrYYTauNB1dV6). I guess one of the great things about WA is that many of our engineers come from other western states which largely have better practices than WSDOT.

* Great example of a "recommendation" implementation is this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3ypqtqfKBji9eePFA) down in Clark County, WA, where each approach has a near-side 5-section tower. Their engineer told me that it was installed due to preliminary MUTCD suggestions in the late 2000s that all approaches along 40+ mph roads would require near-side signals. This policy was not implemented, but the signals were installed as so regardless. Kind of too bad, to be honest!
Haha Jake I think we ought to start calling you the Federal Way Fanboy !
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 03, 2020, 12:35:52 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 02, 2020, 07:28:49 PM
Haha Jake I think we ought to start calling you the Federal Way Fanboy !

:-D :-D I deserve that label.

They do so many interesting things, I find myself using them as a reference a lot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 12:32:18 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

I wonder if TOD phasing can be utilised at these kind of intersections mentioned above with the standard 4-section signal (R-Y-G-GA*) to switch between the following phasings especially when traffic volumes are light, so traffic doesn't have to wait for the split phase and phasing can be shorter in low traffic periods especially at night:

- Permissive only phasing (only R-Y-G used) during lighter periods.
- Split phasing (R-Y-G-GA used) during peak periods.

*Especially NHDOT, they sometimes like to use a 4-section bimodal signal (R-Y-G-GA/YA) for left turn (and left/thru movements) even when approaches are split phased... with the yellow arrow, more phasings could be implmented for such TOD phasing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2020, 10:17:31 AM

Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 12:32:18 AM
I wonder if TOD phasing can be utilised at these kind of intersections mentioned above with the standard 4-section signal (R-Y-G-GA*) to switch between the following phasings especially when traffic volumes are light, so traffic doesn't have to wait for the split phase and phasing can be shorter in low traffic periods especially at night:

- Permissive only phasing (only R-Y-G used) during lighter periods.
- Split phasing (R-Y-G-GA used) during peak periods.

*Especially NHDOT, they sometimes like to use a 4-section bimodal signal (R-Y-G-GA/YA) for left turn (and left/thru movements) even when approaches are split phased... with the yellow arrow, more phasings could be implmented for such TOD phasing.

Like this? AARoads Forum > Traffic Control > Unusual Time-of-Day Signals  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28017.msg2548891#msg2548891)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 05:38:34 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2020, 10:17:31 AM

Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 12:32:18 AM
I wonder if TOD phasing can be utilised at these kind of intersections mentioned above with the standard 4-section signal (R-Y-G-GA*) to switch between the following phasings especially when traffic volumes are light, so traffic doesn't have to wait for the split phase and phasing can be shorter in low traffic periods especially at night:

- Permissive only phasing (only R-Y-G used) during lighter periods.
- Split phasing (R-Y-G-GA used) during peak periods.

*Especially NHDOT, they sometimes like to use a 4-section bimodal signal (R-Y-G-GA/YA) for left turn (and left/thru movements) even when approaches are split phased... with the yellow arrow, more phasings could be implemented for such TOD phasing.

Like this? AARoads Forum > Traffic Control > Unusual Time-of-Day Signals  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28017.msg2548891#msg2548891)

Yeah, something like that as described on that topic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 06, 2020, 05:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Woah!? Probably a TOD signal with protected only during rush hour?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 06, 2020, 08:36:03 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 06, 2020, 05:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Woah!? Probably a TOD signal with protected only during rush hour?

It could also be an LPI during the walk phase (example (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Washington+St+%26+Queen+St,+Alexandria,+VA+22314,+USA/@38.8074749,-77.0464077,3a,29.4y,189.08h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMAptWmm1H9BaTRFyc3evRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7b0f9b5124283:0x496e29ae3b1d4742!8m2!3d38.8073382!4d-77.0465113)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on December 06, 2020, 10:56:34 PM
Noticed these (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.7593573,-80.3755291,3a,36.5y,84.22h,93.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAgPh1QyfRCApyD3rQi0d3g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) very close-together lights at FIU in Miami.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on December 07, 2020, 12:50:19 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 06, 2020, 10:56:34 PM
Noticed these (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.7593573,-80.3755291,3a,36.5y,84.22h,93.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAgPh1QyfRCApyD3rQi0d3g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) very close-together lights at FIU in Miami.
Is the one on the right for the bike lane?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 07, 2020, 01:12:34 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 07, 2020, 12:50:19 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 06, 2020, 10:56:34 PM
Noticed these (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.7593573,-80.3755291,3a,36.5y,84.22h,93.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAgPh1QyfRCApyD3rQi0d3g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) very close-together lights at FIU in Miami.
Is the one on the right for the bike lane?

I would assume it is there because MUTCD requires two through signal heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 07, 2020, 02:45:27 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 06, 2020, 08:36:03 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 06, 2020, 05:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Woah!? Probably a TOD signal with protected only during rush hour?

It could also be an LPI during the walk phase (example (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Washington+St+%26+Queen+St,+Alexandria,+VA+22314,+USA/@38.8074749,-77.0464077,3a,29.4y,189.08h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMAptWmm1H9BaTRFyc3evRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7b0f9b5124283:0x496e29ae3b1d4742!8m2!3d38.8073382!4d-77.0465113)).

Ahh I see now. Now I wonder what the bottom aspect is? Maybe a bi-modal green/yellow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on December 07, 2020, 01:39:59 PM
Well this is odd. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6777488,-76.9228729,3a,34.6y,66.89h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spm47hpSL5vm-JVVQGeCmyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a pedestrian signal hanging from a span wire--at level with the traffic signals! In Franklin, Virginia.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: andrewkbrown on December 07, 2020, 02:55:31 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 07, 2020, 01:39:59 PM
Well this is odd. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6777488,-76.9228729,3a,34.6y,66.89h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spm47hpSL5vm-JVVQGeCmyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a pedestrian signal hanging from a span wire--at level with the traffic signals! In Franklin, Virginia.

Your post reminded me of this pedestrian signal in Cincinnati. While not at level with the traffic signals, it hangs from the span wire.
https://goo.gl/maps/aVATxKJU1nmS5uzD8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 07, 2020, 04:08:19 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 07, 2020, 01:39:59 PM
Well this is odd. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6777488,-76.9228729,3a,34.6y,66.89h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spm47hpSL5vm-JVVQGeCmyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a pedestrian signal hanging from a span wire--at level with the traffic signals! In Franklin, Virginia.

That's not a pedestrian signal, it's an old school NO TURN ON RED.

EDIT: I typed to fast lol. I meant NO LEFT TURN.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on December 07, 2020, 05:00:27 PM
This was at the VA Medical Center in Fayetteville, but has been gone 7-8 years.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4116/4895999150_33363d9263_z_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on December 08, 2020, 12:16:22 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Dq9RLqTa1KNamhcq9

It's like NYS DOT forgot about this one. Pretty much every other protected left turn on Hempstead Turnpike, and other NYS roads (at least on LI), have been changed to the red arrow instead of red solid ball. You can even see where the LEFT TURN SIGNAL sign used to hang from.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2020, 01:06:28 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)

I'm seeing the same thing. That link is to a very Texas-looking installation...in Texas!

Quote from: plain on December 07, 2020, 02:45:27 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 06, 2020, 08:36:03 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 06, 2020, 05:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

Woah!? Probably a TOD signal with protected only during rush hour?

It could also be an LPI during the walk phase (example (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Washington+St+%26+Queen+St,+Alexandria,+VA+22314,+USA/@38.8074749,-77.0464077,3a,29.4y,189.08h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMAptWmm1H9BaTRFyc3evRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7b0f9b5124283:0x496e29ae3b1d4742!8m2!3d38.8073382!4d-77.0465113)).

Ahh I see now. Now I wonder what the bottom aspect is? Maybe a bi-modal green/yellow?

I believe it's a lagging green arrow. No oncoming left turn.

Edit: Post 12345! Who doesn't love consecutive numbers!?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 08, 2020, 02:43:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2020, 01:06:28 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)

I'm seeing the same thing. That link is to a very Texas-looking installation...in Texas!

Quote from: plain on December 07, 2020, 02:45:27 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 06, 2020, 08:36:03 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 06, 2020, 05:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on December 05, 2020, 08:11:08 PM
This is definitely something you don't see everyday, a 4-section T-signal. The top aspect is a red orb & red arrow. This is on Washington St at Queen St in Alexandria, VA. There's another one in the opposite direction at the previous intersection (Washington at Princess St)

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201206/11ada6210bf5329902772d46ab861fcc.jpg)

Woah!? Probably a TOD signal with protected only during rush hour?

It could also be an LPI during the walk phase (example (https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Washington+St+%26+Queen+St,+Alexandria,+VA+22314,+USA/@38.8074749,-77.0464077,3a,29.4y,189.08h,88.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMAptWmm1H9BaTRFyc3evRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7b0f9b5124283:0x496e29ae3b1d4742!8m2!3d38.8073382!4d-77.0465113)).

Ahh I see now. Now I wonder what the bottom aspect is? Maybe a bi-modal green/yellow?

I believe it's a lagging green arrow. No oncoming left turn.

It seems like the intersection allows for both a LPI and a lagging left turn, at rush hours.  The LPI may be for more of the day, which explains the red arrow to prevent turning when peds initially have the walk sign.  The lagging left is only during rush, and this can be seen at the intersection with Princess.  The opposing left at Princess is prohibited during rush hours.  To prevent yellow trap, given the signals present, the opposing lefts must be prohibited.  Since they are only prohibited during rush hours, those are the only times where a lagging left would be safe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 08, 2020, 03:04:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 05:38:34 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2020, 10:17:31 AM

Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 05, 2020, 12:32:18 AM
I wonder if TOD phasing can be utilised at these kind of intersections mentioned above with the standard 4-section signal (R-Y-G-GA*) to switch between the following phasings especially when traffic volumes are light, so traffic doesn't have to wait for the split phase and phasing can be shorter in low traffic periods especially at night:

- Permissive only phasing (only R-Y-G used) during lighter periods.
- Split phasing (R-Y-G-GA used) during peak periods.

*Especially NHDOT, they sometimes like to use a 4-section bimodal signal (R-Y-G-GA/YA) for left turn (and left/thru movements) even when approaches are split phased... with the yellow arrow, more phasings could be implemented for such TOD phasing.

Like this? AARoads Forum > Traffic Control > Unusual Time-of-Day Signals  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28017.msg2548891#msg2548891)

Yeah, something like that as described on that topic.

My preference for a TOD switch between split-phasing and regular phasing would involve doghouses (or 5 aspect towers) instead of teh 4 aspect RYG-GA signal.  The reason for this would be to avoid confusion for someone who typically drives at the intersection only at peak times and now approaches the signal during off peak.  As they generally see split-phasing, using the 4 aspect signal face that is mainly used for split phasing, it is very easy for that driver to assume that the signal is always split phased and would advance on a left turn during off-peak even without seeing the green arrow.  They may assume that the left arrow has burned out or just be so used to making such a turn that they are not even aware of a possible alternative.

Doghouses are more commonly used for signals where thru and left are not necessarily at the same time.  A driver seeing the doghouse would be more careful to watch for the arrow before turning.

In other words, a 4-aspect RYG-GA signal that is used for split-phasing should only be used if split-phasing is done throughout the day.  If it is not, a doghouse is preferred.

One of my favorite uses of split-phasing may be instructive here:  Saul Rd at Connecticut in Kensington, MD:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0154379,-77.078671,3a,15y,279.96h,93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4D_6YMRSl3E0eaZ5n6GaEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is not TOD change sequencing, rather its pedestrian based change sequencing, but the point can still be made.  EB is the heavier of the two movements on Saul and always gets split-phased and sees a 4 aspect RYG-GA signal.  WB, during normal split phasing operation, will have green and green arrow displayed simultaneously on the doghouse.  But if a pedestrian is crossing, they will only get green ball.  The sign says: Left turn yield to pedestrians on green ball.  The sign indicates that the opposing traffic is stopped during green ball, but there is still a need to watch for pedestrians. [More recent GSV images have the sign removed.  A mistake, IMO.]

The primary use of the above is to allow the pedestrians to cross during both the EB and WB phases of the split-phase, which reduces overall red type on the N-S street (which is far busier).  But it can also conceivably be used in TOD operations (without the sign, of course) to alert drivers that they do not have a protected turn and must yield to opposing traffic.

Another nearby signal is also instructive.  A sign to alert drivers that the arrow does not light up during rush hours:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0275669,-77.0766172,3a,15y,198.08h,94.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s54bNucPKRjOvHoDBSqdJeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 08, 2020, 06:01:56 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 07, 2020, 01:39:59 PM
Well this is odd. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6777488,-76.9228729,3a,34.6y,66.89h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spm47hpSL5vm-JVVQGeCmyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) a pedestrian signal hanging from a span wire--at level with the traffic signals! In Franklin, Virginia.

Seattle says, "Hold my beer."

(https://live.staticflickr.com/1909/44902306664_dccfee00f4_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2bpS4p7)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4834/46507485491_8928d527d4_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dRH298)

This is the only one of the three still installed:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/7885/31681695797_dc8fe5b033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on December 08, 2020, 06:53:03 PM
MUTCD

01 Pedestrian signal heads shall be mounted with the bottom of the signal housing including brackets not less than 7 feet or more than 10 feet above sidewalk level, and shall be positioned and adjusted to provide maximum visibility at the beginning of the controlled crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on December 08, 2020, 07:56:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2020, 01:06:28 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)

I'm seeing the same thing. That link is to a very Texas-looking installation...in Texas!

I guess what I meant to indicate is that there are no backplates on the signals in question. Most Texas signals suspended by wires look somewhat like  this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0485384,-95.4634554,3a,46.5y,311.09h,120.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3irUkLMImW0RPRCiBQBSKQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). The other interesting thing about those signals is Bay City usually uses older vertical signals instead of horizontal ones. Also span wires are becoming increasingly rare in Texas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 09, 2020, 07:36:22 AM
Quote from: mrsman on December 02, 2020, 11:42:03 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 06:22:22 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 01, 2020, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 01, 2020, 01:04:52 PM
UDOT does a lot of things that are very unlike surrounding states. At first, it was that split-phasing rule; I remember you mentioning that intersections without left turn lanes are almost always split-phased. That's definitely not something I've seen anywhere else except as required by heavy left turns or whatever. Yet another thing: they seem to simply refuse to use post-mounted signals even when they would make sense, despite being used by every state surrounding it.

Wait, do you mind explaining this? The way I know of split phasing is an intersection like this] (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1847108,-78.1344281,3a,53y,0.08h,96.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9UGyieDbgKEVo5BMC8Jf6w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (on the approaches from I-81 and the side street) where one side gets protected green for all directions (including arrows and the like), and then if necessary the other approach also gets all-protected green. I know occasionally this is done with just green balls (no arrows...I believe 7's two Berryville lights about 15 miles east of this intersection give the side streets arrow-less split phasing). How exactly did Utah do their split phasing?

What I mean is an intersection like this (https://goo.gl/maps/z7KAJPNibTc2xwe98). In WA, and many other states, this would be permissive (as it is in that link): left turns would yield to through traffic, and traffic continuing straight or turning right would either wait for that car, or go around them using what is typically a wide-enough area of the intersection to the right of the waiting vehicle to perform those maneuvers. In Utah, however, the general practice seems to be that all left turns without a dedicated left turn lane are split-phased: movements from that approach will have a green ball and green arrow, and no permissive phase, even if the approach is just a single lane. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/nqLryAAt74iiTjhU8) of what I assume is a very quiet intersection but yet split-phasing is used. I don't get it. Utah is very conservative in this regard.

I have seen intersections like this in other states where its just a single lane approach but the decision was made to split-phase, but this is typically done on a case-by-case basis usually because of issues with overlapping left turns or very heavy approaches (although even then, leading green arrows for one approach seem more common). In Utah, it seems to be the opposite: approaches without a dedicated left turn lane but with the option to turn left (aka, an "option lane") are automatically split-phased from the off, and only become permissive-only "concurrent green" intersections later on as required due to issues with traffic or pedestrian flow.

The situation in Utah that you highlighted seems to be one of the better uses of split phasing.  Split phasing is certainly to be discouraged because by increasing the number of signal phases, you decrease the green time for everyone else.  But in situations where left turns from the side street to the main street are a heavy movment, they are useful.  The two most common situations where I see split phasing is where one or both of the side streets leads to a shopping center and the other situation is where one of the side streets is a collector but dwindles down to a very small residential upon crossing the intersection.  The Utah case is the latter case, where 500 North is a collector to the east of Columbus but a very small residential to the west.  The majority of traffic from the east will turn.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the intersection is designed with a right lane must turn right.  If that lane wasn't designated, then it would be fairly easy is someone wanted to go westbound on 500 north across the intersection to use the right lane to bypass left turning cars, if there was regular signalization.  But given the right turn lane, they are not allowed to.  If so much of the traffic does turn onto Columbus, it makes sense to prioritize right turns with their own lane, so that right turners can make a right on red (as well as green arrow during corresponding left from Columbus) and not be blocked by cars going straight.  Also, for cars coming eastbound, the part of 500 north west of Columbus is very narrow and may not be able to pass a left turner on the right.

Another area that makes widespread use of split-phasing is the unincorporated areas of suburban Sacramento county, especially Arden-Arcade and Carmichael.

Here is an example where the side street (Hurley) is a collector on one side, but a small residential (San Ysidro) on the other side, at the intersection of Watt Avenue.  Somewhat similar to the situation in Utah:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5885923,-121.3830467,3a,75y,106.81h,86.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjlqMr-CQRZsN7kh6bBYS0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here is another example a few blocks away.  Morse is a collector on both sides.  Here, it seems the motivation for split-phasing was to prevent the need to paint left turn pockets so that the bike lane can be continuous through the intersection without widening the street.  Hurley/Morse.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5886642,-121.3922476,3a,75y,173.39h,89.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_7e5u3ypOD5JfKzbLY9RVA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here is one more nearby that is a treat for those who like 12-8-8, 8-8-12, and even a 12-8-8-12 signal faces.  Hurley/Fulton.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5887543,-121.4014607,3a,75y,241.46h,92.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUej78Q7CcFetuJU6PW-mfw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DUej78Q7CcFetuJU6PW-mfw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D222.91882%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This part of town is great in that all collectors and major streets in the area east of Ethan and north of El Camino are named after inventors:  Howe, Bell, Wright, Fulton, Morse, Watt, Marconi, Pope, Whitney, Edison.

I wanted to bring our discussion back to split-phasing for a moment.

Ideally, as we all know, it is nice if a given intersection had at least one exclusive lane for each movement without option lanes.  One lane for left turns, one lane for straight traffic, and one lane for right turns.  Providing such would allow each turning movement to be unrestricted.  straight traffic will not be blocked by left turners and right turners would be able to make a RTOR and not blocked by straight traffic. 

Now if there are only two lanes of traffic, someone is going to be blocked.  The usual configuration is one lane for lefts and one lane for straight, but there could be good reasons as to why the configuration is instead on lane for left/straight and one lane for rights (usually when there is little straight traffic and heavy turning traffic so that right turners have more ability to RTOR).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2020, 11:46:07 PM
Here's an intersection in Bloomfield NJ  (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8083163,-74.1752373,3a,15y,343.91h,92.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqJdRFoy2JmBQg-boRgocPA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)with a 4-section bimodal, a 5-section doghouse, and an inline 5-section signal all at one intersection.

Also in NJ, a 3M doghouse and inline 5 at the same intersection as well (1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7808874,-74.1807679,3a,88.8y,305h,79.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdHyjvsJds9gmM70LtlglZw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3486794,-74.0749595,3a,37.7y,283.98h,89.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUeI1Mi4AW1kh_zgiRz3PaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)). Are there any places that used the 3M 4-section bimodal signal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GOXme2jzVY&ab_channel=LivingGhost371) at all?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 16, 2020, 12:08:32 PM
Well, the new bike signal was finally activated in my town, locals still quite don't get it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlJw_si2QnE
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 16, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/x1LCpZJ3WpGKG7rC9

Is Virginia phasing out Span Wire signals?

I see more and more mast arms popping up like in neighboring Maryland.  However VDOT is keeping the yellow unlike Maryland going all black.  I only see Hampton Roads following MD in that aspect though.

I always remembered the 12-8-8 signals in the 80s
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 17, 2020, 11:22:35 AM
Virginia is absolutely phasing out span wires. Really when any state install (essentially every light outside of some cities and towns) wears out in some manner, VDOT replaces the intersection (or sometimes just the direction) with a mast arms, lights with nearly all-yellow backplates, and FYA's (if there was a doghouse before). There are very few exceptions to this practice. I can think of one intersection over the past few years of them doing this that has stayed span wire, and just recently they retrofitted an intersection near me but kept the left turn doghouses. But probably in the next 5-10 years or so, all VDOT traffic lights will have the same homogenous design: mast arms, yellow backplates, flashing yellow arrows (at permissive lefts) with very few exceptions.

Edit: as far as I know, the only 12-8-8 state install left is on US-60 in Sandston. If anyone knows of more, I'd love to see them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 17, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The color of backplates has become an interesting question. The MUTCD requires that backplates be painted black, period. But now they allow the yellow reflective borders which are becoming very common. So the end result is with a yellow head and yellow borders, only a very small part of the backplates is black which kind of defeats the purpose of the original standard. So they might as well just allow the whole backplate to be yellow like in Canada. Though personally I preferred the black backplate without yellow borders.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 18, 2020, 12:25:32 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 16, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/x1LCpZJ3WpGKG7rC9

Is Virginia phasing out Span Wire signals?

I see more and more mast arms popping up like in neighboring Maryland.  However VDOT is keeping the yellow unlike Maryland going all black.  I only see Hampton Roads following MD in that aspect though.

I always remembered the 12-8-8 signals in the 80s

It's not just the Hampton Roads that are using black signal housings, a few others are doing it too. Actually, as far as city-wide goes, it began with Roanoke.

This is what I said in the Virginia thread last year:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=294.msg2416295#msg2416295

EDIT: As I'm sure you know, only the front of most of the MDSHA signals are black.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 18, 2020, 08:43:15 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 17, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The color of backplates has become an interesting question. The MUTCD requires that backplates be painted black, period. But now they allow the yellow reflective borders which are becoming very common. So the end result is with a yellow head and yellow borders, only a very small part of the backplates is black which kind of defeats the purpose of the original standard. So they might as well just allow the whole backplate to be yellow like in Canada. Though personally I preferred the black backplate without yellow borders.

Speaking from personal experience, the reflective tape makes a world of difference at night. You can easily see a signal,even if it is not operating, when the tape is applied.

The all yellow Canadian backplates help a little but not much.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 18, 2020, 08:57:42 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 18, 2020, 08:43:15 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 17, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The color of backplates has become an interesting question. The MUTCD requires that backplates be painted black, period. But now they allow the yellow reflective borders which are becoming very common. So the end result is with a yellow head and yellow borders, only a very small part of the backplates is black which kind of defeats the purpose of the original standard. So they might as well just allow the whole backplate to be yellow like in Canada. Though personally I preferred the black backplate without yellow borders.

Speaking from personal experience, the reflective tape makes a world of difference at night. You can easily see a signal,even if it is not operating, when the tape is applied.

The all yellow Canadian backplates help a little but not much.

I've never been to Canada, but judging by what you said I take it the yellow backplates there are not reflective?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 18, 2020, 08:58:01 AM
Quote from: plain on December 18, 2020, 12:25:32 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 16, 2020, 04:32:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/x1LCpZJ3WpGKG7rC9

Is Virginia phasing out Span Wire signals?

I see more and more mast arms popping up like in neighboring Maryland.  However VDOT is keeping the yellow unlike Maryland going all black.  I only see Hampton Roads following MD in that aspect though.

I always remembered the 12-8-8 signals in the 80s

It's not just the Hampton Roads that are using black signal housings, a few others are doing it too. Actually, as far as city-wide goes, it began with Roanoke.

This is what I said in the Virginia thread last year:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=294.msg2416295#msg2416295

EDIT: As I'm sure you know, only the front of most of the MDSHA signals are black.


No I did not know as last time I was in MD was 2003 when many new installations I saw were all black.

Must of been a phase it was going through like Florida in late 70s had what MD must of been then for a short while until they decided both sides black which has been the norm since.  Originally a Florida signal was yellow with cut out visors and all concrete poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 18, 2020, 09:51:39 AM
Whenever I see black traffic signals with yellow visors (or vice versa) I always think about those half and half cookies (one side chocolate, one side vanilla). Don't ask me why.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 18, 2020, 09:51:39 AM
Whenever I see black traffic signals with yellow visors (or vice versa) I always think about those half and half cookies (one side chocolate, one side vanilla). Don't ask me why.

I eat those cookies every day with my lunch at work.  So, great, does that mean I'm going to think of stoplights on my lunch break now?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 18, 2020, 01:27:42 PM
Quote from: plain on December 18, 2020, 08:57:42 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 18, 2020, 08:43:15 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 17, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The color of backplates has become an interesting question. The MUTCD requires that backplates be painted black, period. But now they allow the yellow reflective borders which are becoming very common. So the end result is with a yellow head and yellow borders, only a very small part of the backplates is black which kind of defeats the purpose of the original standard. So they might as well just allow the whole backplate to be yellow like in Canada. Though personally I preferred the black backplate without yellow borders.

Speaking from personal experience, the reflective tape makes a world of difference at night. You can easily see a signal,even if it is not operating, when the tape is applied.

The all yellow Canadian backplates help a little but not much.

I've never been to Canada, but judging by what you said I take it the yellow backplates there are not reflective?

No they arent but I was only in Toronto and Niagara falls. Other provinces may be different
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on December 18, 2020, 04:17:49 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 18, 2020, 09:51:39 AM
Whenever I see black traffic signals with yellow visors (or vice versa) I always think about those half and half cookies (one side chocolate, one side vanilla). Don't ask me why.

I eat those cookies every day with my lunch at work.  So, great, does that mean I'm going to think of stoplights on my lunch break now?

You're a member of this forum...you don't already?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 04:45:05 PM
Nah.  I'm not really a stoplight guy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 18, 2020, 05:36:17 PM
I've been noticing that recent signals installed by NYSDOT region 4 all have tunnel visors. NYSDOT signals had mostly cutaway visors until about a year ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2020, 06:07:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 16, 2020, 12:08:32 PM
Well, the new bike signal was finally activated in my town, locals still quite don't get it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlJw_si2QnE

This is what I saw.

At 0:42, you said a car ran a red signal.  There's no way to tell what color the traffic light is here, but what I do see is a car stopping at 0:39.  The Bike/Ped light turns green at 0:44.  It's quite possible that first car stopped early in the yellow phase, because there's absolutely no reason for there to be an all red phase for up to 5 seconds here as there's no reason to clear-out the intersection for that period of time.  Even if that 2nd car (at 0:42) entered right at the beginning of the red, it still made it thru before the Bike/Ped light turned green.  If the light was red longer, that car proved it doesn't need to be longer.

If you believe people are running the red, is it because the light cycles constantly for no reason?  At 1:10, the light turned red for motorists, even though there were no bikes or pedestrians present that could've hit the button.  People are of course going to run the beginning of the red light if they don't want to sit there for no reason.

At 3:08, you said "you can go".  Except, the person did stop at a red light, which turned green just after the motorist stopped.  There's a momentary reaction time when this happens...people don't usually instantly go from brake to gas pedal.  You were also there at the time, so maybe that person was making sure you weren't going to suddenly jump out and cross.

Also interesting at that same time: The person on the sidewalk near you walked right thru the Don't Walk symbol...and yet you didn't say a damn thing about their illegal action.  Earlier, when peds were walking in the bike lane, you didn't say anything bad about that action either.

So, we get it.  Pedestrians Good.  Bikes good.  Cars....badddddd.

Hopefully this light doesn't cycle on its own, and hopefully the crossing is busier during nicer periods of weather.  Because in that video, it's tough to justify its existence for so little traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on December 18, 2020, 07:02:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2020, 06:07:48 PM
Hopefully this light doesn't cycle on its own, and hopefully the crossing is busier during nicer periods of weather.  Because in that video, it's tough to justify its existence for so little traffic.

It's a 10-mile trail, and I've walked the whole thing. It's quite busy, but I would still prefer it on a pushbutton instead of automatic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 18, 2020, 07:29:52 PM
Quote from: plain on December 18, 2020, 08:57:42 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 18, 2020, 08:43:15 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 17, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The color of backplates has become an interesting question. The MUTCD requires that backplates be painted black, period. But now they allow the yellow reflective borders which are becoming very common. So the end result is with a yellow head and yellow borders, only a very small part of the backplates is black which kind of defeats the purpose of the original standard. So they might as well just allow the whole backplate to be yellow like in Canada. Though personally I preferred the black backplate without yellow borders.

Speaking from personal experience, the reflective tape makes a world of difference at night. You can easily see a signal,even if it is not operating, when the tape is applied.

The all yellow Canadian backplates help a little but not much.

I've never been to Canada, but judging by what you said I take it the yellow backplates there are not reflective?

Most cities and provinces use yellow backplates. Retroreflective borders are really only common in some places. BC for instance. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/acKYejDZFz7Sx6aX6). Black backplates were common in Canada for decades, but I think they started to fall out of favor in the 80s.

British Columbia was the first place in North America to utilize yellow retroreflective borders, along McKenzie Ave on Vancouver Island, as part of a study. They eventually became standard in BC and then other parts of Canada. That original study, from the late 90s or early 00s, was the reason the FHWA began to allow yellow retroreflective borders in the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 18, 2020, 10:04:35 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2020, 06:07:48 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 16, 2020, 12:08:32 PM
Well, the new bike signal was finally activated in my town, locals still quite don't get it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlJw_si2QnE

This is what I saw.

At 0:42, you said a car ran a red signal.  There's no way to tell what color the traffic light is here, but what I do see is a car stopping at 0:39.  The Bike/Ped light turns green at 0:44.  It's quite possible that first car stopped early in the yellow phase, because there's absolutely no reason for there to be an all red phase for up to 5 seconds here as there's no reason to clear-out the intersection for that period of time.  Even if that 2nd car (at 0:42) entered right at the beginning of the red, it still made it thru before the Bike/Ped light turned green.  If the light was red longer, that car proved it doesn't need to be longer.

If you believe people are running the red, is it because the light cycles constantly for no reason?  At 1:10, the light turned red for motorists, even though there were no bikes or pedestrians present that could've hit the button.  People are of course going to run the beginning of the red light if they don't want to sit there for no reason.

At 3:08, you said "you can go".  Except, the person did stop at a red light, which turned green just after the motorist stopped.  There's a momentary reaction time when this happens...people don't usually instantly go from brake to gas pedal.  You were also there at the time, so maybe that person was making sure you weren't going to suddenly jump out and cross.

Also interesting at that same time: The person on the sidewalk near you walked right thru the Don't Walk symbol...and yet you didn't say a damn thing about their illegal action.  Earlier, when peds were walking in the bike lane, you didn't say anything bad about that action either.

So, we get it.  Pedestrians Good.  Bikes good.  Cars....badddddd.

Hopefully this light doesn't cycle on its own, and hopefully the crossing is busier during nicer periods of weather.  Because in that video, it's tough to justify its existence for so little traffic.

Alright: So you can clearly see the red hand on the pedestrian signal for lake st which means the signal is red.

I was trying to help cars know when to go and stop since they seemed confused. I didn't talk to the pedestrian about running the hand because I didn't notice.

I actually did call out a runner for running the red light, but it wasn't added in the video. I uploaded it just for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XADVkjZXjjo

The light was currently operating in what is called a coordinated mode, adjusted with other signals on the route since it was filmed during rush hour (which pre covid was very bad here). During free periods it's not like that. Also, you can see pedestrians cross at 1:10, just not immediately.

Sorry if I seemed biased but I'm really not. This signal benefits cars and bikes, you just need to be more knowledgeable on the area.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 20, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/7dckF5mNUU2pRwfC7

Found a 12-8-8 signal on GSV in Newport News at VA 351's Western terminus.

The other day here we were discussing VA signals so someone mentioned most gone but one other in Western VA still left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 20, 2020, 01:27:54 PM
I found a site with a lot of historic pictures along L.A.'s famous Sunset Blvd running from Downtown LA, thru Hollywood, Beverly Hills, UCLA to Pacific Palisades on the Pacific Ocean.

One picture from 1974 shows the signals at Sunset/Highland.

On the right side, you can see a side mounted 8-8-12-12 controlling the westbound to southbound left turn.  While I grew up relatively close to this intersection, I don't remember the specific signaling.  I believe this may have been a leading protected/permitted left (as it currently is now with 8-8-8-12-12 signal) but probably did not utilize a yellow arrow.  It is interesting, then, that the green orb used a 12" signal and not a 8" signal.  But it is also likely that this was signalized in a different manner.

https://12sunsets.getty.edu/contact-sheet/image/7e3909f1-7b2b-42e2-a0ce-49f40f3899bc?d=0.42787&mode=normal&seed=768&filters=tag,traffic%20light
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on December 20, 2020, 01:46:06 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 20, 2020, 01:27:54 PM
I found a site with a lot of historic pictures along L.A.'s famous Sunset Blvd running from Downtown LA, thru Hollywood, Beverly Hills, UCLA to Pacific Palisades on the Pacific Ocean.

One picture from 1974 shows the signals at Sunset/Highland.

On the right side, you can see a side mounted 8-8-12-12 controlling the westbound to southbound left turn.  While I grew up relatively close to this intersection, I don't remember the specific signaling.  I believe this may have been a leading protected/permitted left (as it currently is now with 8-8-8-12-12 signal) but probably did not utilize a yellow arrow.  It is interesting, then, that the green orb used a 12" signal and not a 8" signal.  But it is also likely that this was signalized in a different manner.

https://12sunsets.getty.edu/contact-sheet/image/7e3909f1-7b2b-42e2-a0ce-49f40f3899bc?d=0.42787&mode=normal&seed=768&filters=tag,traffic%20light


I remember seeing set-ups like that in Chicago
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 20, 2020, 01:52:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/7dckF5mNUU2pRwfC7

Found a 12-8-8 signal on GSV in Newport News at VA 351's Western terminus.

The other day here we were discussing VA signals so someone mentioned most gone but one other in Western VA still left.

That was me lol, and great find! Assuming this is a state install, that makes two!

(Also super minor, but Sandston is an eastern suburb of Richmond, not at all Western VA).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 20, 2020, 01:55:16 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 20, 2020, 01:27:54 PM
I found a site with a lot of historic pictures along L.A.'s famous Sunset Blvd running from Downtown LA, thru Hollywood, Beverly Hills, UCLA to Pacific Palisades on the Pacific Ocean.

One picture from 1974 shows the signals at Sunset/Highland.

On the right side, you can see a side mounted 8-8-12-12 controlling the westbound to southbound left turn.  While I grew up relatively close to this intersection, I don't remember the specific signaling.  I believe this may have been a leading protected/permitted left (as it currently is now with 8-8-8-12-12 signal) but probably did not utilize a yellow arrow.  It is interesting, then, that the green orb used a 12" signal and not a 8" signal.  But it is also likely that this was signalized in a different manner.

https://12sunsets.getty.edu/contact-sheet/image/7e3909f1-7b2b-42e2-a0ce-49f40f3899bc?d=0.42787&mode=normal&seed=768&filters=tag,traffic%20light


Holy crap!  It's a Jurassic Google Street View!!!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:19:49 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 20, 2020, 01:52:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/7dckF5mNUU2pRwfC7

Found a 12-8-8 signal on GSV in Newport News at VA 351's Western terminus.

The other day here we were discussing VA signals so someone mentioned most gone but one other in Western VA still left.

That was me lol, and great find! Assuming this is a state install, that makes two!

(Also super minor, but Sandston is an eastern suburb of Richmond, not at all Western VA).

Not a state install, this was done by the city.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I remember another one somewhere in the Boston metro but I can't remember where.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 20, 2020, 02:33:28 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 20, 2020, 01:55:16 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 20, 2020, 01:27:54 PM
I found a site with a lot of historic pictures along L.A.'s famous Sunset Blvd running from Downtown LA, thru Hollywood, Beverly Hills, UCLA to Pacific Palisades on the Pacific Ocean.

One picture from 1974 shows the signals at Sunset/Highland.

On the right side, you can see a side mounted 8-8-12-12 controlling the westbound to southbound left turn.  While I grew up relatively close to this intersection, I don't remember the specific signaling.  I believe this may have been a leading protected/permitted left (as it currently is now with 8-8-8-12-12 signal) but probably did not utilize a yellow arrow.  It is interesting, then, that the green orb used a 12" signal and not a 8" signal.  But it is also likely that this was signalized in a different manner.

https://12sunsets.getty.edu/contact-sheet/image/7e3909f1-7b2b-42e2-a0ce-49f40f3899bc?d=0.42787&mode=normal&seed=768&filters=tag,traffic%20light


Holy crap!  It's a Jurassic Google Street View!!!

Indeed!  This photographer basically took periodic pictures while someone else was driving all along Sunset Blvd.  (I believe he may have been on the bed of a pickup.)  The main focus was on some of the buildings that line the street, such as the famous nightclulbs on the Strip.  But now it is something that we can all utilize and look at.  I find the site a little hard to work with, but it is nice looking at some of these pictures.

[I know that in NYC, the depression era WPA hired photographers to photograph every building in the city.  These photos are now digitized as well and can be accessed here:]

https://1940s.nyc/map#13.69/40.7093/-73.99397
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 20, 2020, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I remember another one somewhere in the Boston metro but I can't remember where.
I know where! Watertown square MA (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201221/b0ed688632184050898d24ab29afc1dd.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 21, 2020, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 20, 2020, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I remember another one somewhere in the Boston metro but I can't remember where.
I know where! Watertown square MA (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201221/b0ed688632184050898d24ab29afc1dd.jpg)


iPhone

That's not the one but thanks for posting that. Is that an FYA?

The one I saw was another 3-section signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 21, 2020, 10:02:39 AM
Quote from: plain on December 21, 2020, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 20, 2020, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I remember another one somewhere in the Boston metro but I can't remember where.
I know where! Watertown square MA (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201221/b0ed688632184050898d24ab29afc1dd.jpg)


iPhone

That's not the one but thanks for posting that. Is that an FYA?

The one I saw was another 3-section signal.

I'm certain that the signal sections are RA-Y-YA-GA... IIRC, in stop-and-go mode, everything but the Y (circular yellow) section is used, and in flash mode, the circular yellow is the one that flashes. Please correct me if I'm wrong...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 21, 2020, 02:05:12 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:19:49 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 20, 2020, 01:52:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/7dckF5mNUU2pRwfC7

Found a 12-8-8 signal on GSV in Newport News at VA 351's Western terminus.

The other day here we were discussing VA signals so someone mentioned most gone but one other in Western VA still left.

That was me lol, and great find! Assuming this is a state install, that makes two!

(Also super minor, but Sandston is an eastern suburb of Richmond, not at all Western VA).

Not a state install, this was done by the city.

Rats. Makes only one existing VDOT install then. I know there was another one at Burke and Old Burke Lake in Burke until the mid-2000s, but that one's long gone.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 21, 2020, 09:55:55 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 21, 2020, 10:02:39 AM
Quote from: plain on December 21, 2020, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 20, 2020, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 19, 2020, 06:40:54 PM
MA inverted red arrows: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3968973,-71.2592962,3a,15y,295.59h,97.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQtk4Sz201a_PJnErZENBUQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I remember another one somewhere in the Boston metro but I can't remember where.
I know where! Watertown square MA (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201221/b0ed688632184050898d24ab29afc1dd.jpg)


iPhone

That's not the one but thanks for posting that. Is that an FYA?

The one I saw was another 3-section signal.

I'm certain that the signal sections are RA-Y-YA-GA... IIRC, in stop-and-go mode, everything but the Y (circular yellow) section is used, and in flash mode, the circular yellow is the one that flashes. Please correct me if I'm wrong...
You are correct


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on December 24, 2020, 03:11:12 AM
One of the more interesting things I've seen: pedestrian doghouse signals.  It's comprised of a hand/man at the top, with two countdown timers side-by-side at the bottom.  From what time I could observe while waiting on a red light, only the left timer came on during the don't walk phase, with the right timer remaining dark the whole time.  At the intersection of FL-A1A and FL-870:
https://goo.gl/maps/3X8rZo8Sxz9YUx6LA
https://goo.gl/maps/ZYshbJqZn3zhkL1m6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on December 24, 2020, 01:19:52 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on December 24, 2020, 03:11:12 AM
One of the more interesting things I've seen: pedestrian doghouse signals.  It's comprised of a hand/man at the top, with two countdown timers side-by-side at the bottom.  From what time I could observe while waiting on a red light, only the left timer came on during the don't walk phase, with the right timer remaining dark the whole time.  At the intersection of FL-A1A and FL-870:
https://goo.gl/maps/3X8rZo8Sxz9YUx6LA
https://goo.gl/maps/ZYshbJqZn3zhkL1m6
Thats a weird one! Looking through street view history, there is a sign that reads: TRIAL All-Way Pedestrian Signal Phase Weekends and Special Events
https://www.google.com/maps/@26.189836,-80.0966398,3a,15y,31.45h,96.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQ4cZRkPw_42M0cws5Nds8g!2e0!5s20150601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I'm guessing one countdown is used for the pedestrian scramble and a different for normal operations? Still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Sign is definitely unique as well being a non-standard FYG background sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on December 26, 2020, 01:18:19 PM
Baja appears to be getting some nice new mast arms, probably courtesy of its neighbor to the north.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.573522,-115.3493715,3a,75y,112.96h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgGx1eetU6bQnWqtD37lypw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Certainly better than what it replaced (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5733867,-115.3490316,3a,69.6y,304.39h,92.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIDBiQdp55k7ZS_0Wi2O3dw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 26, 2020, 09:58:36 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 26, 2020, 01:18:19 PM
Baja appears to be getting some nice new mast arms, probably courtesy of its neighbor to the north.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.573522,-115.3493715,3a,75y,112.96h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgGx1eetU6bQnWqtD37lypw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Certainly better than what it replaced (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5733867,-115.3490316,3a,69.6y,304.39h,92.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIDBiQdp55k7ZS_0Wi2O3dw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).

I spun the camera around in your link and saw something in the distance so I went in for a closer look. Looks like those signals weren't the only thing Baja got from its neighbor to the north lol

Image from GSV

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201227/eaa26589eda05b8c8bb7c3e8cf992c6f.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 27, 2020, 11:58:42 AM
Another reason I prefer mastarms to span wire:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MontgomeryCountyMD/comments/kkqrrd/what_i_encountered_on_my_way_to_work_today_at/

https://i.imgur.com/8hZEuZc.jpg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 27, 2020, 12:09:33 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 26, 2020, 01:18:19 PM
Baja appears to be getting some nice new mast arms, probably courtesy of its neighbor to the north.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.573522,-115.3493715,3a,75y,112.96h,99.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgGx1eetU6bQnWqtD37lypw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Certainly better than what it replaced (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5733867,-115.3490316,3a,69.6y,304.39h,92.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIDBiQdp55k7ZS_0Wi2O3dw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/).

Gotta work on that wiring though... https://goo.gl/maps/i1cUebPgeYZBJKU7A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on December 28, 2020, 03:55:12 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/vheE7onubZWyQfQK8

Interesting find of a "DONT WALK" pedestrian head still in use on Commack Rd in Commack, NY. The pedestrian head for the other direction is the hand/walk man. Still in service as of Fall 2020, although Suffolk DPW is doing work on CR-4 and I'm sure it'll be replaced.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on December 28, 2020, 04:39:16 PM
And another interesting find in Lindenhurst, NY. Look at the spacing between the red, yellow, and green on the horizontal signals.

https://goo.gl/maps/fWzBgJRmMjHcz7FD7

https://goo.gl/maps/MdXtKe7oF68NiaBW7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 05:21:23 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on December 28, 2020, 04:39:16 PM
And another interesting find in Lindenhurst, NY. Look at the spacing between the red, yellow, and green on the horizontal signals.

https://goo.gl/maps/fWzBgJRmMjHcz7FD7

I strongly prefer vertical signals to horizontal, because of the regularity and expectation of the matter.  They are also more common. 

In the above case, I recognize the need for horizontal because the elevated train blocks the view of the signals.  But I commend those who placed this signal for putting in place a side mounted vertical signal as well.  I think in any place where the view would be obstructed, side mounted signals form a great supplement.

I beleive similar treatments are needed below, where the freeway bridge obstructs the view of the upcoming signal.  Pan around and see how close you have to get before you can clearly see the signal.


https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0134533,-77.0420845,3a,75y,192.29h,78.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgH-Pd6uYHrNrjhi8HR7KBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2020, 10:39:37 PM
Seems like someone forgot to change the default password on these Polara iNS APS buttons... Main and Pond St in Weymouth MA.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 04, 2021, 11:07:14 AM
Alto ahead, and a green light? (https://goo.gl/maps/ihtg58uDghhhrMca7)  Sure, why not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on January 04, 2021, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 04, 2021, 11:07:14 AM
Alto ahead, and a green light? (https://goo.gl/maps/ihtg58uDghhhrMca7)  Sure, why not.
Gah! Cool it with the spanwires Costa Rica.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on January 05, 2021, 02:46:49 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2020, 10:39:37 PM
Seems like someone forgot to change the default password on these Polara iNS APS buttons... Main and Pond St in Weymouth MA.
Caltrans also did the same thing on the recent installation of new signals/push buttons on CA 152 in Gilroy, CA (where I live).  They finally fixed them a few weeks later.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: spooky on January 05, 2021, 09:26:32 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2020, 10:39:37 PM
Seems like someone forgot to change the default password on these Polara iNS APS buttons... Main and Pond St in Weymouth MA.



The installer will typically leave it that way so that the owner can set the password. Were these recently installed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on January 05, 2021, 10:26:29 AM
Quote from: spooky on January 05, 2021, 09:26:32 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2020, 10:39:37 PM
Seems like someone forgot to change the default password on these Polara iNS APS buttons... Main and Pond St in Weymouth MA.
The installer will typically leave it that way so that the owner can set the password. Were these recently installed?
Yes. However, some of the other buttons at the same intersection (and the intersection 100m to the north) were not saying that message, which I'm guessing the default password was changed on some of them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 06, 2021, 09:15:45 AM
Quote from: spooky on January 05, 2021, 09:26:32 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 30, 2020, 10:39:37 PM
Seems like someone forgot to change the default password on these Polara iNS APS buttons... Main and Pond St in Weymouth MA.



The installer will typically leave it that way so that the owner can set the password. Were these recently installed?

So Porala doesn't let buttons keep their default password anymore.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2021, 01:07:00 PM
So, this is kind of a traffic signal thing, but also kind of not.

I was looking at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/QhCxUEnaEXDeHTZ57) in Burien, WA trying to figure out why it needed to be split-phased.

Oh...wait, I think I spotted it :-D

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50810418968_71d5b2e3aa_o.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on January 07, 2021, 03:51:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2021, 01:07:00 PM
So, this is kind of a traffic signal thing, but also kind of not.

I was looking at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/QhCxUEnaEXDeHTZ57) in Burien, WA trying to figure out why it needed to be split-phased.

Oh...wait, I think I spotted it :-D

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50810418968_71d5b2e3aa_o.png)
Buses enter on the left side of the road into the transit center? That's new for me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2021, 04:11:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2021, 01:07:00 PM
So, this is kind of a traffic signal thing, but also kind of not.

I was looking at this intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/QhCxUEnaEXDeHTZ57) in Burien, WA trying to figure out why it needed to be split-phased.

Oh...wait, I think I spotted it :-D

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50810418968_71d5b2e3aa_o.png)

Looking at the signaled, I get why they did that. I think the unusual thing here with such a traffic pattern is that there's no center island to assist with signage. But, being its only buses that should be in here, they should know the traffic flow for this lot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 08, 2021, 12:45:43 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 07, 2021, 03:51:33 PM
Buses enter on the left side of the road into the transit center? That's new for me.

Yeah, not sure I noticed before myself either. Not until today, at least.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2021, 04:11:46 PM
Looking at the signaled, I get why they did that. I think the unusual thing here with such a traffic pattern is that there's no center island to assist with signage. But, being its only buses that should be in here, they should know the traffic flow for this lot.

If not for the left-hand traffic, I think it could safely operate with concurrent phasing. Since there isn't that much traffic in and out of the bus station.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on January 10, 2021, 02:41:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 08, 2021, 12:45:43 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 07, 2021, 03:51:33 PM
Buses enter on the left side of the road into the transit center? That's new for me.

Yeah, not sure I noticed before myself either. Not until today, at least.

The same thing happens at the current Northgate Transit Center (not split phased (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7032137,-122.3272534,3a,90y,231.01h,99.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siSgldBYwXPZvjHlpRqlRug!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)(!) with the current temporary signal configuration on the north end -- but this will be gone once the light rail station opens later this year, with the new station having stops on 1st Ave NE northbound and a new one-way roadway east of the station southbound) and Bellevue Transit Center (with an interesting signal setup (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6155078,-122.1934628,3a,33y,268.2h,94.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjkkQTVvQ1lEa8KIfRxm08A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) on the east end). I'm sure there are other examples that I'm not thinking of right now, since driving on the left is necessary for island platforms with normal buses... though most are off-street facilities (like Everett Station (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9739722,-122.197756,207m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)) that aren't quite as odd as these three.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 10, 2021, 12:56:54 PM
Quote from: jay8g on January 10, 2021, 02:41:14 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 08, 2021, 12:45:43 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 07, 2021, 03:51:33 PM
Buses enter on the left side of the road into the transit center? That's new for me.

Yeah, not sure I noticed before myself either. Not until today, at least.

The same thing happens at the current Northgate Transit Center (not split phased (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7032137,-122.3272534,3a,90y,231.01h,99.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siSgldBYwXPZvjHlpRqlRug!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)(!) with the current temporary signal configuration on the north end -- but this will be gone once the light rail station opens later this year, with the new station having stops on 1st Ave NE northbound and a new one-way roadway east of the station southbound) and Bellevue Transit Center (with an interesting signal setup (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6155078,-122.1934628,3a,33y,268.2h,94.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjkkQTVvQ1lEa8KIfRxm08A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) on the east end). I'm sure there are other examples that I'm not thinking of right now, since driving on the left is necessary for island platforms with normal buses... though most are off-street facilities (like Everett Station (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9739722,-122.197756,207m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)) that aren't quite as odd as these three.

I remember that signal at Northgate being a bit of an oddity last time I went by, but I think I was caught more by the odd older 8-8-8 signal in the other direction and the near-side left turn signal. I did not notice the opposite-side driving for the transit center. But it definitely makes sense why it might happen.

That signal outside the Bellevue Transit Center is very interesting. Right now it doesn't seem compliant (seems odd only having one signal for normal traffic) but I'll reserve actual complaints for when the Eastlink service opens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 11, 2021, 05:49:40 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.

I would assume that's for pedestrians, has nothing to do with the parking lot
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 09:45:08 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 11, 2021, 05:49:40 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.

I would assume that's for pedestrians, has nothing to do with the parking lot
Pedestrians? It's a T-intersection right in front of a mall, after that the exit options are ramps to US-7/I-84 or making a left/right onto Backus Ave, which just takes you to more stores (no sidewalk). No matter where you go, it doesn't seem like a place for pedestrians, and crossing straight from there, you'd be heading towards a large intersection with no marked crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Also, I'm aware it has nothing to do with the parking lot, I'm just saying the layout of it makes it look like it does.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on January 11, 2021, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 09:45:08 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 11, 2021, 05:49:40 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.

I would assume that's for pedestrians, has nothing to do with the parking lot
Pedestrians? It's a T-intersection right in front of a mall, after that the exit options are ramps to US-7/I-84 or making a left/right onto Backus Ave, which just takes you to more stores (no sidewalk). No matter where you go, it doesn't seem like a place for pedestrians, and crossing straight from there, you'd be heading towards a large intersection with no marked crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Also, I'm aware it has nothing to do with the parking lot, I'm just saying the layout of it makes it look like it does.

It is fairly common practice in CT where there are no pedestrian crosswalk signals for T intersections or where split phasing is used

https://goo.gl/maps/Hu6zqeoJzBhd4LVB6 old setup with signal towards field
https://goo.gl/maps/ayD2KcYVPZ1GfvM49 New installation with no ped crossing signs installed instead

https://goo.gl/maps/ssn2AQpMoA4kzeqa8 another example

https://goo.gl/maps/vZEvM822muqLLXb67 pole mounted example prior to current change to 4-way intersection

https://goo.gl/maps/EvgvEuf1abuspnGK6 split phase intersection with a "ped" signal so that crossing was aligned with traffic from Middle Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/uHs58JTtzkSFKCyS9 Later deactivated and pointed towards back of left turn signal when normal crosswalk ped signals were installed
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 04:41:26 PM
Mast arm attached to concrete 294 underpass near O'Hare (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9656847,-87.8734837,3a,75y,286.06h,97.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s49JUu8X7dUOiHYwS8ByZeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Any other installs like this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on January 12, 2021, 05:15:50 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 04:41:26 PM
Mast arm attached to concrete 294 underpass near O'Hare (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9656847,-87.8734837,3a,75y,286.06h,97.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s49JUu8X7dUOiHYwS8ByZeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Any other installs like this?
Here's one I've been through a lot: MO 94/364 and Jungs Station Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7507273,-90.562821,3a,51.2y,26.26h,94.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3OsckDk4amuTTgL0ZfcY2A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D3OsckDk4amuTTgL0ZfcY2A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.0725%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 06:09:44 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 12, 2021, 05:15:50 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 04:41:26 PM
Mast arm attached to concrete 294 underpass near O'Hare (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9656847,-87.8734837,3a,75y,286.06h,97.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s49JUu8X7dUOiHYwS8ByZeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Any other installs like this?
Here's one I've been through a lot: MO 94/364 and Jungs Station Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7507273,-90.562821,3a,51.2y,26.26h,94.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3OsckDk4amuTTgL0ZfcY2A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D3OsckDk4amuTTgL0ZfcY2A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.0725%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
Didn't even recall that one lmao
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 12, 2021, 10:05:05 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 04:41:26 PM
Mast arm attached to concrete 294 underpass near O'Hare (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9656847,-87.8734837,3a,75y,286.06h,97.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s49JUu8X7dUOiHYwS8ByZeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Any other installs like this?

I can only think of examples for ramp meters in my area. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/YcFYjdkS6WbdxAL66) with only post-mounted signals in Bellevue, WA. This isn't the same, however, as it is mounted vertically as though it were a post-mounted meter.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on January 12, 2021, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on January 11, 2021, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 09:45:08 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 11, 2021, 05:49:40 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.

I would assume that's for pedestrians, has nothing to do with the parking lot
Pedestrians? It's a T-intersection right in front of a mall, after that the exit options are ramps to US-7/I-84 or making a left/right onto Backus Ave, which just takes you to more stores (no sidewalk). No matter where you go, it doesn't seem like a place for pedestrians, and crossing straight from there, you'd be heading towards a large intersection with no marked crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Also, I'm aware it has nothing to do with the parking lot, I'm just saying the layout of it makes it look like it does.

It is fairly common practice in CT where there are no pedestrian crosswalk signals for T intersections or where split phasing is used

https://goo.gl/maps/Hu6zqeoJzBhd4LVB6 old setup with signal towards field
https://goo.gl/maps/ayD2KcYVPZ1GfvM49 New installation with no ped crossing signs installed instead

https://goo.gl/maps/ssn2AQpMoA4kzeqa8 another example

https://goo.gl/maps/vZEvM822muqLLXb67 pole mounted example prior to current change to 4-way intersection

https://goo.gl/maps/EvgvEuf1abuspnGK6 split phase intersection with a "ped" signal so that crossing was aligned with traffic from Middle Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/uHs58JTtzkSFKCyS9 Later deactivated and pointed towards back of left turn signal when normal crosswalk ped signals were installed
Weird. Haven't seen that before. I'd still note that the ones you mentioned are near homes and businesses, while the one at the mall that I mentioned isn't, and therefore doesn't have as much use. I'd also be curious to know if other states have this pedestrian setup for their traffic lights as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 12, 2021, 11:14:12 PM
I've seen the above (car-less approach with traffic signals) exactly once. Downtown Seattle, of all places:

Marion St @ Western Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/RApuGcJ3K2EcRbJcA)

Marion is one-way eastbound but the signal also has a display for any westbound traffic. But there is no pedestrian signal, so that signal is actually meant for pedestrians. How this setup has survived over time, I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 13, 2021, 12:03:48 AM
At one point, when ped signals were rare, regular signals used as a pedestrian indicator were common.  Very few remain in existence today.

To show one in action, let's take this intersecton, whose signal is split-phased with the opposing direction. Take a close look here:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/e5QBddCUTCqEhHzJ8 . The signal is red, although it's hard to tell due to those slot thingys they put in a lens to restrict side viewability. Now, zoom out and look at the main traffic light. It's green. That's showing how that signal to the side is really for pedestrians, not vehicles.  Honestly, I'm amazed this light hasn't been fully upgraded for pedestrians yet. The green arrow itself is relatively new.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 13, 2021, 11:32:07 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 12, 2021, 11:14:12 PM
I've seen the above (car-less approach with traffic signals) exactly once. Downtown Seattle, of all places:

Marion St @ Western Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/RApuGcJ3K2EcRbJcA)

Marion is one-way eastbound but the signal also has a display for any westbound traffic. But there is no pedestrian signal, so that signal is actually meant for pedestrians. How this setup has survived over time, I'm not sure.

Signals like this are very common in Philadelphia.  Many of the signals do not have pedestrian indicators, so a standard RYG signal will control pedestrian movements.  In areas with one-way streets, you see the signals facing wrong way traffic, as is the case here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9560345,-75.1606318,3a,75y,294.5h,91.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sW0kRt2526fgR2OjVaoNNRw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DW0kRt2526fgR2OjVaoNNRw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D203.60448%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Here's another one at Spring Garden at 7th.  Here it seems like all of the signals that are meant for vehicles are larger 12-12-12, but the ped signals are 8-8-8.  One can see the wrong way signals facing one-way 7th and the left most signal at this vantage point is also for peds and is likely red when the median signal displays a green or yellow arrow.  (It matches the signals for the reverse direction).

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9615131,-75.1498869,3a,75y,86.69h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU97R_22ZN_Gi6q-Ei6edBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Over in Washington DC, there is this signal at a T intersection.  (The stem of the T is a driveway, but delivery vehicles use it to access IRS and the Trump Hotel loading zones.)  There are ped signals here, yet for whatever reason there is a RYG signal facing into a building.  From this vantage point, I'm referring to the red signals.  12th St NW, north of Constitution.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8934337,-77.028129,3a,37.5y,85.63h,93.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFRNw919dDmEwmfLGoAlDLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 14, 2021, 12:54:49 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 12, 2021, 11:14:12 PM
I've seen the above (car-less approach with traffic signals) exactly once. Downtown Seattle, of all places:

Marion St @ Western Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/RApuGcJ3K2EcRbJcA)

Marion is one-way eastbound but the signal also has a display for any westbound traffic. But there is no pedestrian signal, so that signal is actually meant for pedestrians. How this setup has survived over time, I'm not sure.

There used to be more of them in Pioneer Square, before 2nd Ave had bike lanes added.  1st & Yesler are both two-way streets, but there are no pedestrian signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 14, 2021, 02:42:23 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 14, 2021, 12:54:49 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 12, 2021, 11:14:12 PM
I've seen the above (car-less approach with traffic signals) exactly once. Downtown Seattle, of all places:

Marion St @ Western Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/RApuGcJ3K2EcRbJcA)

Marion is one-way eastbound but the signal also has a display for any westbound traffic. But there is no pedestrian signal, so that signal is actually meant for pedestrians. How this setup has survived over time, I'm not sure.

There used to be more of them in Pioneer Square, before 2nd Ave had bike lanes added.  1st & Yesler are both two-way streets, but there are no pedestrian signals.

2nd and Yesler (https://goo.gl/maps/CK7WBGMMi1D1D2rPA) looks to have had an example of this as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 14, 2021, 09:40:49 AM
There used to be one in downtown Wheaton, IL.

GSV from 2017, still present (https://goo.gl/maps/tAg2GE8i4dT2Pd5C8)
GSV from 2019, removed (https://goo.gl/maps/4Kpmf7QuYk88gd4c8)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 14, 2021, 11:09:53 AM
Quote from: DrSmith on January 11, 2021, 06:39:00 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 09:45:08 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 11, 2021, 05:49:40 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on January 11, 2021, 12:20:18 AM
Thought I'd share- this traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/W8eHRFnEa5jtUagR7) at the Danbury Fair Mall in Connecticut has a signal head pointing towards a parking lot approach...that has no access to the intersection. Don't know if it was installed by CTDOT or the mall, but boy, wonder how that one happened.

I would assume that's for pedestrians, has nothing to do with the parking lot
Pedestrians? It's a T-intersection right in front of a mall, after that the exit options are ramps to US-7/I-84 or making a left/right onto Backus Ave, which just takes you to more stores (no sidewalk). No matter where you go, it doesn't seem like a place for pedestrians, and crossing straight from there, you'd be heading towards a large intersection with no marked crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Also, I'm aware it has nothing to do with the parking lot, I'm just saying the layout of it makes it look like it does.

It is fairly common practice in CT where there are no pedestrian crosswalk signals for T intersections or where split phasing is used

https://goo.gl/maps/Hu6zqeoJzBhd4LVB6 old setup with signal towards field
https://goo.gl/maps/ayD2KcYVPZ1GfvM49 New installation with no ped crossing signs installed instead

https://goo.gl/maps/ssn2AQpMoA4kzeqa8 another example

https://goo.gl/maps/vZEvM822muqLLXb67 pole mounted example prior to current change to 4-way intersection

https://goo.gl/maps/EvgvEuf1abuspnGK6 split phase intersection with a "ped" signal so that crossing was aligned with traffic from Middle Rd
https://goo.gl/maps/uHs58JTtzkSFKCyS9 Later deactivated and pointed towards back of left turn signal when normal crosswalk ped signals were installed
Page 11-1 of the current ConnDOT signal manual:

In  those  instances  where pushbuttons are not provided, the Local Traffic Authority should be consulted.  The exclusion of pushbuttons itself does not require an action by the Office of State Traffic  Administration.    However,  if  no pushbuttons  are  included  in  the  signal  design  then  "No Pedestrian Crossing" signs should be installed.  These signs are a regulatory item, and therefore a traffic investigationreport approving their installation is required

So the new signal installed in South Windsor at CT 194/74 is following this guideline.

Further down:
Pedestrian Actuated Side Street Green:
Pedestrian actuation of side streetgreen for crossing the arterial may require more time than might otherwise be allotted to the side street phase.  Pedestrians should normally be provided time to cross from curb line to curb line at a normal walking speed of 3.5 feet per second.  In areas where elderly pedestrians, pedestrians with disabilities,or pedestrians who may travel at a slower pace are expected,  a  walking  speed  of  less  than  3.5  feet  per  second  should  be  considered.    The  calculated pedestrian crossing time is shown on the signal plan in the WALK and PED CLR rows under the appropriate vehicle phase.  Typically one second is entered as the PED CLR timedue to controller requirementsand the remainder of the required time is entered as the WALK time.The  designer  should includean  auxiliary  signal  headto  ensure  that  signal  indications  are visible to the pedestrian.  Inaddition, at intersections with split side streetphasing, signal faces for pedestrians may need to be shielded(tunnel visors/louvers).Pedestrian  signal  heads  should  be  conspicuous  and  recognizable  to  pedestrians  at  all distances  from  the  beginning  of  the  controlled crossingto  a  point  10  feet  from  the  end  of  the controlled crossing during both day and night.

In summary, those post-mounted signals are for getting peds across a main road when the need for walk signals isn't high enough but where ped safety would be compromised without some kind of control.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 14, 2021, 11:16:21 AM
In other news, CT's first LPI signal began operation this past week, though its a municipal installation.

It's at the intersection of Buckland St., Buckland Rd., Buckland Hills Dr., and Pleasant Valley Rd.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on January 14, 2021, 12:24:09 PM
I'm fairly certain San Francisco had a few examples of carless approaches with traffic signals for peds...at least when I went in 2013.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 14, 2021, 09:45:39 PM
Quote from: US 89 on January 14, 2021, 12:24:09 PM
I'm fairly certain San Francisco had a few examples of carless approaches with traffic signals for peds...at least when I went in 2013.

Yes, they do.  Grant Ave, that runs through Chinatown, is one of the narrowest streets in SF with traffic signals, so most of the examples are along there.  Here is Grant and Pacific:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7968845,-122.4068272,3a,75y,66.26h,83.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spG8rsGjYq-xyjaXe1_1xuQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

But here is something interesting, ped signals used only in the wrong-way direction (for car traffic) and no ped signals for peds facing the same direction of traffic.  Usually if you are driving and you don't see ped signals, they wouldn't be present in the opposing direction.

Grant and Jackson, San Francisco:

This is what it looks like facing traffic, northbound view on Grant, no ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7960347,-122.4066791,3a,75y,348.9h,84.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa2AQknFkyQ4D3E6wJnhfbw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

This is what it looks like opposing traffic, southbound view on Grant, only ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.796047,-122.4066739,3a,75y,182.01h,80.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU6IpYcl4aS2qGq3puHjJCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on January 14, 2021, 11:37:40 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 12, 2021, 11:14:12 PM


Over in Washington DC, there is this signal at a T intersection.  (The stem of the T is a driveway, but delivery vehicles use it to access IRS and the Trump Hotel loading zones.)  There are ped signals here, yet for whatever reason there is a RYG signal facing into a building.  From this vantage point, I'm referring to the red signals.  12th St NW, north of Constitution.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8934337,-77.028129,3a,37.5y,85.63h,93.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFRNw919dDmEwmfLGoAlDLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Now that is bizarre, and very uncharacteristic for DC, which likes putting signals for even the most unused of driveways but I've never seen them for simply crosswalks. This makes me wonder if that arc of the Wilson Plaza was a driveway years back. It's definitely big enough.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 15, 2021, 01:43:25 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 14, 2021, 11:37:40 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 13, 2021, 11:32:07 AM
Over in Washington DC, there is this signal at a T intersection.  (The stem of the T is a driveway, but delivery vehicles use it to access IRS and the Trump Hotel loading zones.)  There are ped signals here, yet for whatever reason there is a RYG signal facing into a building.  From this vantage point, I'm referring to the red signals.  12th St NW, north of Constitution.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8934337,-77.028129,3a,37.5y,85.63h,93.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFRNw919dDmEwmfLGoAlDLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Now that is bizarre, and very uncharacteristic for DC, which likes putting signals for even the most unused of driveways but I've never seen them for simply crosswalks. This makes me wonder if that arc of the Wilson Plaza was a driveway years back. It's definitely big enough.

(fixed quote attribution)

I've walked by that signal a few times while out wandering around, and I remember noticing the oddity.

Looking at historicaerials.com: never been a driveway there. There's really no explanation other than that it must have been a layover from days when it was meant for pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:51:17 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 14, 2021, 09:45:39 PM
But here is something interesting, ped signals used only in the wrong-way direction (for car traffic) and no ped signals for peds facing the same direction of traffic.  Usually if you are driving and you don't see ped signals, they wouldn't be present in the opposing direction.

Grant and Jackson, San Francisco:

This is what it looks like facing traffic, northbound view on Grant, no ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7960347,-122.4066791,3a,75y,348.9h,84.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa2AQknFkyQ4D3E6wJnhfbw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

This is what it looks like opposing traffic, southbound view on Grant, only ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.796047,-122.4066739,3a,75y,182.01h,80.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU6IpYcl4aS2qGq3puHjJCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

So one direction gets a stoplight and the other direction gets a ped signal.  That... actually... kind of makes sense!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on January 15, 2021, 04:33:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 15, 2021, 01:43:25 AM

(fixed quote attribution)

I've walked by that signal a few times while out wandering around, and I remember noticing the oddity.

Looking at historicaerials.com: never been a driveway there. There's really no explanation other than that it must have been a layover from days when it was meant for pedestrians.

Thanks for correcting the quote attribution, not sure how that happened.

But man, that is bizarre about the light. Again, totally uncharacteristic for DC, though I do know (based on old videos) that ped heads used to be a scarcity in the city. And considering this is an old(er) steel grey signal, I'm inclined to believe you're right. By that logic then, the south side of that intersection must have had a crosswalk years back, as there is also an old (now dark) signal there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 18, 2021, 10:58:39 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 15, 2021, 04:33:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 15, 2021, 01:43:25 AM

(fixed quote attribution)

I've walked by that signal a few times while out wandering around, and I remember noticing the oddity.

Looking at historicaerials.com: never been a driveway there. There's really no explanation other than that it must have been a layover from days when it was meant for pedestrians.


Thanks for correcting the quote attribution, not sure how that happened.

But man, that is bizarre about the light. Again, totally uncharacteristic for DC, though I do know (based on old videos) that ped heads used to be a scarcity in the city. And considering this is an old(er) steel grey signal, I'm inclined to believe you're right. By that logic then, the south side of that intersection must have had a crosswalk years back, as there is also an old (now dark) signal there.

There is quite to be said about this intersection.

Take a look at this vantage point:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.893253,-77.0281322,3a,37.5y,300.23h,94.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szGbdFeiCUROALr6swMyAPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

My earlier post showed two red signals that faced the building.  This one is even stranger, but harder to locate thru GSV.  From this vantage point, you see the red light facing the driveway, but behind it is a traffic signal facing the building.  So not only were there two signals facing the building from across the street, but there is also one near sided signal that also faces the building.

From what I can gather, this building, which is now part of EPA headquearters, was once part of the Post Office Dept. headquarters.  The building was built in 1936, but I'm not sure if the grassy area once held a small parking lot.  It's still strange because any signal with a mast arm in DC is relatively recent (last 15 years or so) so certainly at the time when they replaced this signal, there was no driveway on the west side of 12th street.

Many years ago, there was a C street that ran through here, its northern border was basically at the edge of the Old Post Office Building (now Trump Hotel).  For whatever reason, the driveway doesn't entirely match the old C street, but curves a little bit south, following the contour of the IRS building.  I believe this was done to increase the area for outside tables and chairs as the Old Post Office used to have a big food court, and it allowed people to take food outside.

Pre-COVID, I worked in this area, so I am quite familiar with this signal, passing it on foot almost daily.  The dark signal is not an old signal head, it just means that the bulb burned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 18, 2021, 11:04:13 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:51:17 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 14, 2021, 09:45:39 PM
But here is something interesting, ped signals used only in the wrong-way direction (for car traffic) and no ped signals for peds facing the same direction of traffic.  Usually if you are driving and you don't see ped signals, they wouldn't be present in the opposing direction.

Grant and Jackson, San Francisco:

This is what it looks like facing traffic, northbound view on Grant, no ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7960347,-122.4066791,3a,75y,348.9h,84.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa2AQknFkyQ4D3E6wJnhfbw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

This is what it looks like opposing traffic, southbound view on Grant, only ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.796047,-122.4066739,3a,75y,182.01h,80.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU6IpYcl4aS2qGq3puHjJCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

So one direction gets a stoplight and the other direction gets a ped signal.  That... actually... kind of makes sense!

It does.  It's just quite unique as a ped signal is almost always patched by an equivalent ped signal on the other side of the street.  I have seen plenty of intersections where the NS street has ped signals and the EW street does not (or vice versa), even though crossing is allowed in all directions, but never seen another example like the one above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 18, 2021, 11:15:00 AM
Here's another example, but with a caveat.

For many years, NYC could not put in regular signals on part of Park Avenue that rests atop the Grand Central terminal train yards (basically 47 - 56 streets).  Apparently, the layout underneath restricted the types of signals that could be anchored to the ground here.  The signals looked like this:  (be sure you are looking at 2009 view)

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7559447,-73.9749401,3a,75y,173.06h,98.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkGTsdFweLv9xKtAqeJ3ow!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

One stanchion with 12-12-12 signal in all directions, even the direction against one-way traffic.  But no ped signals.  And only one signal face in each direction.  What do you do if the bulb burns out?  This is a busy intersection with a very wide Park Avenue and a ton of pedestrians in the heart of Manhattan.  Yet, from what I gather, statistically not more dangerous than other nearby intersections with more signal faces.

Fortunately, this was later changed, and more traditional NYC signal were later installed with ped signals and guy wire mastarms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 18, 2021, 05:40:41 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 18, 2021, 11:04:13 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 15, 2021, 09:51:17 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 14, 2021, 09:45:39 PM
But here is something interesting, ped signals used only in the wrong-way direction (for car traffic) and no ped signals for peds facing the same direction of traffic.  Usually if you are driving and you don't see ped signals, they wouldn't be present in the opposing direction.

Grant and Jackson, San Francisco:

This is what it looks like facing traffic, northbound view on Grant, no ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7960347,-122.4066791,3a,75y,348.9h,84.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa2AQknFkyQ4D3E6wJnhfbw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

This is what it looks like opposing traffic, southbound view on Grant, only ped signals:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.796047,-122.4066739,3a,75y,182.01h,80.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU6IpYcl4aS2qGq3puHjJCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

So one direction gets a stoplight and the other direction gets a ped signal.  That... actually... kind of makes sense!

It does.  It's just quite unique as a ped signal is almost always patched by an equivalent ped signal on the other side of the street.  I have seen plenty of intersections where the NS street has ped signals and the EW street does not (or vice versa), even though crossing is allowed in all directions, but never seen another example like the one above.

The only way that makes sense to me is if the walk+FDW pedestrian timing is exactly equal to the vehicular green time, so that pedestrians going both directions have the same amount of time to cross.

However, it really doesn't make sense in the grand scheme to have pedestrian signals in one direction (which provide the most amount of information about how much time you have to cross) versus only vehicular indications in the other direction (that aren't as instructive--that green can turn yellow at any moment!) on the same leg of a crossing. If you've gone as far as to put the signals in on half the legs, you might as well do all of them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 19, 2021, 11:48:35 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2021, 05:40:41 PM
However, it really doesn't make sense in the grand scheme to have pedestrian signals in one direction (which provide the most amount of information about how much time you have to cross) versus only vehicular indications in the other direction (that aren't as instructive--that green can turn yellow at any moment!) on the same leg of a crossing. If you've gone as far as to put the signals in on half the legs, you might as well do all of them.

This is basically my opinion as well. Although I believe it should be legal to enter at any point during the walk & FDW cycle (I think the case in CA), some information about time remaining is very valuable to those who cannot move as quickly. A simple red-yellow-green signal isn't enough information to safely enter an intersection, unless you were at the intersection when it turned green. Even then, it's a total guessing game how long the light will last.

This type of setup may have been a thing out east or in the midwest for a while, but ped signals have been standard here in the Seattle area since at least the late 50s. Especially with advances in technology and, in particular, changes in law, there really is no valid excuse for not installing pedestrian signals (with countdown timers and voice guidance).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 19, 2021, 03:13:42 PM
I was noticing in my home town of Lakeland that the downtown signals have the crosswalks display the walk icon before the road signal turns green.  Does anywhere else have this set up?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 19, 2021, 04:36:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 19, 2021, 03:13:42 PM
I was noticing in my home town of Lakeland that the downtown signals have the crosswalks display the walk icon before the road signal turns green.  Does anywhere else have this set up?

Exceptionally common. It's called a leading pedestrian interval (https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/intersection-design-elements/traffic-signals/leading-pedestrian-interval/) (LPI for short).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on January 19, 2021, 06:01:30 PM
Found something interesting in Blaine, MN. Here's a signal installation (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.16074,-93.2301199,3a,39.4y,91.77h,95.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV__7_3VIqmOrdClmvK4D5g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that uses the classic green base/yellow pole/vertical truss arms scheme that characterized older MN masts; however, this installation came in around 2018.

For those who don't know, here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.1607234,-93.2351408,3a,73y,55.54h,86.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxttlvYP9j38bGPeXtnn12A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) a typical newer all-gray MN mast arm, located just a block away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on January 19, 2021, 06:03:25 PM
I didn't even realize that colorful combination was a thing there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on January 19, 2021, 07:42:53 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 19, 2021, 06:01:30 PM
Found something interesting in Blaine, MN. Here's a signal installation (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.16074,-93.2301199,3a,39.4y,91.77h,95.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV__7_3VIqmOrdClmvK4D5g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that uses the classic green base/yellow pole/vertical truss arms scheme that characterized older MN masts; however, this installation came in around 2018.

For those who don't know, here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.1607234,-93.2351408,3a,73y,55.54h,86.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxttlvYP9j38bGPeXtnn12A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) a typical newer all-gray MN mast arm, located just a block away.
That first example is an Anoka County install. The second one is a MNDOT install. Anoka County still paints their new signals in the "old" Minnesota style. There are a few other agencies around the state that do the same as well, although most have stopped painting their signals in favor of the unpainted mast like you linked below.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 22, 2021, 11:45:54 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 12, 2021, 04:41:26 PM
Mast arm attached to concrete 294 underpass near O'Hare (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9656847,-87.8734837,3a,75y,286.06h,97.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s49JUu8X7dUOiHYwS8ByZeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/).

Any other installs like this?

Elliot & Galer, Seattle (https://goo.gl/maps/PtDnhHg6ZczgdJBx5)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 23, 2021, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on January 19, 2021, 06:01:30 PM
Found something interesting in Blaine, MN. Here's a signal installation (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.16074,-93.2301199,3a,39.4y,91.77h,95.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV__7_3VIqmOrdClmvK4D5g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) that uses the classic green base/yellow pole/vertical truss arms scheme that characterized older MN masts; however, this installation came in around 2018.

For those who don't know, here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.1607234,-93.2351408,3a,73y,55.54h,86.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxttlvYP9j38bGPeXtnn12A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) a typical newer all-gray MN mast arm, located just a block away.

Interesting. I haven't seen too many instances of signal mast poles painted like this before.

In the Las Vegas area, it used to be common for the bottom half of signal masts and the entirety of any freestanding poles for signal/pedestrian to be painted yellow. There are examples from every (https://goo.gl/maps/tzddSmEnc28gECjy5) jurisdiction (https://goo.gl/maps/gFgAQ57RhBtmthPN7) around (https://goo.gl/maps/owpfwpQJZ9MMUekF7) the valley (https://goo.gl/maps/sNofxHqfHwynzUCH8), including on the Strip (https://goo.gl/maps/JY5m7V3gBHASaiem6)–and this also extended to other traffic control installations such as overhead school zone flashers (https://goo.gl/maps/eqCyFqJdYo4nH4rX9). However, this practice was abandoned in the mid-1990's, likely because the entities didn't want the maintenance cost of repainting poles every so often for what's likely a negligible safety benefit. New installations and one-off pole replacements since then are now bare steel, except some installations have the entire signal structure painted one color (often black or tan) as part of specific area aesthetic treatments. (It must have been a Vegas-area entity practice because, excepting aesthetic treatments, I cannot recall having seen painted traffic signal poles anywhere else in Nevada outside of Clark County.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on January 23, 2021, 11:50:30 PM
Here's a really cool extended one-lane road control signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3aENbDPN3iS8tuzq5) at a park in my area that also serves a boat launch. I had no idea this park (much less this wonky signal setup) even existed until last summer despite having lived nearby my entire life. Of note are not just the signals themselves at the point where the road narrows, but also a series of LED reassurance arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/1mcnhBxJu5h58naG8) that run along the road every few hundred feet. Also interesting is that despite the fact that there is a bike path present (on the far left side of the barriers in the first GSV photo) there are no indicators for bicyclists crossing the road a few hundred feet ahead (https://goo.gl/maps/UTkLPX32riWs7sQz9) of the initial lane drop to determine which direction traffic is flowing, just stop signs.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on January 24, 2021, 04:34:23 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on January 23, 2021, 11:50:30 PM
Here's a really cool extended one-lane road control signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3aENbDPN3iS8tuzq5) at a park in my area that also serves a boat launch. I had no idea this park (much less this wonky signal setup) even existed until last summer despite having lived nearby my entire life. Of note are not just the signals themselves at the point where the road narrows, but also a series of LED reassurance arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/1mcnhBxJu5h58naG8) that run along the road every few hundred feet. Also interesting is that despite the fact that there is a bike path present (on the far left side of the barriers in the first GSV photo) there are no indicators for bicyclists crossing the road a few hundred feet ahead (https://goo.gl/maps/UTkLPX32riWs7sQz9) of the initial lane drop to determine which direction traffic is flowing, just stop signs.
That is really cool!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 24, 2021, 04:37:39 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on January 23, 2021, 11:50:30 PM
Here's a really cool extended one-lane road control signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3aENbDPN3iS8tuzq5) at a park in my area that also serves a boat launch. I had no idea this park (much less this wonky signal setup) even existed until last summer despite having lived nearby my entire life. Of note are not just the signals themselves at the point where the road narrows, but also a series of LED reassurance arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/1mcnhBxJu5h58naG8) that run along the road every few hundred feet. Also interesting is that despite the fact that there is a bike path present (on the far left side of the barriers in the first GSV photo) there are no indicators for bicyclists crossing the road a few hundred feet ahead (https://goo.gl/maps/UTkLPX32riWs7sQz9) of the initial lane drop to determine which direction traffic is flowing, just stop signs.

That's a really cool setup! I've never seen something like that before. Great way to deal with a one-lane road with no visibility to the other end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on January 29, 2021, 11:14:01 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)
Sorry for the bump, but by pure chance I happened to come across a legitimate pole-mounted horizontal signal  (https://goo.gl/maps/BvzVHMfRP7DxuuNFA)in Texas. It's a little strange looking, but I guess whatever works.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 29, 2021, 11:38:45 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on January 29, 2021, 11:14:01 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 07, 2020, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on December 05, 2020, 05:36:09 PM
Bay City, Texas has some horizontal pole mounted signals such as this one...
SH 35 @ SH 60 (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9829359,-95.9698987,3a,57.2y,287.76h,115.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPhHjsLZG8y6-zJcj9Lddeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Not sure how common these are. I've only seen them in Bay City.

Am I missing something? All I see are horizontal lights on wires, which are very common throughout Texas (at least in the area between Houston and Dallas)
Sorry for the bump, but by pure chance I happened to come across a legitimate pole-mounted horizontal signal  (https://goo.gl/maps/BvzVHMfRP7DxuuNFA)in Texas. It's a little strange looking, but I guess whatever works.

What a bizarre intersection. First, you have a couple of pole-mounted signals for the southbound movement, and a couple others for pedestrians. Bit later, the northbound signals are replaced with entirely pole-mounted signals. Shortly after, the left-most pole-mounted signal for the southbound movement is replaced with a black signal. Bit later still, that signal is moved up and then mounted horizontally (huh!?), and then replaced itself by a yellow signal. All the while, the northbound right-most pole-mounted signal is initially installed vertically, before being placed horizontally, and then around the time the other pole-mounted signal was mounted horizontally, it was then rotated to be vertical again. WTF...they seem to change the intersection for fun every year or so.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on January 30, 2021, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.

No, IIRC, the signal configuration was:

Y        Y         Y        Y
G       G         G       G
YA
GA

I think the "Y" section (top section) flashes circular yellow for when the signal goes into flash mode and I believe this is a T intersection with protected/permissive left turns. This is the intersection in question... (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4796409,-77.5120653,3a,69.7y,72.33h,90.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sml6qUnQ9HEEkc6_y6MePkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The side driveway is not controlled by a light, rather, a YIELD sign instead (EDIT: it was formerly controlled by signals pre-2010's).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on January 30, 2021, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.

No, IIRC, the signal configuration was:

Y        Y         Y        Y
G       G         G       G
YA
GA

I think the "Y" section (top section) flashes circular yellow for when the signal goes into flash mode and I believe this is a T intersection with protected/permissive left turns. This is the intersection in question... (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4796409,-77.5120653,3a,69.7y,72.33h,90.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sml6qUnQ9HEEkc6_y6MePkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The side driveway is not controlled by a light, rather, a YIELD sign instead (EDIT: it was formerly controlled by signals pre-2010's).


I believe you would be right. The GSV is a much better view and you are familiar with the region.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 31, 2021, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on January 30, 2021, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.

No, IIRC, the signal configuration was:

Y        Y         Y        Y
G       G         G       G
YA
GA

I think the "Y" section (top section) flashes circular yellow for when the signal goes into flash mode and I believe this is a T intersection with protected/permissive left turns. This is the intersection in question... (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4796409,-77.5120653,3a,69.7y,72.33h,90.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sml6qUnQ9HEEkc6_y6MePkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The side driveway is not controlled by a light, rather, a YIELD sign instead (EDIT: it was formerly controlled by signals pre-2010's).


I believe you would be right. The GSV is a much better view and you are familiar with the region.

This is indeed correct. This setup was pretty common where the side street was a right turn only onto the main road. This signal is on US 360 just inside Richmond city limits, though I believe it's a leftover VDOT installation. This area was transitioning at the time because it was part of Chesterfield County before the city annexed it in 1970
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on January 31, 2021, 01:33:38 PM
Quote from: plain on January 31, 2021, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on January 30, 2021, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.

No, IIRC, the signal configuration was:

Y        Y         Y        Y
G       G         G       G
YA
GA

I think the "Y" section (top section) flashes circular yellow for when the signal goes into flash mode and I believe this is a T intersection with protected/permissive left turns. This is the intersection in question... (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4796409,-77.5120653,3a,69.7y,72.33h,90.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sml6qUnQ9HEEkc6_y6MePkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The side driveway is not controlled by a light, rather, a YIELD sign instead (EDIT: it was formerly controlled by signals pre-2010's).


I believe you would be right. The GSV is a much better view and you are familiar with the region.

This is indeed correct. This setup was pretty common where the side street was a right turn only onto the main road. This signal is on US 360 just inside Richmond city limits, though I believe it's a leftover VDOT installation. This area was transitioning at the time because it was part of Chesterfield County before the city annexed it in 1970

Two questions to ask about this signal:
1. If this signal is upgraded for some reason... could you just get away with just installing a 3-section protected-only or 4-section FYA head for the left turns only?
2. Why were the signals on the side street removed? Wouldn't that make this signal a half signal or something like that?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 31, 2021, 03:34:05 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on January 31, 2021, 01:33:38 PM
Quote from: plain on January 31, 2021, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on January 30, 2021, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 30, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Who needs yellow?
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-D6r8MCn5PkM/T1-4zOie6PI/AAAAAAAABmw/qS2G_HNNkCI/s816/DSC00478.JPG)

I couldn't see where this was ever solved. Are there some reversing lines here? The reversed lanes would be green while open and a RED X when reversed toward you.  This was the setup in Arlington TX for use after Rangers games. Not sure if it still is or not.

No, IIRC, the signal configuration was:

Y        Y         Y        Y
G       G         G       G
YA
GA

I think the "Y" section (top section) flashes circular yellow for when the signal goes into flash mode and I believe this is a T intersection with protected/permissive left turns. This is the intersection in question... (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4796409,-77.5120653,3a,69.7y,72.33h,90.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sml6qUnQ9HEEkc6_y6MePkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The side driveway is not controlled by a light, rather, a YIELD sign instead (EDIT: it was formerly controlled by signals pre-2010's).


I believe you would be right. The GSV is a much better view and you are familiar with the region.

This is indeed correct. This setup was pretty common where the side street was a right turn only onto the main road. This signal is on US 360 just inside Richmond city limits, though I believe it's a leftover VDOT installation. This area was transitioning at the time because it was part of Chesterfield County before the city annexed it in 1970

Two questions to ask about this signal:
1. If this signal is upgraded for some reason... could you just get away with just installing a 3-section protected-only or 4-section FYA head for the left turns only?
2. Why were the signals on the side street removed? Wouldn't that make this signal a half signal or something like that?

1. Yes.

2. I have no clue, but the city did put up a YIELD sign there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on January 31, 2021, 05:44:41 PM
With SPUI interchanges above the freeway, the vast majority of the non-wires signal layout are a long gantry or mast arm spanning the entire center of the intersection. I found this unique signal layout on the I-270 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.67186,-90.4488729,3a,87.2y,315.59h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7c9Nk29aOFwWSk8O68BtgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) interchange with the mast arm supports in the median of the arterial (i'll let the GSV describe the rest for itself), and a similar one at I-55 and US 50/61/67. (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5110641,-90.3357887,3a,75y,0.06h,79.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Md47_kxsWemBx0eIwrkkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's also 2 examples on MO 141 with the mast arm support on one of the triangle gores at MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6810172,-90.4930299,3a,49y,304.83h,92.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ3oPhUtntPocSNpBdbrnAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and Ladue (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6600079,-90.503732,3a,68.1y,339.97h,92.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRJ7_xVuOZUzVUq2vLgH9OA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). How many more unique SPUI signal layouts are there?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on February 01, 2021, 12:35:12 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 31, 2021, 05:44:41 PM
With SPUI interchanges above the freeway, the vast majority of the non-wires signal layout are a long gantry or mast arm spanning the entire center of the intersection. I found this unique signal layout on the I-270 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.67186,-90.4488729,3a,87.2y,315.59h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7c9Nk29aOFwWSk8O68BtgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) interchange with the mast arm supports in the median of the arterial (i'll let the GSV describe the rest for itself), and a similar one at I-55 and US 50/61/67. (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5110641,-90.3357887,3a,75y,0.06h,79.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Md47_kxsWemBx0eIwrkkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's also 2 examples on MO 141 with the mast arm support on one of the triangle gores at MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6810172,-90.4930299,3a,49y,304.83h,92.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ3oPhUtntPocSNpBdbrnAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and Ladue (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6600079,-90.503732,3a,68.1y,339.97h,92.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRJ7_xVuOZUzVUq2vLgH9OA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). How many more unique SPUI signal layouts are there?
Maybe it's because I go through these intersections almost every day, but I've never noticed anything odd about them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 01, 2021, 09:46:25 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on February 01, 2021, 12:35:12 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 31, 2021, 05:44:41 PM
With SPUI interchanges above the freeway, the vast majority of the non-wires signal layout are a long gantry or mast arm spanning the entire center of the intersection. I found this unique signal layout on the I-270 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.67186,-90.4488729,3a,87.2y,315.59h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7c9Nk29aOFwWSk8O68BtgA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) interchange with the mast arm supports in the median of the arterial (i'll let the GSV describe the rest for itself), and a similar one at I-55 and US 50/61/67. (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5110641,-90.3357887,3a,75y,0.06h,79.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Md47_kxsWemBx0eIwrkkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) There's also 2 examples on MO 141 with the mast arm support on one of the triangle gores at MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6810172,-90.4930299,3a,49y,304.83h,92.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ3oPhUtntPocSNpBdbrnAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and Ladue (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6600079,-90.503732,3a,68.1y,339.97h,92.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRJ7_xVuOZUzVUq2vLgH9OA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). How many more unique SPUI signal layouts are there?
Maybe it's because I go through these intersections almost every day, but I've never noticed anything odd about them.
I used to go through the MO 340 and 141 interchange at least twice a week, so I were used to their layouts until I saw a lot of other SPUIs with a long mast arm or truss gantry spanning the center of the intersection, instead of having 2 mast arms at 2 locations in the intersection as what I posted above. But here  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7768437,-90.5114652,3a,75y,271.62h,89.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3kRLFo3-5TUTtDSb2mVjAQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D3kRLFo3-5TUTtDSb2mVjAQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D126.59684%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)are  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8032828,-90.6783241,3a,75y,224.96h,92.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVD_QLYK6To_0Cd8Sls5Hkg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DVD_QLYK6To_0Cd8Sls5Hkg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D116.062%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)some  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5675668,-90.4999675,3a,75y,290.47h,92.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCNlNW1lH9Dggo5VhjJ-DLA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DCNlNW1lH9Dggo5VhjJ-DLA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D61.322556%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)examples  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6320282,-90.2860653,3a,75y,237.55h,75.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ5b7CI2zglolf_0BZ8Lirg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)for what (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6309234,-90.265718,3a,75y,3.7h,91.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saQva4Nwh3s0cgMfw31NkeQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DaQva4Nwh3s0cgMfw31NkeQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D155.91466%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) I mean by (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1087233,-83.0912739,3a,75y,29.9h,89.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRZZMy_QKx_wmqzTc-GhxgA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DRZZMy_QKx_wmqzTc-GhxgA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D147.45596%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) normal (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0815313,-82.8960279,3a,75y,49.35h,86.69t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sH77NxD0bRrY8iF6NLs8bFQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DH77NxD0bRrY8iF6NLs8bFQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D344.7836%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) signal  (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4397144,-84.3357523,3a,75y,317.02h,90.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spJ_EsqwEz74pTzSSJKuJhA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)layouts (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5041289,-111.8908068,3a,36.5y,304.74h,93.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1st6ThyLwmFnnCmQ69tWBZLA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dt6ThyLwmFnnCmQ69tWBZLA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D66.36159%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on February 01, 2021, 02:47:22 PM
I kind of like the Missouri approach better. Here we use full-on monotube gantries for the signals, which are beefy enough that you can see them from literally a mile away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
I've seen regular mast arms in Edmonton, Alberta. The older SPUIs along the Yellowhead Hwy: https://goo.gl/maps/oQpHV6H1f44fuBWq8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on February 01, 2021, 09:35:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
I've seen regular mast arms in Edmonton, Alberta. The older SPUIs along the Yellowhead Hwy: https://goo.gl/maps/oQpHV6H1f44fuBWq8

Do all the EXIT signs look like they've been sawed off?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2021, 09:50:36 PM
Quote from: US71 on February 01, 2021, 09:35:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
I've seen regular mast arms in Edmonton, Alberta. The older SPUIs along the Yellowhead Hwy: https://goo.gl/maps/oQpHV6H1f44fuBWq8

Do all the EXIT signs look like they've been sawed off?

Yeah, that's an Alberta thing. Another example (https://goo.gl/maps/iSPBT2vv3WVSaxJE8), and another (https://goo.gl/maps/VFE3o5iVFWgor2ni9) from Calgary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 01, 2021, 09:53:02 PM
Years ago New Jersey's Garden State Pkwy. had exit gore signs similar to those.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 01, 2021, 10:32:34 PM
Found another SPUI without a single long mast arm in the center of the interchange at I-215 and Windmill in Vegas (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0423636,-115.1336858,3a,75y,295.35h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8n7ID_IBhMg05uT6fojSxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This one has a mast arm on each triangle gore, which is a bit excessive imo.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:07:05 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 01, 2021, 10:32:34 PM
Found another SPUI without a single long mast arm in the center of the interchange at I-215 and Windmill in Vegas (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0423636,-115.1336858,3a,75y,295.35h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8n7ID_IBhMg05uT6fojSxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This one has a mast arm on each triangle gore, which is a bit excessive imo.
The DO NOT ENTER (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0425515,-115.1339421,3a,75y,131.01h,84.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXxxKilqNp05JTUKTUlvDIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) on the street sign is a nice touch.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 01:28:01 AM
Utah has 11 freeway-under SPUIs. All but one take the "let's put all the lights on one massive monotube in the middle"  approach. The only one that doesn't is the newest one on Bangerter at 114th South (https://goo.gl/maps/FRyTZEvnyYqx1X7WA), and it is fascinating because it's actually possible for thru traffic on 114th to not realize they're driving through an interchange if they aren't paying attention. It's damn near impossible to miss the interchange on all the others.

There is a bit of variation in how the monotube design is executed. Usually, it's mounted directly across the cross street, as in this example (https://goo.gl/maps/U7qjanjHLsjxYkF57). But sometimes in particularly large SPUIs, it's installed at an angle - for example, at the I-15 and University Parkway (https://goo.gl/maps/GRWx3f1xdjs6tm147) interchange.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:30:57 AM
Quote from: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 01:28:01 AM
Utah has 11 freeway-under SPUIs. All but one take the "let's put all the lights on one massive monotube in the middle"  approach. The only one that doesn't is the newest one on Bangerter at 114th South (https://goo.gl/maps/FRyTZEvnyYqx1X7WA), and it is fascinating because it's actually possible for thru traffic on 114th to not realize they're driving through an interchange if they aren't paying attention.
Um...I sure as hell wouldn't miss that, not with the mast arm and traffic lights with reflective borders.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on February 02, 2021, 02:42:20 AM
Here's the signal structure (literally) at the SPUI at CA 87 and Taylor Street in San Jose, CA.

https://goo.gl/maps/4nnAfYhUYT5rUtkQA (https://goo.gl/maps/4nnAfYhUYT5rUtkQA)

(Oh the days when SPUIs were the state-of-the-art interchanges...)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 08:14:26 AM
Quote from: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 01:28:01 AM
Utah has 11 freeway-under SPUIs. All but one take the "let's put all the lights on one massive monotube in the middle"  approach. The only one that doesn't is the newest one on Bangerter at 114th South (https://goo.gl/maps/FRyTZEvnyYqx1X7WA), and it is fascinating because it's actually possible for thru traffic on 114th to not realize they're driving through an interchange if they aren't paying attention. It's damn near impossible to miss the interchange on all the others.
I don't see how drivers would miss that one, as it looks like every other traffic signal before and after it on the same road. Maybe because it's not a fat monotube like the others in that area? But at the same time, I've seen 2 drivers (1 left turn, 1 straight) go through a red light on MO 340 at the SPUI with I-270.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2021, 12:00:32 PM
This signal here in Beaufort, SC at SC 170's east end has only one straight through signal head as the others around it are actually either right or left turn signals.  Though, it represents the movement in front of each individual head, it still kind of seems odd though that the one straight through lane gets only one signal head when the MUTCD requires two for that movement.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50898386867_f63bc6ee7e_4k_d.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 12:14:29 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2021, 12:00:32 PM
This signal here in Beaufort, SC at SC 170's east end has only one straight through signal head as the others around it are actually either right or left turn signals.  Though, it represents the movement in front of each individual head, it still kind of seems odd though that the one straight through lane gets only one signal head when the MUTCD requires two for that movement.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50898386867_f63bc6ee7e_4k_d.jpg)
As someone that is used to signal layouts in MO, the fact that the straight movement is represented with a ball instead of an arrow seems off to me for some reason. Not that this is an issue.

And I thought that the one straight movement getting one signal head makes sense, as there's only 1 lane for that movement, and it's an option lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 02:06:52 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:30:57 AM
Um...I sure as hell wouldn't miss that, not with the mast arm and traffic lights with reflective borders.
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 08:14:26 AM
I don't see how drivers would miss that one, as it looks like every other traffic signal before and after it on the same road. Maybe because it's not a fat monotube like the others in that area?

When I said "easy to miss", I wasn't talking about missing the red light...I was more referring to how it's not immediately obvious that you're about to drive over a freeway.

Compare that interchange (https://goo.gl/maps/wPN2ZHDyPSsyMeiC9) with a more conventional Utah SPUI (https://goo.gl/maps/Q26LHtUdDrFAdbLh7) and you'll see what I'm getting at. The new one is a lot more compact and lacks the characteristic monotube.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 02:13:35 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 12:14:29 PM
And I thought that the one straight movement getting one signal head makes sense, as there's only 1 lane for that movement, and it's an option lane.

MUTCD requires at least two through signals (aka green orbs or green up arrows) for any through movement. If no through movement exists, you must have two signals for the important movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 02:16:55 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 02:06:52 PM
When I said "easy to miss", I wasn't talking about missing the red light...I was more referring to how it's not immediately obvious that you're about to drive over a freeway.

Compare that interchange (https://goo.gl/maps/wPN2ZHDyPSsyMeiC9) with a more conventional Utah SPUI (https://goo.gl/maps/Q26LHtUdDrFAdbLh7) and you'll see what I'm getting at. The new one is a lot more compact and lacks the characteristic monotube.

Another sign would certainly be the lack of any apparent rise or descent in the roadway to clear the freeway at the Bangerter/114 example. Your "more conventional" example shows a very clear rise which is often a sign of a major roadway passing beneath (no signal controls likely indicate a railway crossing in that instance, however).

Side-note: Utah has excellent signal location tactics at SPUIs; shame that doesn't extend to other intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 08:10:26 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 02, 2021, 02:06:52 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:30:57 AM
Um...I sure as hell wouldn't miss that, not with the mast arm and traffic lights with reflective borders.
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 08:14:26 AM
I don't see how drivers would miss that one, as it looks like every other traffic signal before and after it on the same road. Maybe because it's not a fat monotube like the others in that area?

When I said "easy to miss", I wasn't talking about missing the red light...I was more referring to how it's not immediately obvious that you're about to drive over a freeway.

Compare that interchange (https://goo.gl/maps/wPN2ZHDyPSsyMeiC9) with a more conventional Utah SPUI (https://goo.gl/maps/Q26LHtUdDrFAdbLh7) and you'll see what I'm getting at. The new one is a lot more compact and lacks the characteristic monotube.
That might be partly because there's no overhead signage for UT 154 prior to the intersection. I can see myself missing the entrance as a new driver in the area without a GPS without either overhead signage or the standard monotube. Here's another view of the I-270 and MO 340 SPUI (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6718658,-90.4477498,3a,75y,280.58h,87.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY75iZmGQxITRh6ZWpadcRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) I mentioned a lot earlier. Without the overhead signage on MO 340 to I-270, this one would probably also be easy to miss. The median mast arm poles may be a give away, but a lot of intersections on MO 340 have their mast arm supported in the median (this is something that Missouri loves to do that I don't really see in other states). A monotube or truss gantry for the signals may help drivers not miss their freeway entrance from a SPUI, but so can overhead signage.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 02, 2021, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 12:14:29 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2021, 12:00:32 PM
This signal here in Beaufort, SC at SC 170's east end has only one straight through signal head as the others around it are actually either right or left turn signals.  Though, it represents the movement in front of each individual head, it still kind of seems odd though that the one straight through lane gets only one signal head when the MUTCD requires two for that movement.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50898386867_f63bc6ee7e_4k_d.jpg)
As someone that is used to signal layouts in MO, the fact that the straight movement is represented with a ball instead of an arrow seems off to me for some reason. Not that this is an issue.

And I thought that the one straight movement getting one signal head makes sense, as there's only 1 lane for that movement, and it's an option lane.

Interesting design problem. The Manual does require two circular greens for the thru movement even if it's only one lane. But I have to agree in this one case, it might be misleading to put a circular green in any of the other heads because only that one lane is a thru lane. So how do you meet the requirement without misleading drivers re: lane assignments?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2021, 08:50:14 PM
Interesting design problem. The Manual does require two circular greens for the thru movement even if it's only one lane. But I have to agree in this one case, it might be misleading to put a circular green in any of the other heads because only that one lane is a thru lane. So how do you meet the requirement without misleading drivers re: lane assignments?

Weirdly, it's a design issue created by the FHWA themselves. By suggesting signal-per-lane strategies be the end-all design philosophy, agencies are left with shrugged shoulders when you have turn lanes on either side of a single through lane and those turn lanes use dedicated signals, as is often the case with double right turns.

One solution for the above signal is to delete the far left signal, and duplicate the second signal (green orb + green left arrow) on the far left mast. This gives you double left turn green arrows, double through signals as required, and double right turn signals.

Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

Another option might be to dump the right turn signals in favor of 5-section signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 09:28:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2021, 08:50:14 PM
Interesting design problem. The Manual does require two circular greens for the thru movement even if it's only one lane. But I have to agree in this one case, it might be misleading to put a circular green in any of the other heads because only that one lane is a thru lane. So how do you meet the requirement without misleading drivers re: lane assignments?

Weirdly, it's a design issue created by the FHWA themselves. By suggesting signal-per-lane strategies be the end-all design philosophy, agencies are left with shrugged shoulders when you have turn lanes on either side of a single through lane and those turn lanes use dedicated signals, as is often the case with double right turns.

One solution for the above signal is to delete the far left signal, and duplicate the second signal (green orb + green left arrow) on the far left mast. This gives you double left turn green arrows, double through signals as required, and double right turn signals.

Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.
Sometimes, I wonder if 1 signal per direction, like what I see with most signals Canada and China and probably many other countries, is enough opposed to the current 1 signal per lane...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:31:26 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 09:28:06 PM
Sometimes, I wonder if 1 signal per direction, like what I see with most signals Canada and China and probably many other countries, is enough opposed of the current 1 signal per lane...

Definitely not, for numerous reasons. Visibility of signals is hugely important, as is redundancy in the case of electrical issues or burn-out.

Canada has the same rules as the US, requiring two through signals for every approach. China is pretty much alone, and for good reason: their signals are not sufficient. Judging by their crash rate, China is the last place we should be inspired by...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 09:39:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:31:26 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 02, 2021, 09:28:06 PM
Sometimes, I wonder if 1 signal per direction, like what I see with most signals Canada and China and probably many other countries, is enough opposed of the current 1 signal per lane...

Definitely not, for numerous reasons. Visibility of signals is hugely important, as is redundancy in the case of electrical issues or burn-out.

Canada has the same rules as the US, requiring two through signals for every approach. China is pretty much alone, and for good reason: their signals are not sufficient. Judging by their crash rate, China is the last place we should be inspired by...
There's issues with China's roads and drivers besides their signals with their higher crash rate, but that's another topic. Something I'll note is that a lot of their freeway to surface interchanges in China are like SPUIs, and sometimes, the traffic signals are easy to miss.

For Canada, I forgot to count the green bulb on the 4 section signals in Ontario, so yea that makes it 2 after counting it. Does the US MUTCD say anything about needing 3 through signals for a 3 lane road, or is that up to the state? Missouri, for the most part, have 3 through signals for 3 lane roads in one direction, but Ohio sometimes doesn't, sticking to the usual 2. I see that Ontario at least only have 2 through signals even for a 3 lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 02, 2021, 09:43:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2021, 08:50:14 PM
Interesting design problem. The Manual does require two circular greens for the thru movement even if it's only one lane. But I have to agree in this one case, it might be misleading to put a circular green in any of the other heads because only that one lane is a thru lane. So how do you meet the requirement without misleading drivers re: lane assignments?

Weirdly, it's a design issue created by the FHWA themselves. By suggesting signal-per-lane strategies be the end-all design philosophy, agencies are left with shrugged shoulders when you have turn lanes on either side of a single through lane and those turn lanes use dedicated signals, as is often the case with double right turns.

One solution for the above signal is to delete the far left signal, and duplicate the second signal (green orb + green left arrow) on the far left mast. This gives you double left turn green arrows, double through signals as required, and double right turn signals.

Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

Another option might be to dump the right turn signals in favor of 5-section signals.

Jakeroot, your post is very well reasoned. The FHWA shot themselves in the foot when they changed that rule in the 2009 Manual I believe. Prior to that the requirement was for a minimum of two signals for the predominant route, not necessarily the thru route. That might have worked better here. But your solution of putting one of the right or left turn signals on a mast and replacing the overhead with a green ball might work very well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 02, 2021, 10:20:13 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2021, 12:00:32 PM
This signal here in Beaufort, SC at SC 170's east end has only one straight through signal head as the others around it are actually either right or left turn signals.  Though, it represents the movement in front of each individual head, it still kind of seems odd though that the one straight through lane gets only one signal head when the MUTCD requires two for that movement.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50898386867/in/dateposted-public/)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50898386867_f63bc6ee7e_4k_d.jpg)

I've always had this question for a while now but never know how to ask it since I was curious about what signals were best for this kind of application, assuming those right turns are protected only and have no pedestrian conflict. There are four intersections in Maine, 2 in Scarborough, 1 in Biddeford, and 1 in Bangor that are like this:

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
One solution for the above signal is to delete the far left signal, and duplicate the second signal (green orb + green left arrow) on the far left mast. This gives you double left turn green arrows, double through signals as required, and double right turn signals.

So something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4757011,-70.511124,3a,25.4y,336.01h,93.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOOU7z52yIK56HZrRpNdswQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) intersection in Biddeford?

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

This example from Portsmouth NH only has 2 lanes (left/thru, right), but if there was a second right turn lane in addition to what is present, something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0874954,-70.7901071,3a,26.2y,54.64h,87.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D66.236404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0878429,-70.78977,3a,75y,209.47h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s800lrn19lAaE81SyapWkHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Another option might be to dump the right turn signals in favor of 5-section signals.

So something like the  ME Turnpike / Haigis Pkwy and Payne Rd intersection  (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6031057,-70.3666644,3a,20.2y,126.45h,92.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZdw7_FEyTruTJVZ-UXY6kw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DZdw7_FEyTruTJVZ-UXY6kw%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D226.04262%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) in Scarborough, or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8133409,-72.5273138,3a,15y,38.5h,90.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf9gsHWeIyDaBc-MAD9TALg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) one in Manchester CT? (Edit 3-Aug-22. For Scarborough, as part of the Scarborough Downs project, this approach has been reconfigured from L-T-R-R to L-L-T-R, eliminating the issue mentioned above)

The other intersections in question are US 1 / Payne Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5728673,-70.3855491,3a,75y,132.22h,80.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc0OJWlbVXIb2UQbhfutWHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Scarborough (only one thru head) and I-95 / Stillwater Ave (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8282833,-68.7550159,3a,22y,348.68h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf5roLIQCtCn3Wy0lWp9n3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Bangor (there used to be a doghouse between the three section signals as shown here (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8286418,-68.7550896,3a,81.7y,278.44h,88.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_7V65bbfHrUjFj1WV_I9MA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) as of 2007).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 03, 2021, 03:59:21 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 02, 2021, 10:20:13 PM
I've always had this question for a while now but never know how to ask it since I was curious about what signals were best for this kind of application, assuming those right turns are protected only and have no pedestrian conflict. There are four intersections in Maine, 2 in Scarborough, 1 in Biddeford, and 1 in Bangor that are like this:

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
One solution for the above signal is to delete the far left signal, and duplicate the second signal (green orb + green left arrow) on the far left mast. This gives you double left turn green arrows, double through signals as required, and double right turn signals.

So something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4757011,-70.511124,3a,25.4y,336.01h,93.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOOU7z52yIK56HZrRpNdswQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) intersection in Biddeford?

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

This example from Portsmouth NH only has 2 lanes (left/thru, right), but if there was a second right turn lane in addition to what is present, something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0874954,-70.7901071,3a,26.2y,54.64h,87.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D66.236404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0878429,-70.78977,3a,75y,209.47h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s800lrn19lAaE81SyapWkHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Another option might be to dump the right turn signals in favor of 5-section signals.

So something like the  ME Turnpike / Haigis Pkwy and Payne Rd intersection  (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6031057,-70.3666644,3a,20.2y,126.45h,92.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZdw7_FEyTruTJVZ-UXY6kw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DZdw7_FEyTruTJVZ-UXY6kw%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D226.04262%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) in Scarborough, or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8133409,-72.5273138,3a,15y,38.5h,90.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf9gsHWeIyDaBc-MAD9TALg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) one in Manchester CT?

The other intersections in question are US 1 / Payne Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5728673,-70.3855491,3a,75y,132.22h,80.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sc0OJWlbVXIb2UQbhfutWHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Scarborough (only one thru head) and I-95 / Stillwater Ave (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8282833,-68.7550159,3a,22y,348.68h,86.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf5roLIQCtCn3Wy0lWp9n3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Bangor (there used to be a doghouse between the three section signals as shown here (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8286418,-68.7550896,3a,81.7y,278.44h,88.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_7V65bbfHrUjFj1WV_I9MA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) as of 2007).

Sorry to quote the whole post. Easier than responding bit-by-bit.

To answer succinctly: yes, those examples are all ways that the South Carolina intersection could be improved. The intersection shown above is not compliant with the MUTCD despite the numerous ways that it could have otherwise been installed. I understand the general confusion around signal-per-lane strategies and signal-head requirements, but there are ways to approach the problem while still being compliant. You just have to be creative.

In particular, I would say that I'm quite a fan of the install along Hale Road in Manchester, CT. It's not a perfect match for this intersection, but I think it's a great way to approach the problem, even if the right turn never has to yield. I am personally not a fan of using right red arrows if RTOR is to be permitted, as traffic sometimes falsely assumes that it's illegal. Certainly it is illegal in some places...but if it isn't, don't trick drivers into thinking it is! Just use a darn "NTOR" sign.

As for examples from my area:

So yeah, there's ways to solve the South Carolina intersection, you just have to think a bit more creatively!

edit: "Florida intersection"..? Ay qué rico...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 03, 2021, 04:51:05 AM
As an example of how I might fix it (SC-170 @ Boundary St, Beaufort), I'd go with a more typically-Californian approach. The near-side signal is especially important with the curve.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50904543082_8e916cb6f4_o.png)

edit: fixed some layering issues.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 03, 2021, 09:28:00 AM
With the minimum 2 green bulbs or arrows for the straight movement, I'm guessing this one at the NB I-71 ramp to Mason-Montgomery Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2913996,-84.3161793,3a,26y,100.38h,92.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sp7_9GT6hnIMJ_qDcRs5jJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) also violates the MUTCD, despite that left turns is the primary movement here. Could be easily fixed by adding a fourth signal with a green ball between the second left signal and the doghouse. Note that Ohio normally doesn't place signals on the vertical beams.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on February 03, 2021, 04:53:30 PM
This one doesn't even try, only on each and it's new
https://goo.gl/maps/gBBStpZo2A5k9sD19
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2021, 08:35:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 03, 2021, 04:51:05 AM
As an example of how I might fix it (SC-170 @ Boundary St, Beaufort), I'd go with a more typically-Californian approach. The near-side signal is especially important with the curve.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50904543082_8e916cb6f4_o.png)

edit: fixed some layering issues.
How'd you add traffic lights into street mix?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 04, 2021, 01:52:16 AM
Quote from: DrSmith on February 03, 2021, 04:53:30 PM
This one doesn't even try, only on each and it's new
https://goo.gl/maps/gBBStpZo2A5k9sD19

I wonder if the contractor thought they were going to install a shared, "yield on green" 4-section bimodal signal rather than a(n) FYA... because that signal configuration would be OK if the FYA was just a shared, "yield on green" 4-section bimodal signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 04, 2021, 01:58:51 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2021, 08:35:32 PM
How'd you add traffic lights into street mix?

I made the street, then downloaded it with a transparent background. I added the signals myself using Illustrator, leaving the streetmix image in the foreground.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 04, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 02, 2021, 10:20:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

This example from Portsmouth NH only has 2 lanes (left/thru, right), but if there was a second right turn lane in addition to what is present, something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0874954,-70.7901071,3a,26.2y,54.64h,87.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D66.236404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0878429,-70.78977,3a,75y,209.47h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s800lrn19lAaE81SyapWkHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

Actually, while looking for a signal for another thread, I think this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7815994,-71.2399525,3a,22.5y,150.12h,85.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shduuqd3p76xwJHXXXMiEnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) signal in Salem, NH better fits the conditions above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 04, 2021, 12:04:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 04, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 02, 2021, 10:20:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

This example from Portsmouth NH only has 2 lanes (left/thru, right), but if there was a second right turn lane in addition to what is present, something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0874954,-70.7901071,3a,26.2y,54.64h,87.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D66.236404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0878429,-70.78977,3a,75y,209.47h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s800lrn19lAaE81SyapWkHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

Actually, while looking for a signal for another thread, I think this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7815994,-71.2399525,3a,22.5y,150.12h,85.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shduuqd3p76xwJHXXXMiEnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) signal in Salem, NH better fits the conditions above.

What is the point of the "no turn on red arrow" sign? It's a left turn, and it's not the type of intersection where someone would expect a left on red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 04, 2021, 12:16:30 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 04, 2021, 12:04:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 04, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 02, 2021, 10:20:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 02, 2021, 09:25:06 PM
Alternatively, delete the left-most right turn signal, placing it on the right-side mast, and replace that signal with a RYG orb signal.

This example from Portsmouth NH only has 2 lanes (left/thru, right), but if there was a second right turn lane in addition to what is present, something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0874954,-70.7901071,3a,26.2y,54.64h,87.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8VioOc_IfTLwDM_FSTTVfg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D66.236404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) or this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0878429,-70.78977,3a,75y,209.47h,83.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s800lrn19lAaE81SyapWkHw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

Actually, while looking for a signal for another thread, I think this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7815994,-71.2399525,3a,22.5y,150.12h,85.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shduuqd3p76xwJHXXXMiEnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) signal in Salem, NH better fits the conditions above.

What is the point of the "no turn on red arrow" sign? It's a left turn, and it's not the type of intersection where someone would expect a left on red.

I'm not really sure what the point is but I do know that signage is older NHDOT standard, as most newer NHDOT-maintained signals have eliminated the sign completely. (Note that both signals I mentioned are town/city maintained, not NHDOT). If you look at the Portsmouth NH example on Woodbury Ave... you can see the contractor who installed the signal was following the older standard.

Having that sign there technically prohibits right on red as well... if the right turn signals are red arrows, which NH likes to do with 3-section protected right turn signals. That intersection and the Market St/Woodbury Ave intersection in Portsmouth have that problem as well, though most drivers I've seen just turn right on red at both intersections listed above.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on February 05, 2021, 01:00:08 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/vi4hxXbyun6bpRTs9

This intersection has since been replaced, but I'm sure this old set up was not correct??
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 05, 2021, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on February 05, 2021, 01:00:08 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/vi4hxXbyun6bpRTs9

This intersection has since been replaced, but I'm sure this old set up was not correct??

Very odd indeed. The red was not necessary during the green arrow at all given the fact that this is a T-intersection. Could've been just regular left turn signals, or just regular signals period (all orbs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 05, 2021, 09:33:31 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on February 05, 2021, 01:00:08 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/vi4hxXbyun6bpRTs9

This intersection has since been replaced, but I'm sure this old set up was not correct

That looks like the intersection of Lawson and Daly Blvd's, correct? Yes there are newer signals there now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on February 08, 2021, 09:04:08 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 05, 2021, 09:33:31 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on February 05, 2021, 01:00:08 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/vi4hxXbyun6bpRTs9

This intersection has since been replaced, but I'm sure this old set up was not correct

That looks like the intersection of Lawson and Daly Blvd's, correct? Yes there are newer signals there now.

Yup, in Island Park/Oceanside.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 10, 2021, 01:08:30 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:07:05 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 01, 2021, 10:32:34 PM
Found another SPUI without a single long mast arm in the center of the interchange at I-215 and Windmill in Vegas (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0423636,-115.1336858,3a,75y,295.35h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8n7ID_IBhMg05uT6fojSxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This one has a mast arm on each triangle gore, which is a bit excessive imo.
The DO NOT ENTER (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0425515,-115.1339421,3a,75y,131.01h,84.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXxxKilqNp05JTUKTUlvDIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) on the street sign is a nice touch.

Sorry I'm late to the SPUI discussion, but wanted to comment on this.

The I-215 & Windmill SPUI that SkyPesos linked is, I believe, only the second SPUI in Nevada with intersection above the freeway. I'm fairly certain that this was the first SPUI design overseen by Clark County. When you compare to the next two "over" SPUIs the county built along I-215 at Green Valley Pkwy (https://goo.gl/maps/nqqXwwUXMPykCvjPA) and Valley Verde Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/Ea9RfdxqZGfdTedDA), as well as later "over" SPUIs along CC-215 at Town Center Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/3LBBz9Lto3yWBbUa7), Far Hills Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/87p64veXU4HU24Hs5) and Lake Mead Blvd (https://goo.gl/maps/N25NydV4LCLT5LfS8), they all use a "two mast arms from the midpoint of the bridge" approach that somewhat mimics a monotube.

The first "over" SPUI in Nevada, by several years, was at I-15 & Cheyenne (https://goo.gl/maps/cVk1FRFX9Lx2cYBs5) in North Las Vegas and constructed by NDOT. This one has both a monotube in the middle and redundant signals on the near side gore. This may seem excessive like an excessive amount of signal heads, but this interchange is different from the others, in that the bridge structure rises significantly over the surrounding terrain in short distance (as opposed to all the 215 examples where the freeway was built below grade leaving the bridge relatively level) causing sight distance issues to the signals.

Incidentally, every other "over" SPUI overseen by NDOT has used a monotube in the center. They even used a monotube at the "under" SPUI at US 95 & Rancho Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/SLvC4o7U68VZp4Bi9) in Las Vegas, instead of the usual method of attaching at least some of the primary signal heads to the bridge structure.


And to STLmapboy's comment: The "DO NOT ENTER" sign has become a standard. Other than the I-15 & Cheyenne example, you'll see that at every "over" SPUI in the Las Vegas area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 10, 2021, 07:13:26 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 10, 2021, 01:08:30 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on February 02, 2021, 01:07:05 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 01, 2021, 10:32:34 PM
Found another SPUI without a single long mast arm in the center of the interchange at I-215 and Windmill in Vegas (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0423636,-115.1336858,3a,75y,295.35h,88.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8n7ID_IBhMg05uT6fojSxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This one has a mast arm on each triangle gore, which is a bit excessive imo.
The DO NOT ENTER (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0425515,-115.1339421,3a,75y,131.01h,84.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXxxKilqNp05JTUKTUlvDIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) on the street sign is a nice touch.

Sorry I'm late to the SPUI discussion, but wanted to comment on this.

The I-215 & Windmill SPUI that SkyPesos linked is, I believe, only the second SPUI in Nevada with intersection above the freeway. I'm fairly certain that this was the first SPUI design overseen by Clark County. When you compare to the next two "over" SPUIs the county built along I-215 at Green Valley Pkwy (https://goo.gl/maps/nqqXwwUXMPykCvjPA) and Valley Verde Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/Ea9RfdxqZGfdTedDA), as well as later "over" SPUIs along CC-215 at Town Center Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/3LBBz9Lto3yWBbUa7), Far Hills Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/87p64veXU4HU24Hs5) and Lake Mead Blvd (https://goo.gl/maps/N25NydV4LCLT5LfS8), they all use a "two mast arms from the midpoint of the bridge" approach that somewhat mimics a monotube.

The first "over" SPUI in Nevada, by several years, was at I-15 & Cheyenne (https://goo.gl/maps/cVk1FRFX9Lx2cYBs5) in North Las Vegas and constructed by NDOT. This one has both a monotube in the middle and redundant signals on the near side gore. This may seem excessive like an excessive amount of signal heads, but this interchange is different from the others, in that the bridge structure rises significantly over the surrounding terrain in short distance (as opposed to all the 215 examples where the freeway was built below grade leaving the bridge relatively level) causing sight distance issues to the signals.

Incidentally, every other "over" SPUI overseen by NDOT has used a monotube in the center. They even used a monotube at the "under" SPUI at US 95 & Rancho Dr (https://goo.gl/maps/SLvC4o7U68VZp4Bi9) in Las Vegas, instead of the usual method of attaching at least some of the primary signal heads to the bridge structure.


And to STLmapboy's comment: The "DO NOT ENTER" sign has become a standard. Other than the I-15 & Cheyenne example, you'll see that at every "over" SPUI in the Las Vegas area.
I really like the two mast arms at the bridge midpoint signaling style too. It's less bulky than a monotube or truss gantry, and has the centering that it seems like most want with SPUIs. The first two I've seen with that style are both on I-64 in St. Louis, at Hampton  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6317054,-90.2866765,3a,75y,49.87h,89.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJmnSa_NL5oXbQDKF0dy2lg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)and Kingshighway (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6309234,-90.265718,3a,81y,359.75h,85.29t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saQva4Nwh3s0cgMfw31NkeQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DaQva4Nwh3s0cgMfw31NkeQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D48.017994%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). Of course there's also ones with span wire that I see a lot in Indianapolis and Charlotte, but those are their own story.

For under SPUIs, I don't know any other example that has its own signal structure under the bridge besides the Rancho example you showed. Most examples have signals attached at either side of the bridge. But here's one I've gone through a lot that has all horizontal signals under the bridge, like the Rancho one: I-170 and MO 340  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6739479,-90.3620204,3a,75y,324.35h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSONoll1FEbfQnXUVXHj_Hw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). It looks like there's two mast arms attached to the bridge that bends in the middle to accommodate the off ramp left turn signals.

EDIT: I forgot about I-170 and MO 180 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7047618,-90.3397327,3a,75y,9.88h,87.71t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4vEixH59CVp4Dk7aBwK5vw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D4vEixH59CVp4Dk7aBwK5vw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D32.312%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) when writing this, but it has its own signal structure for an under SPUI. Also in St. Louis, MO 141/MO 100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5926013,-90.508519,3a,75y,319.1h,84.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3pRAfPwF1hUGzFKpIVWQog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and I-70/Florissant (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7209351,-90.3054791,3a,75y,237.56h,97.47t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5eYYgq13aI4IrgJIypMLCg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5eYYgq13aI4IrgJIypMLCg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D60.81941%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) are similar to the I-170/MO 340 I posted above. And there's I-64 and US 67 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.635832,-90.4053726,3a,75y,246.81h,84.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAm7Wm6G04EmqTJ_Kxn2sgg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), which is unique in that there's no overhead or on-bridge signals for the off ramp left movements; all signals for that movement are ground mounted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on February 11, 2021, 09:35:07 AM
I've always loved this set up at this interesection.

https://goo.gl/maps/2cRgpbtZgHeUrRJb7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 11:48:55 AM
Quote from: betfourteen on February 11, 2021, 09:35:07 AM
I've always loved this set up at this interesection.

https://goo.gl/maps/2cRgpbtZgHeUrRJb7
How often do the signs in the middle of that SPUI get knocked down? I imagine it would be pretty frequent.

And I thought that layout looked familiar to something in the St Louis area, with the single signal under the bridge. Eventually found it at the IL 255 interchange with IL 111/140 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9023887,-90.0647904,3a,79.5y,337.06h,89.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBB99fNlGhvR7zf6sSXKIIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 11, 2021, 11:56:48 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 11:48:55 AM
Quote from: betfourteen on February 11, 2021, 09:35:07 AM
I've always loved this set up at this interesection.

https://goo.gl/maps/2cRgpbtZgHeUrRJb7
How often do the signs in the middle of that SPUI get knocked down? I imagine it would be pretty frequent.

Not sure about that particular intersection, but the two SPUIs in Reno, NV with a similar setup had those signs in the middle knocked down quite frequently. I think they stopped replacing them after a while...and when one of the intersections was repaved recently, the median was removed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2021, 04:29:22 PM
US 101 & Blake Black Lake Blvd. (https://goo.gl/maps/JnBZTLw56KU8M2zL6)

This is the only under SPUI I've ever been through, and I thought they were all set up this way.  The ramps also have advanced signals. The last time I drove this, I saw the yellow on the ramp and prepared to stop, but the car in front of me kept going.  Then they saw the red light and stopped right at it, blocking through traffic.  A second later they figured it out, and went through the intersection.  Ugh.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 11, 2021, 06:35:59 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2021, 04:29:22 PM
US 101 & Blake Lake Blvd. (https://goo.gl/maps/JnBZTLw56KU8M2zL6)

This is the only under SPUI I've ever been through, and I thought they were all set up this way.  The ramps also have advanced signals. The last time I drove this, I saw the yellow on the ramp and prepared to stop, but the car in front of me kept going.  Then they saw the red light and stopped right at it, blocking through traffic.  A second later they figured it out, and went through the intersection.  Ugh.

This is definitely WSDOT's worst under-SPUI, in terms of signalization. There are much better ones in the Southwest District, like I-5 at NE 99th in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/ACtBaFpFMwLyvfk49). The mid-way signals, attached to the overpass, are 3Ms which should help prevent cars from stopping at them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 06:47:40 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2021, 04:29:22 PM
US 101 & Blake Lake Blvd. (https://goo.gl/maps/JnBZTLw56KU8M2zL6)

This is the only under SPUI I've ever been through, and I thought they were all set up this way.  The ramps also have advanced signals. The last time I drove this, I saw the yellow on the ramp and prepared to stop, but the car in front of me kept going.  Then they saw the red light and stopped right at it, blocking through traffic.  A second later they figured it out, and went through the intersection.  Ugh.
The mast arm setup in the triangular gore for the exit ramps is unique; never seen that before. It may be a bit excessive, but it's better than being under-signalized like what I mentioned above for the I-64 and US 67  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6352045,-90.4061873,3a,75y,57.63h,87.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHokJQ0wYb5805HnZSw5DgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in St Louis SPUI; only one left turn signal before the overpass. The other two are on vertical poles under the bridge, sometimes difficult to see. Installing two off ramp left turn signals on the overpass structure would help greatly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 11, 2021, 07:11:53 PM
Related to the above discussion about SPUIs with regular mast arms:

Along the 51 Freeway in Phoenix, many interchanges are over-SPUIs with mast arms instead of monotubes:

(1) Bethany Home Road (https://goo.gl/maps/XfhHX62f7KVugv7U9)
(2) Glendale Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/8dFPVfYrKsVxAfg3A)
(3) Shea Blvd (https://goo.gl/maps/nwQCDBmmgbjoPg466)
(4) Cactus Road (https://goo.gl/maps/ACefqMZF4Bz75Lje9)
(5) Greenway Road (https://goo.gl/maps/oTuViimQNyEfasNS6)
(6) Bell Road (https://goo.gl/maps/hx4Axoevbw3xuLSf6)
(7) Union Hills Drive (https://goo.gl/maps/Ct4KbG7CsmsduByS9)

I personally think these are all excellent setups. Most even include the oft-forgotten right-side far-corner repeater signal required in many jurisdictions, something even California (https://goo.gl/maps/z5VJtjdRQRx1r6Pq8) sometimes forgoes using.

Interestingly, the few that include double right turns from the off-ramps use yield signs instead of signals, such as at Bell Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/F4YRYpTXRVtQJD4JA) and the under-SPUI at Thomas Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/FZcAcLk6wKLxFDmJ8).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 08:19:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 11, 2021, 07:11:53 PM
Related to the above discussion about SPUIs with regular mast arms:

Along the 51 Freeway in Phoenix, many interchanges are over-SPUIs with mast arms instead of monotubes:

(1) Bethany Home Road (https://goo.gl/maps/XfhHX62f7KVugv7U9)
(2) Glendale Ave (https://goo.gl/maps/8dFPVfYrKsVxAfg3A)
(3) Shea Blvd (https://goo.gl/maps/nwQCDBmmgbjoPg466)
(4) Cactus Road (https://goo.gl/maps/ACefqMZF4Bz75Lje9)
(5) Greenway Road (https://goo.gl/maps/oTuViimQNyEfasNS6)
(6) Bell Road (https://goo.gl/maps/hx4Axoevbw3xuLSf6)
(7) Union Hills Drive (https://goo.gl/maps/Ct4KbG7CsmsduByS9)

I personally think these are all excellent setups. Most even include the oft-forgotten right-side far-corner repeater signal required in many jurisdictions, something even California (https://goo.gl/maps/z5VJtjdRQRx1r6Pq8) sometimes forgoes using.

Interestingly, the few that include double right turns from the off-ramps use yield signs instead of signals, such as at Bell Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/F4YRYpTXRVtQJD4JA) and the under-SPUI at Thomas Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/FZcAcLk6wKLxFDmJ8).
I really like the signaling for those Phoenix ones, could be up there with the various St Louis examples I posted earlier as my preferences. Mast arms are noticeably shorter than the St Louis ones, but I think that's has to do with MoDOT installing an overhead signal for each lane, instead of like CA and AZ using a single overhead left signal for two left turn lanes. My only nitpick about the Phoenix ones is the lack of overhead signals for the left turns off the ramp, but that can easily be fixed with what is there currently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 12, 2021, 01:41:20 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 08:19:31 PM
I really like the signaling for those Phoenix ones, could be up there with the various St Louis examples I posted earlier as my preferences. Mast arms are noticeably shorter than the St Louis ones, but I think that's has to do with MoDOT installing an overhead signal for each lane, instead of like CA and AZ using a single overhead left signal for two left turn lanes. My only nitpick about the Phoenix ones is the lack of overhead signals for the left turns off the ramp, but that can easily be fixed with what is there currently.

They could stand to have a single overhead signal at the ends of the mast arms, angled towards the off-ramps. Something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/ydTQKWzuLqkRJ8k77), just at the end of the arm.

That said, even having only post-mounted signals for the off-ramps, I feel like signal visibility is quite excellent. There are four signals, after all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 13, 2021, 04:54:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 12, 2021, 01:41:20 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 08:19:31 PM
I really like the signaling for those Phoenix ones, could be up there with the various St Louis examples I posted earlier as my preferences. Mast arms are noticeably shorter than the St Louis ones, but I think that's has to do with MoDOT installing an overhead signal for each lane, instead of like CA and AZ using a single overhead left signal for two left turn lanes. My only nitpick about the Phoenix ones is the lack of overhead signals for the left turns off the ramp, but that can easily be fixed with what is there currently.

They could stand to have a single overhead signal at the ends of the mast arms, angled towards the off-ramps. Something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/ydTQKWzuLqkRJ8k77), just at the end of the arm.

That said, even having only post-mounted signals for the off-ramps, I feel like signal visibility is quite excellent. There are four signals, after all.

I'd have gone with one or two signal heads on the backside of the closer arterial mast arm, as with many of the Vegas area examples I posted.

It seems odd that there are not overhead signal heads for those Phoenix off ramps. And I wonder if the post-mounted signals on the far side of the interchange are too far away for the primary signal faces...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 13, 2021, 06:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 11, 2021, 06:35:59 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2021, 04:29:22 PM
US 101 & Blake Lake Blvd. (https://goo.gl/maps/JnBZTLw56KU8M2zL6)

This is the only under SPUI I've ever been through, and I thought they were all set up this way.  The ramps also have advanced signals. The last time I drove this, I saw the yellow on the ramp and prepared to stop, but the car in front of me kept going.  Then they saw the red light and stopped right at it, blocking through traffic.  A second later they figured it out, and went through the intersection.  Ugh.

This is definitely WSDOT's worst under-SPUI, in terms of signalization. There are much better ones in the Southwest District, like I-5 at NE 99th in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/ACtBaFpFMwLyvfk49). The mid-way signals, attached to the overpass, are 3Ms which should help prevent cars from stopping at them.

Yeah, I am not a fan of that "island" in the middle. Seems a little dangerous.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 13, 2021, 06:34:20 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 13, 2021, 04:54:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 12, 2021, 01:41:20 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 11, 2021, 08:19:31 PM
I really like the signaling for those Phoenix ones, could be up there with the various St Louis examples I posted earlier as my preferences. Mast arms are noticeably shorter than the St Louis ones, but I think that's has to do with MoDOT installing an overhead signal for each lane, instead of like CA and AZ using a single overhead left signal for two left turn lanes. My only nitpick about the Phoenix ones is the lack of overhead signals for the left turns off the ramp, but that can easily be fixed with what is there currently.

They could stand to have a single overhead signal at the ends of the mast arms, angled towards the off-ramps. Something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/ydTQKWzuLqkRJ8k77), just at the end of the arm.

That said, even having only post-mounted signals for the off-ramps, I feel like signal visibility is quite excellent. There are four signals, after all.

I'd have gone with one or two signal heads on the backside of the closer arterial mast arm, as with many of the Vegas area examples I posted.

It seems odd that there are not overhead signal heads for those Phoenix off ramps. And I wonder if the post-mounted signals on the far side of the interchange are too far away for the primary signal faces...
I'll do a side by side comparison of 2 interchanges (one over, one under) without overhead signals; you can judge for yourself. Both on the default zoom setting of GSV. From what I see, it's sort of difficult to see the signals across the street without zooming in from that position, which may be a visibility issue for some drivers.

AZ 51 and Greenway (Phoenix)
(https://i.imgur.com/MaggcWm.png)

I-64 and US 67 (St. Louis)
(https://i.imgur.com/aj5izYO.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 14, 2021, 04:37:02 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 13, 2021, 06:01:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 11, 2021, 06:35:59 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on February 11, 2021, 04:29:22 PM
US 101 & Blake Lake Blvd. (https://goo.gl/maps/JnBZTLw56KU8M2zL6)

This is the only under SPUI I've ever been through, and I thought they were all set up this way.  The ramps also have advanced signals. The last time I drove this, I saw the yellow on the ramp and prepared to stop, but the car in front of me kept going.  Then they saw the red light and stopped right at it, blocking through traffic.  A second later they figured it out, and went through the intersection.  Ugh.

This is definitely WSDOT's worst under-SPUI, in terms of signalization. There are much better ones in the Southwest District, like I-5 at NE 99th in Vancouver (https://goo.gl/maps/ACtBaFpFMwLyvfk49). The mid-way signals, attached to the overpass, are 3Ms which should help prevent cars from stopping at them.

Yeah, I am not a fan of that "island" in the middle. Seems a little dangerous.

The island is there to help channelize the turns to prevent drifting into the oncoming left turns. The most dangerous thing about it is not necessarily the island itself, but rather the sign on the island when it gets knocked down.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2021, 09:43:46 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210216/3bc9ea21733c454c93168363cfa5a1ae.jpg)
Unique signal in Cambridge MA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 15, 2021, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2021, 09:43:46 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210216/3bc9ea21733c454c93168363cfa5a1ae.jpg)
Unique signal in Cambridge MA


iPhone

Looks like MA out DC'd DC lmao. Seriously, if someone from DC's engineering department saw this FYA, I wouldn't at all be surprised if something real similar appears there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 12:10:12 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2021, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2021, 09:43:46 PM
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210216/3bc9ea21733c454c93168363cfa5a1ae.jpg
Unique signal in Cambridge MA

Looks like MA out DC'd DC lmao. Seriously, if someone from DC's engineering department saw this FYA, I wouldn't at all be surprised if something real similar appears there.

Look no further than H St @ Bladensburg Rd NE (https://goo.gl/maps/zgVW92VxtCxJaDA97). Nearly the same, although it's bottom aligned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 16, 2021, 12:31:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 12:10:12 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2021, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2021, 09:43:46 PM
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210216/3bc9ea21733c454c93168363cfa5a1ae.jpg
Unique signal in Cambridge MA

Looks like MA out DC'd DC lmao. Seriously, if someone from DC's engineering department saw this FYA, I wouldn't at all be surprised if something real similar appears there.

Look no further than H St @ Bladensburg Rd NE (https://goo.gl/maps/zgVW92VxtCxJaDA97). Nearly the same, although it's bottom aligned.

Ahh nice!! It's been a couple of years since I've been on the city streets in DC. How common is that setup there?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:24:40 AM
Quote from: plain on February 16, 2021, 12:31:55 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 12:10:12 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2021, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 15, 2021, 09:43:46 PM
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210216/3bc9ea21733c454c93168363cfa5a1ae.jpg
Unique signal in Cambridge MA

Looks like MA out DC'd DC lmao. Seriously, if someone from DC's engineering department saw this FYA, I wouldn't at all be surprised if something real similar appears there.

Look no further than H St @ Bladensburg Rd NE (https://goo.gl/maps/zgVW92VxtCxJaDA97). Nearly the same, although it's bottom aligned.

Ahh nice!! It's been a couple of years since I've been on the city streets in DC. How common is that setup there?

This seems to be the only flashing yellow arrow for left turns in DC, at least that I know of. But I haven't been in the district proper since last July, and I didn't do much driving, so that may easily no longer be the case.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:25:37 AM
This signal in Florida, US-27 @ Johnson St (https://goo.gl/maps/B3KqgDnYxtrBe52G6) in Pembroke Pines, has left turn signals that use RYG orbs.

I was pretty sure this didn't exist, yet here we are... :-|

Remarkably, they replaced RYG left turn arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/JWWctamLp1CBUvVc6) that had no signage. The current design seems comparatively regressive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 16, 2021, 07:31:00 AM
https://youtu.be/x7VgYhAi8ro
Here's a video of it


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 16, 2021, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:25:37 AM
This signal in Florida, US-27 @ Johnson St (https://goo.gl/maps/B3KqgDnYxtrBe52G6) in Pembroke Pines, has left turn signals that use RYG orbs.


That's not quite as bad as I expected, what with the change in angle, but still, in my opinion left or even diagonal arrows should be used here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 12:58:47 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 16, 2021, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:25:37 AM
This signal in Florida, US-27 @ Johnson St (https://goo.gl/maps/B3KqgDnYxtrBe52G6) in Pembroke Pines, has left turn signals that use RYG orbs.


That's not quite as bad as I expected, what with the change in angle, but still, in my opinion left or even diagonal arrows should be used here.

I would have used diagonal arrows for those turns myself. There's a very similar intersection on Utah's SR 201 (https://goo.gl/maps/sBxK9Kzxc6KpiTkW8) with that arrangement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 16, 2021, 05:13:45 PM
Here's a neat pedestrian signal in Harvard square: https://youtu.be/cwYOLK53ls4


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 16, 2021, 05:18:07 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 12:58:47 PM
I would have used diagonal arrows for those turns myself. There's a very similar intersection on Utah's SR 201 (https://goo.gl/maps/sBxK9Kzxc6KpiTkW8) with that arrangement.

Well, this light is just a wee-bit before the stop line...

https://goo.gl/maps/voCihghNp1dYFVvf6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 16, 2021, 05:34:55 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 12:58:47 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 16, 2021, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:25:37 AM
This signal in Florida, US-27 @ Johnson St (https://goo.gl/maps/B3KqgDnYxtrBe52G6) in Pembroke Pines, has left turn signals that use RYG orbs.


That's not quite as bad as I expected, what with the change in angle, but still, in my opinion left or even diagonal arrows should be used here.

I would have used diagonal arrows for those turns myself. There's a very similar intersection on Utah's SR 201 (https://goo.gl/maps/sBxK9Kzxc6KpiTkW8) with that arrangement.
Love how they thought out that intersection a bit. Could add an overpass for UT 201 in the future when the traffic warrants it and it's a functioning SPUI!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 05:44:38 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 16, 2021, 05:34:55 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 12:58:47 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 16, 2021, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 16, 2021, 01:25:37 AM
This signal in Florida, US-27 @ Johnson St (https://goo.gl/maps/B3KqgDnYxtrBe52G6) in Pembroke Pines, has left turn signals that use RYG orbs.


That's not quite as bad as I expected, what with the change in angle, but still, in my opinion left or even diagonal arrows should be used here.

I would have used diagonal arrows for those turns myself. There's a very similar intersection on Utah's SR 201 (https://goo.gl/maps/sBxK9Kzxc6KpiTkW8) with that arrangement.
Love how they thought out that intersection a bit. Could add an overpass for UT 201 in the future when the traffic warrants it and it's a functioning SPUI!

I believe that's indeed the plan (not anytime soon, but I can see traffic getting bad there in the near future). You might also notice the intersection at 8400 West is built with something similar in mind. Both configurations date back to when 201 was first four-laned through the west valley in the 1970s.

Unfortunately, it will take a bit more work to upgrade the 8000 West intersection if and when more of 201 is upgraded to freeway status.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 17, 2021, 03:26:36 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.

Probably guessing this is the reason why, similar to this approach from the Bangor Mall at Stillwater Ave in Bangor ME:

Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.
The Bangor, ME location looks like it was done that way to avoid having the signal heads obscured by, or to avoid potential collision with, the overhead utility lines (I'm assuming the utility lines predate the signal).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman1071 on February 17, 2021, 01:21:44 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 16, 2021, 05:13:45 PM
Here's a neat pedestrian signal in Harvard square: https://youtu.be/cwYOLK53ls4


iPhone
Car Talk HQ
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on February 17, 2021, 05:48:20 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1144811,-85.2568714,3a,75y,344.97h,77.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw35LbdOPuB8Qpy8FS8zupw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

the traffic lights here at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN are a little more higher 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 17, 2021, 09:37:34 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210218/97ce037a06ff4def0f2308ca12580bd6.jpg)
What?


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 18, 2021, 12:44:18 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.

Here's one in Newport News, VA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5eeDMFHdofNdsDtY6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on February 18, 2021, 01:10:53 AM
This example on Reservation Road in Marina, California is a good example of a signal-pole style in California during, I think, the 1960s.  There are still a lot of these within Monterey County, such as this one.

https://goo.gl/maps/fCUxFDTqvXhqoBrEA (https://goo.gl/maps/fCUxFDTqvXhqoBrEA) 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 01:36:28 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 16, 2021, 05:18:07 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 16, 2021, 12:58:47 PM
I would have used diagonal arrows for those turns myself. There's a very similar intersection on Utah's SR 201 (https://goo.gl/maps/sBxK9Kzxc6KpiTkW8) with that arrangement.

Well, this light is just a wee-bit before the stop line...

https://goo.gl/maps/voCihghNp1dYFVvf6

Yikes.  Indeed that pole-mounted one is clearly visible to thru traffic and shows a different color at least part of the time.  https://goo.gl/maps/oRepSqd4gbPt7iaN9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 02:03:10 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 17, 2021, 03:26:36 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.

Probably guessing this is the reason why, similar to this approach from the Bangor Mall at Stillwater Ave in Bangor ME:

Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.
The Bangor, ME location looks like it was done that way to avoid having the signal heads obscured by, or to avoid potential collision with, the overhead utility lines (I'm assuming the utility lines predate the signal).

These Akron low-hangers didn't have conflicting utility lines but were still hung rather low...it seems to be an Akron thing.  https://goo.gl/maps/c3h9Jm26tef53hqo9  They used to have one arrow pointing left and one right, but were fitted with circular green LEDs more recently.  The only reason the greens were 12-inch was because of the old arrows, which were probably to emphasize that you can't go straight.  I say if they were going to go LED, fit 8-inch heads.  They put in 12-8-8 (and even 12-8-8-12) new old stock at Arlington/North/Home in Akron, so we know they have stuff kicking around. https://goo.gl/maps/41u9X9nweXXmGeqNA (There used to be very old classic green-painted Akron signals there.  In 2019, they put in "new" yellow ones--different signal heads in the same configuration, painted yellow, still 12-8-8.  Wonders never cease.  Akron had been losing lots of 12-8-8s.)

This pair in Akron may not look that low in the pictures but it strikes you as low in person.  https://goo.gl/maps/RKbyHR1dG7gi5JZ38  Maybe utility line concerns here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on February 19, 2021, 08:40:29 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 02:03:10 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 17, 2021, 03:26:36 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.

While not a signal on a wire, when this signal was added sometime in the late 90s, there were issues with the telephone wires. They had to come back and move one of the arms (I think the far one in this image as it is right through the wires) as there were a bunch of accidents from people not seeing the signal.

https://goo.gl/maps/ZXEF8L4uB4udw3Hh9

Probably guessing this is the reason why, similar to this approach from the Bangor Mall at Stillwater Ave in Bangor ME:

Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.
The Bangor, ME location looks like it was done that way to avoid having the signal heads obscured by, or to avoid potential collision with, the overhead utility lines (I'm assuming the utility lines predate the signal).

These Akron low-hangers didn't have conflicting utility lines but were still hung rather low...it seems to be an Akron thing.  https://goo.gl/maps/c3h9Jm26tef53hqo9  They used to have one arrow pointing left and one right, but were fitted with circular green LEDs more recently.  The only reason the greens were 12-inch was because of the old arrows, which were probably to emphasize that you can't go straight.  I say if they were going to go LED, fit 8-inch heads.  They put in 12-8-8 (and even 12-8-8-12) new old stock at Arlington/North/Home in Akron, so we know they have stuff kicking around. https://goo.gl/maps/41u9X9nweXXmGeqNA (There used to be very old classic green-painted Akron signals there.  In 2019, they put in "new" yellow ones--different signal heads in the same configuration, painted yellow, still 12-8-8.  Wonders never cease.  Akron had been losing lots of 12-8-8s.)

This pair in Akron may not look that low in the pictures but it strikes you as low in person.  https://goo.gl/maps/RKbyHR1dG7gi5JZ38  Maybe utility line concerns here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 19, 2021, 09:39:27 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 17, 2021, 09:37:34 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210218/97ce037a06ff4def0f2308ca12580bd6.jpg)
What?


iPhone

Looks like the top lens is the red hand / white ped crossing signal, while the lower lens is a countdown clock.  The setups I've seen had the clock on top.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 19, 2021, 10:48:48 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 19, 2021, 09:39:27 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 17, 2021, 09:37:34 PM
snip image
What?

Looks like the top lens is the red hand / white ped crossing signal, while the lower lens is a countdown clock.  The setups I've seen had the clock on top.

That setup, with countdown clock on the bottom, is all over DC and I'm pretty sure I've seen it elsewhere as well
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on February 19, 2021, 02:15:41 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 02:03:10 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 17, 2021, 03:26:36 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 17, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Has anyone seen lower hanging traffic lights than these in Morristown, TN?

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2056035,-83.3240473,3a,42.2y,155.07h,93.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7qHHx9-4qoKMO5NWSSQkyg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kinda like them not gonna lie.

Probably guessing this is the reason why, similar to this approach from the Bangor Mall at Stillwater Ave in Bangor ME:

Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 09, 2020, 11:12:43 PM
I'm going to ask the same question about this approach (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8330741,-68.7507799,3a,21.3y,288.2h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szzLpwN-ZDNRc181-XIQSlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) leaving the Bangor Mall in Bangor ME... span wire mounted very low compared to the other lights on Stillwater Ave.
The Bangor, ME location looks like it was done that way to avoid having the signal heads obscured by, or to avoid potential collision with, the overhead utility lines (I'm assuming the utility lines predate the signal).

These Akron low-hangers didn't have conflicting utility lines but were still hung rather low...it seems to be an Akron thing.  https://goo.gl/maps/c3h9Jm26tef53hqo9  They used to have one arrow pointing left and one right, but were fitted with circular green LEDs more recently.  The only reason the greens were 12-inch was because of the old arrows, which were probably to emphasize that you can't go straight.  I say if they were going to go LED, fit 8-inch heads.  They put in 12-8-8 (and even 12-8-8-12) new old stock at Arlington/North/Home in Akron, so we know they have stuff kicking around. https://goo.gl/maps/41u9X9nweXXmGeqNA (There used to be very old classic green-painted Akron signals there.  In 2019, they put in "new" yellow ones--different signal heads in the same configuration, painted yellow, still 12-8-8.  Wonders never cease.  Akron had been losing lots of 12-8-8s.)

This pair in Akron may not look that low in the pictures but it strikes you as low in person.  https://goo.gl/maps/RKbyHR1dG7gi5JZ38  Maybe utility line concerns here.

I think the low hanging lights are better seen from the driver's point of view.  Obviously, if the lights are too low, taller vehicles can't drive under them, so something like this would only work at T-intersections.

"Traditional" signals in the city of Los Angeles would have one pole mounted signal on each far side corner.  Wider streets would get an additional signal on a mast arm.  But there are examples of wider streets that end at a T-intersection where the mast arm would not be used.

Here is the intersection of Crenshaw terminating at Wilshire:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0616458,-118.3191881,3a,75y,3.79h,80.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sffKbzXkA-yGPu--TEfdD-A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here is Lankershim terminating at San Fernando:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2335587,-118.3877706,3a,75y,10.8h,87.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCX-5_DQs_UzyYiL4wKK3EQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Edited to add:  Example with wide street ending at a t-intersection with a mast arm, Westchester Pkwy at Pershing:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9518278,-118.4391782,3a,75y,239.69h,84.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKvSRo7H6KRknNR7Gb5tI9g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on February 19, 2021, 08:51:16 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 19, 2021, 10:48:48 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 19, 2021, 09:39:27 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 17, 2021, 09:37:34 PM
snip image
What?

Looks like the top lens is the red hand / white ped crossing signal, while the lower lens is a countdown clock.  The setups I've seen had the clock on top.

That setup, with countdown clock on the bottom, is all over DC and I'm pretty sure I've seen it elsewhere as well

I believe the initial "What?" is a response to the use of two different styles/makers for the top and bottom sections of all the walk signals, and not the fact its a two section setup instead of a combined one section setup.  I'll admit, I cannot say I've seen a pedestrian Frankensignal before either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rick1962 on February 20, 2021, 10:21:25 AM
Quote
I'll admit, I cannot say I've seen a pedestrian Frankensignal before either.

McAlester, Oklahoma says "hold my beer".(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210220/2cd92ba972bd5ac429b50d41de0bd3b2.jpg)

SM-T580

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 12:17:27 PM
Quote from: Rick1962 on February 20, 2021, 10:21:25 AM
Quote
I'll admit, I cannot say I've seen a pedestrian Frankensignal before either.

McAlester, Oklahoma says "hold my beer".(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210220/2cd92ba972bd5ac429b50d41de0bd3b2.jpg)

SM-T580

As does whatever this is in El Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,15.6y,351.46h,87.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: renegade on February 20, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 12:17:27 PM
whatever this is in El Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,24.1y,346.65h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656%5Burl=http://whatever%20this%20is%20in%20El%20Reno).
Nice map of El Reno.  What were you trying to show us?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 20, 2021, 05:21:51 PM
Quote from: mapman on February 18, 2021, 01:10:53 AM
This example on Reservation Road in Marina, California is a good example of a signal-pole style in California during, I think, the 1960s.  There are still a lot of these within Monterey County, such as this one.

https://goo.gl/maps/fCUxFDTqvXhqoBrEA (https://goo.gl/maps/fCUxFDTqvXhqoBrEA)

I do believe there are still several examples in the greater Sacramento area. At least that's where I recall seeing this style first.

That mast arm curve to display the left turn signals lower is really unique, but I gotta wonder why they did that in the first place... Perhaps these are replacements for what may have been post-mounted signals in the narrow median, and they did this to avoid knockdowns. Most of these that I've seen do appear that the curved portion of the arm was added on later. I've also only seen this style where the turn signal is above a (often narrow) median island.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 20, 2021, 08:56:32 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 20, 2021, 05:21:51 PM
That mast arm curve to display the left turn signals lower is really unique, but I gotta wonder why they did that in the first place... Perhaps these are replacements for what may have been post-mounted signals in the narrow median, and they did this to avoid knockdowns. Most of these that I've seen do appear that the curved portion of the arm was added on later. I've also only seen this style where the turn signal is above a (often narrow) median island.

Best I can assume is that they wanted the left turn signal to be lower than the through signals, as it was common for years to have the left turn signal at pole-mounted height rather than overhead.

In BC, it's normally taught  (https://youtu.be/JMC56argXVk)that overhead signals are for through traffic, and when there is a protected left, the median signal is the one you look for. BC still calls for median-mounted pole-level left turn signals when possible, otherwise they are placed overhead.

In short: those curved signals in California may have been trying to get the left-turn signal to pole-mounted height over the median, without actually pole-mounting the signal (to avoid knockdowns I guess).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 20, 2021, 08:59:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

I don't believe it's allowed, but it's seen most often in states where all-arrow signals are normally common. Example near me (https://goo.gl/maps/g3f7NkkiJCrB1rqr5).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 10:56:36 PM
Quote from: renegade on February 20, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 12:17:27 PM
whatever this is in El Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,24.1y,346.65h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656%5Burl=http://whatever%20this%20is%20in%20El%20Reno).
Nice map of El Reno.  What were you trying to show us?

Sorry about that, something happened with the link.  Here it is. (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,15.6y,351.46h,87.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 21, 2021, 10:07:21 AM
Quote from: renegade on February 20, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 12:17:27 PM
whatever this is in El Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,24.1y,346.65h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656%5Burl=http://whatever%20this%20is%20in%20El%20Reno).
Nice map of El Reno.  What were you trying to show us?

That first link worked for me...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 21, 2021, 01:40:03 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 21, 2021, 10:07:21 AM
Quote from: renegade on February 20, 2021, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 20, 2021, 12:17:27 PM
whatever this is in El Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5323185,-97.9547932,3a,24.1y,346.65h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkdXo3hgyUUnIwQXf8IWbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656%5Burl=http://whatever%20this%20is%20in%20El%20Reno).
Nice map of El Reno.  What were you trying to show us?

That first link worked for me...

Yeah, I edited the first link after the fact.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 21, 2021, 05:04:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 20, 2021, 08:59:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

I don't believe it's allowed, but it's seen most often in states where all-arrow signals are normally common. Example near me (https://goo.gl/maps/g3f7NkkiJCrB1rqr5).

Yeah, straight ahead red arrows are not allowed in the MUTCD. That's one thing I've never really understood the rationale for.

Despite this, I have occasionally seen them in practice here in Nevada. Usually, it's somewhat of a reinforcement of a turn prohibition where you might more commonly see a green straight  arrow, such as this no left turn into a bus station in Sparks (https://goo.gl/maps/MCBGFwXGuqvu2J3Y8). But the main use seems to be the crossover points at DDIs, like every through signal at I-580/US 395 & Moana Ln in Reno (https://goo.gl/maps/5bpgnre2dBhTgjgg9) or I-11/US 93/US 95 & Horizon Dr in Henderson (https://goo.gl/maps/T7FEVuZ31X6Vchzx6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on February 21, 2021, 06:55:04 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 21, 2021, 05:04:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 20, 2021, 08:59:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

I don't believe it's allowed, but it's seen most often in states where all-arrow signals are normally common. Example near me (https://goo.gl/maps/g3f7NkkiJCrB1rqr5).

Yeah, straight ahead red arrows are not allowed in the MUTCD. That's one thing I've never really understood the rationale for.

Despite this, I have occasionally seen them in practice here in Nevada. Usually, it's somewhat of a reinforcement of a turn prohibition where you might more commonly see a green straight  arrow, such as this no left turn into a bus station in Sparks (https://goo.gl/maps/MCBGFwXGuqvu2J3Y8). But the main use seems to be the crossover points at DDIs, like every through signal at I-580/US 395 & Moana Ln in Reno (https://goo.gl/maps/5bpgnre2dBhTgjgg9) or I-11/US 93/US 95 & Horizon Dr in Henderson (https://goo.gl/maps/T7FEVuZ31X6Vchzx6).

A red up-arrow. It used to be a 3M signal and was replaced with this one. The green arrow is louvered to block the sight line unless you are right up on it. When this one is red, so are the other signals through there. Maybe the red up-arrow is to try and highlight the no left turn here.
https://goo.gl/maps/mrAC5KFW9a93pG9i6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on February 21, 2021, 07:24:29 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

The straight red arrow is disallowed because a red ball would be easier to see than a red arrow.

What's also interesting about this signal is that it is also a bus signal.  Apparently, buses along SR-51 are encouraged to exit and then continue back on the freeway.  I guess they feel it is quicker for buses to do that in heavy traffic periods.  What's interesting is that there is no provision for that in the other direction.  What is also interesting is that there is no bus stop at that point.  In LA, freewaay buses that exit usually do so to service an exit.  Here is an example of a freeway bus along US 101 that exits at Van Nuys Blvd at a diamond interchange, continues straight across the street and then makes a stop just before the on-ramp.

Bus stop shown, not the bus itself.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1562833,-118.4478097,3a,37.5y,141.57h,87.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEWnqDJvSWCYtNAVATFqFtw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 21, 2021, 07:39:14 PM
What are the square things on the back of these signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.463056,-86.7898823,3a,34.8y,258.84h,101.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scKg5alE0gSny72Oh8BgSwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) near Birmingham? My initial guess was something to make the light not very visible from far away, but streetview says otherwise. For what it's worth, the far lights on the road's other side also have these.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 22, 2021, 10:08:24 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 21, 2021, 07:39:14 PM
What are the square things on the back of these signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.463056,-86.7898823,3a,34.8y,258.84h,101.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scKg5alE0gSny72Oh8BgSwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) near Birmingham? My initial guess was something to make the light not very visible from far away, but streetview says otherwise. For what it's worth, the far lights on the road's other side also have these.

Quote from: jakeroot on April 02, 2018, 04:08:04 PM
Federal Way, WA installed quite a few of these for a while, although they used them at several intersections where I'm not sure it was necessary to limit the visibility of the signals.

All of their uses were flashing yellow arrows. Here's an image I took today. Note that tunnel visors are used, instead of the cutaway visors seen on all of the previous examples. Cutaway visors are very rare here in Washington, generally being used on signals with limited visibility features (except for these, obviously).

(https://i.imgur.com/gFJKBDB.jpg)

Looks like heat sinks for the ESB PV signals discussed in this old thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21172.0).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 23, 2021, 12:32:17 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2021, 07:24:29 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

What's also interesting about this signal is that it is also a bus signal.  Apparently, buses along SR-51 are encouraged to exit and then continue back on the freeway.  I guess they feel it is quicker for buses to do that in heavy traffic periods.  What's interesting is that there is no provision for that in the other direction.  What is also interesting is that there is no bus stop at that point.

The Phoenix signal appears specifically accommodates bus access to a Park & Ride. If you follow the street view across Shea Blvd across to the on ramp, you'll see there's a slip ramp marked for buses only. This services a park & ride facility (with nearly all covered spaces!). There is another access so that buses can come back down from the park & ride to merge back to the same on ramp. Here's a Google Map  (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Shea+Park+%26+Ride/@33.5811623,-112.0110547,490m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x872b72f7880c7019:0xc6e43cc1079b0a1b!8m2!3d33.5805835!4d-112.0111109)for an overview.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 03:36:02 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/uM7BofJqhQuGw6T48
Instead of a doghouse.

Yeah I know many 8-8-8 have them but on 12-12-12 is common, but not as though interesting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 07:10:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 03:36:02 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/uM7BofJqhQuGw6T48
Instead of a doghouse.

Yeah I know many 8-8-8 have them but on 12-12-12 is common, but not as though interesting.

That's just a regular side-by-side 5-section signal. Not common apart from Colorado, West Virginia, and parts of New York and Maryland.

I personally prefer this style, but that's neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 23, 2021, 08:42:53 PM
The side-by-side configuration dominates on Long Island in both NYS DOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW installations. Not sure what Suffolk County does.

Like Jakeroot, I also much prefer it to the doghouse. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 10:03:27 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 23, 2021, 08:42:53 PM
Not sure what Suffolk County does.

Very brief tour on Street View would suggest that side-by-side is also dominant there. Very new example (https://goo.gl/maps/M7S6JAt1qDAYU6Gx8).

edit: that may not be a county install; disregard if so.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on February 23, 2021, 10:24:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 23, 2021, 08:42:53 PM
The side-by-side configuration dominates on Long Island in both NYS DOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW installations. Not sure what Suffolk County does.

Like Jakeroot, I also much prefer it to the doghouse.

They're called offset doghouses
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:12:03 PM
Quote from: traffic light guy on February 23, 2021, 10:24:42 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 23, 2021, 08:42:53 PM
The side-by-side configuration dominates on Long Island in both NYS DOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW installations. Not sure what Suffolk County does.

Like Jakeroot, I also much prefer it to the doghouse.

They're called offset doghouses

Well, in addition to, but I've never heard that as the official term. Both are widely used, although I've seen "side by side" used more.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:14:33 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?

Double reds are an option that some states use more than others (Texas in particular). It has no special meaning.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on February 23, 2021, 11:41:15 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?

Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:14:33 PM
Double reds are an option that some states use more than others (Texas in particular). It has no special meaning.

How about redundancy?  The purpose of color position lights (CPLs) on certain railroads was to provide for redundant aspects.  Otherwise, the FRA requires "light out protection" for any signal where a burnt out light bulb could be misconstrued as an increase in signal indication.  I've seen some folks run traffic signals when the light bulb is burnt out because it resembles a power outage (and they thought they were on the "priority" route).  That's why the law requires a "four-way" stop when the signal is not working.  (Not really an all-way stop when a bulb is burnt out).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:14:33 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?

Double reds are an option that some states use more than others (Texas in particular). It has no special meaning.
j

San Antonio don't use double red signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:04:03 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:14:33 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?

Double reds are an option that some states use more than others (Texas in particular). It has no special meaning.

San Antonio don't use double red signals.

A lot of Texas doesn't, but the number of double reds in other parts likely outnumbers the total number in most other states put together. I can think of two or three double reds in all of Washington.

Quote from: Dirt Roads on February 23, 2021, 11:41:15 PM
How about redundancy?  The purpose of color position lights (CPLs) on certain railroads was to provide for redundant aspects.  Otherwise, the FRA requires "light out protection" for any signal where a burnt out light bulb could be misconstrued as an increase in signal indication.  I've seen some folks run traffic signals when the light bulb is burnt out because it resembles a power outage (and they thought they were on the "priority" route).  That's why the law requires a "four-way" stop when the signal is not working.  (Not really an all-way stop when a bulb is burnt out).

I'm more in favor of positional redundancy. Cramming signals overhead meets MUTCD requirements, but they're easily blocked. It's better to have multiple signals than repeated displays on the same head, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 07:10:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 03:36:02 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/uM7BofJqhQuGw6T48
Instead of a doghouse.

Yeah I know many 8-8-8 have them but on 12-12-12 is common, but not as though interesting.

That's just a regular side-by-side 5-section signal. Not common apart from Colorado, West Virginia, and parts of New York and Maryland.

I personally prefer this style, but that's neither here nor there.
I'm still a traditional doghouse fan, because of the symmetry.

Also there's this doghouse variant (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316074,-83.0159876,3a,15y,96.04h,94.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfC_bId-q53dHNVxHybAOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (idk the actual name of it) with a missing yellow left signal that I sometimes see in Columbus. Not sure how it works; does the yellow left arrow share the same section as the yellow ball?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:33:25 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Also there's this doghouse variant (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316074,-83.0159876,3a,15y,96.04h,94.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfC_bId-q53dHNVxHybAOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (idk the actual name of it) with a missing yellow left signal that I sometimes see in Columbus. Not sure how it works; does the yellow left arrow share the same section as the yellow ball?

That's just a split-phase signal where the bottom green arrow was moved up, likely for clearance issues or because of that power line (signal in Fife, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/P8QgLhzEQJ2zNKpeA) installed for the same reason). Nothing to do with doghouse signals.

Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 07:10:02 PM
I personally prefer this style, but that's neither here nor there.
I'm still a traditional doghouse fan, because of the symmetry.

Totally fair. My preference is simply because I like to keep the circular indications in a line. I don't understand why the red is centered at all. It's not like symmetry matters to engineers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:39:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:33:25 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Also there's this doghouse variant (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316074,-83.0159876,3a,15y,96.04h,94.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfC_bId-q53dHNVxHybAOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (idk the actual name of it) with a missing yellow left signal that I sometimes see in Columbus. Not sure how it works; does the yellow left arrow share the same section as the yellow ball?

That's just a split-phase signal where the bottom green arrow was moved up, likely for clearance issues or because of that power line (signal in Fife, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/P8QgLhzEQJ2zNKpeA) installed for the same reason). Nothing to do with doghouse signals.
This is the first time I've seen a split phase signal with one of the two movements missing on the green (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316542,-83.0161558,3a,15y,101.91h,92.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUJ46xiyjz6ulEJmfe2KaLg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) then. Kind of wondering if this is supposed to be similar to Ontario's split phase signals, with a protected-permissive left turn option. Or if it's just an electrical issue, since every other green phase of that exact signal I've seen on GSV have both the left arrow and bulb working.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:49:32 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:39:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:33:25 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Also there's this doghouse variant (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316074,-83.0159876,3a,15y,96.04h,94.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfC_bId-q53dHNVxHybAOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (idk the actual name of it) with a missing yellow left signal that I sometimes see in Columbus. Not sure how it works; does the yellow left arrow share the same section as the yellow ball?

That's just a split-phase signal where the bottom green arrow was moved up, likely for clearance issues or because of that power line (signal in Fife, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/P8QgLhzEQJ2zNKpeA) installed for the same reason). Nothing to do with doghouse signals.
This is the first time I've seen a split phase signal with one of the two movements missing on the green (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316542,-83.0161558,3a,15y,101.91h,92.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUJ46xiyjz6ulEJmfe2KaLg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) then. Kind of wondering if this is supposed to be similar to Ontario's split phase signals, with a protected-permissive left turn option. Or if it's just an electrical issue, since every other green phase of that exact signal I've seen on GSV have both the left arrow and bulb working.

You were right the first time. That is indeed a protected-permissive bimodal arrow. All evidence pointed to split phasing (note the other direction has a protected left), but your GSV pretty clearly shows it operating permissively (crosswalk signal being active on the left is the big giveaway). There are many four-section bimodal left turn signals out there (very common in parts of WA), but I cannot recall seeing any in this configuration. I definitely don't see why a doghouse wasn't used, especially given the other adjacent signal.

edit: it may not necessarily be bimodal. The oncoming left did not use to exist. It's possible this was a lagging green arrow at one point, which would not have required a yellow arrow. But when they switched it to leading (the case based on this GSV still (https://goo.gl/maps/fvSvDeooAqasEwFe9) where both directions have a yellow at the same time), they may not have realized that the yellow arrow was missing. Or maybe they went back and made it bimodal...who knows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on February 24, 2021, 09:29:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:33:25 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 07:10:02 PM
I personally prefer this style, but that's neither here nor there.
I'm still a traditional doghouse fan, because of the symmetry.
Totally fair. My preference is simply because I like to keep the circular indications in a line. I don't understand why the red is centered at all. It's not like symmetry matters to engineers.

Engineers may not care about symmetry, but we do care about aesthetics (sometimes). :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on February 24, 2021, 10:37:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:49:32 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:39:48 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:33:25 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 12:28:51 AM
Also there's this doghouse variant (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316074,-83.0159876,3a,15y,96.04h,94.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWfC_bId-q53dHNVxHybAOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (idk the actual name of it) with a missing yellow left signal that I sometimes see in Columbus. Not sure how it works; does the yellow left arrow share the same section as the yellow ball?

That's just a split-phase signal where the bottom green arrow was moved up, likely for clearance issues or because of that power line (signal in Fife, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/P8QgLhzEQJ2zNKpeA) installed for the same reason). Nothing to do with doghouse signals.
This is the first time I've seen a split phase signal with one of the two movements missing on the green (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0316542,-83.0161558,3a,15y,101.91h,92.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUJ46xiyjz6ulEJmfe2KaLg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) then. Kind of wondering if this is supposed to be similar to Ontario's split phase signals, with a protected-permissive left turn option. Or if it's just an electrical issue, since every other green phase of that exact signal I've seen on GSV have both the left arrow and bulb working.

You were right the first time. That is indeed a protected-permissive bimodal arrow. All evidence pointed to split phasing (note the other direction has a protected left), but your GSV pretty clearly shows it operating permissively (crosswalk signal being active on the left is the big giveaway). There are many four-section bimodal left turn signals out there (very common in parts of WA), but I cannot recall seeing any in this configuration. I definitely don't see why a doghouse wasn't used, especially given the other adjacent signal.

edit: it may not necessarily be bimodal. The oncoming left did not use to exist. It's possible this was a lagging green arrow at one point, which would not have required a yellow arrow. But when they switched it to leading (the case based on this GSV still (https://goo.gl/maps/fvSvDeooAqasEwFe9) where both directions have a yellow at the same time), they may not have realized that the yellow arrow was missing. Or maybe they went back and made it bimodal...who knows.

I agree that it is probably really hard to guess at what the signal mode configuration is there at that intersection, unless someone is nearby and can watch the operation.

First, I think jakeroot is correct that the configuration of the aspects, where the arrow is to the left of the green orb, is likely for clearance considerations.  Operationally, the signal is no different that a 4 aspect tower: R-Y-G-?

When I do see a 4 aspect tower, these are the possibilities that I think of (in order) unless other evidence points otherwise:

Split phase
Lagging left (no longer allowed without separate yellow arrow*, but many w/o yellow arrow still exist)
Leading left with bimodal arrrow
Leading left with a missing yellow arrow aspect (not great, but they do still exist, but are rare).

Of these, I believe this is probably the second of these possibilities, the lagging left.  First, in the pre-FYA era, it was very common to signal lead-lag signals with the leading left on a protected only signal and the lagging left permissive.   This was to prevent yellow trap on the leading side during the lagging phase.  Second, the GSVs showing simultaneous yellow do rule out split-phasing, but do not necessarily rule out lagging left.  It could be that since the lagging left is permissive, the lagging left is only shown when it is needed.  But on that still, while there are a lot of cars wanting to turn left on the protected side (and they can't because of the red arrow), there are no cars waiting to turn left on the lagging side.  If there are good sensors here, the lagging left would only be triggered when there is a need to trigger the lagging left, i.e. cars waiting to turn.  And one thing about a lagging left is that while there may be a bunch of cars needing to make the turn at the beginning of the cycle, if they are all able to find a gap in opposing traffic to make their turns there would be no need to even provide the protected arrow at the end of the cycle.  And that is better for most everyone, because providing protected lefts takes away proportionate signal time from the other phases, so to the extent that one of the signal phases can be safely skipped, it is better for everyone else, namely the thru traffic.

Of course, all of the above is speculation, as I have not been at this intersection in Columbus.  BOth sides leading left is also possible, but it is hard to believe that they would implement that without a yellow arrow.


*IMO for a lagging left the yellow arrow is really not necessary, since the yellow arrow time would be shown at the exact same times as the yellow orb.  For whatever reasons more recent editions of MUTCD require a yellow arrow for lagging lefts but don't require them for split-phasing.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 24, 2021, 12:24:34 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2021, 07:24:29 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 20, 2021, 06:12:36 PM
I'm looking at some Phoenix SPUIs from the discussion from a week ago, and found a straight movement red light with an up arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5825732,-112.0103371,3a,15y,186.04h,92.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11i5KHBXu4-RluD_9QwNbA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is common in some other countries, like China, but it's the first time seeing one in the states for me. Any other examples of this?

The straight red arrow is disallowed because a red ball would be easier to see than a red arrow.

What's also interesting about this signal is that it is also a bus signal.  Apparently, buses along SR-51 are encouraged to exit and then continue back on the freeway.  I guess they feel it is quicker for buses to do that in heavy traffic periods.  What's interesting is that there is no provision for that in the other direction.  What is also interesting is that there is no bus stop at that point.  In LA, freewaay buses that exit usually do so to service an exit.  Here is an example of a freeway bus along US 101 that exits at Van Nuys Blvd at a diamond interchange, continues straight across the street and then makes a stop just before the on-ramp.

Bus stop shown, not the bus itself.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1562833,-118.4478097,3a,37.5y,141.57h,87.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEWnqDJvSWCYtNAVATFqFtw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Right away I thought of the first signal you hit on US 36 in Boulder entering town; I have a photo of it that I got in 2016 but the street view is clearer probably.

https://goo.gl/maps/zcRu6mFx98A5Fhfm9

It is to emphasize no right turns as the frontage road is there.  They didn't go all-out; just the one with the rest red balls.
There were lots of other interesting things around there (fairly modern 12-8-8s; doghouses with red arrows at the top) as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 24, 2021, 01:34:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 12:04:03 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 23, 2021, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 23, 2021, 11:14:33 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 23, 2021, 11:13:39 PM
What's with the double red lights here in NC? Does it mean to stop only by looking at 2 red lights?

Double reds are an option that some states use more than others (Texas in particular). It has no special meaning.

San Antonio don't use double red signals.

A lot of Texas doesn't, but the number of double reds in other parts likely outnumbers the total number in most other states put together. I can think of two or three double reds in all of Washington.

Houston probably has more signals than the whole state of Wyoming.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 24, 2021, 01:35:09 PM
Don't ask me what happened. I deleted the part I wasn't responding to and got this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on February 24, 2021, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 24, 2021, 01:35:09 PM
Don't ask me what happened. I deleted the part I wasn't responding to and got this.

Your reply went before the final [/quo.te] tag rather than after it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 05:13:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 24, 2021, 10:37:24 AM
I agree that it is probably really hard to guess at what the signal mode configuration is there at that intersection, unless someone is nearby and can watch the operation.

First, I think jakeroot is correct that the configuration of the aspects, where the arrow is to the left of the green orb, is likely for clearance considerations.  Operationally, the signal is no different that a 4 aspect tower: R-Y-G-?

When I do see a 4 aspect tower, these are the possibilities that I think of (in order) unless other evidence points otherwise:

Split phase
Lagging left (no longer allowed without separate yellow arrow*, but many w/o yellow arrow still exist)
Leading left with bimodal arrrow
Leading left with a missing yellow arrow aspect (not great, but they do still exist, but are rare).

Of these, I believe this is probably the second of these possibilities, the lagging left.  First, in the pre-FYA era, it was very common to signal lead-lag signals with the leading left on a protected only signal and the lagging left permissive.   This was to prevent yellow trap on the leading side during the lagging phase.  Second, the GSVs showing simultaneous yellow do rule out split-phasing, but do not necessarily rule out lagging left.  It could be that since the lagging left is permissive, the lagging left is only shown when it is needed.  But on that still, while there are a lot of cars wanting to turn left on the protected side (and they can't because of the red arrow), there are no cars waiting to turn left on the lagging side.  If there are good sensors here, the lagging left would only be triggered when there is a need to trigger the lagging left, i.e. cars waiting to turn.  And one thing about a lagging left is that while there may be a bunch of cars needing to make the turn at the beginning of the cycle, if they are all able to find a gap in opposing traffic to make their turns there would be no need to even provide the protected arrow at the end of the cycle.  And that is better for most everyone, because providing protected lefts takes away proportionate signal time from the other phases, so to the extent that one of the signal phases can be safely skipped, it is better for everyone else, namely the thru traffic.

Of course, all of the above is speculation, as I have not been at this intersection in Columbus.  BOth sides leading left is also possible, but it is hard to believe that they would implement that without a yellow arrow.


*IMO for a lagging left the yellow arrow is really not necessary, since the yellow arrow time would be shown at the exact same times as the yellow orb.  For whatever reasons more recent editions of MUTCD require a yellow arrow for lagging lefts but don't require them for split-phasing.
So I guess this is different from how Ontario does their 4 section protected-permissive signals, which according to their guide (https://www.ontario.ca/document/official-mto-drivers-handbook/traffic-lights), it's a leading left, with the yellow left arrow sharing the same signal section as the green left arrow. My first thought of seeing the Columbus one was Ontario's, but I'm not sure if the MUTCD allows that for leading lefts, but only for lagging lefts as you described.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 24, 2021, 06:36:06 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 24, 2021, 05:13:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 24, 2021, 10:37:24 AM
I agree that it is probably really hard to guess at what the signal mode configuration is there at that intersection, unless someone is nearby and can watch the operation.

First, I think jakeroot is correct that the configuration of the aspects, where the arrow is to the left of the green orb, is likely for clearance considerations.  Operationally, the signal is no different that a 4 aspect tower: R-Y-G-?

When I do see a 4 aspect tower, these are the possibilities that I think of (in order) unless other evidence points otherwise:

Split phase
Lagging left (no longer allowed without separate yellow arrow*, but many w/o yellow arrow still exist)
Leading left with bimodal arrrow
Leading left with a missing yellow arrow aspect (not great, but they do still exist, but are rare).

Of these, I believe this is probably the second of these possibilities, the lagging left.  First, in the pre-FYA era, it was very common to signal lead-lag signals with the leading left on a protected only signal and the lagging left permissive.   This was to prevent yellow trap on the leading side during the lagging phase.  Second, the GSVs showing simultaneous yellow do rule out split-phasing, but do not necessarily rule out lagging left.  It could be that since the lagging left is permissive, the lagging left is only shown when it is needed.  But on that still, while there are a lot of cars wanting to turn left on the protected side (and they can't because of the red arrow), there are no cars waiting to turn left on the lagging side.  If there are good sensors here, the lagging left would only be triggered when there is a need to trigger the lagging left, i.e. cars waiting to turn.  And one thing about a lagging left is that while there may be a bunch of cars needing to make the turn at the beginning of the cycle, if they are all able to find a gap in opposing traffic to make their turns there would be no need to even provide the protected arrow at the end of the cycle.  And that is better for most everyone, because providing protected lefts takes away proportionate signal time from the other phases, so to the extent that one of the signal phases can be safely skipped, it is better for everyone else, namely the thru traffic.

Of course, all of the above is speculation, as I have not been at this intersection in Columbus.  BOth sides leading left is also possible, but it is hard to believe that they would implement that without a yellow arrow.


*IMO for a lagging left the yellow arrow is really not necessary, since the yellow arrow time would be shown at the exact same times as the yellow orb.  For whatever reasons more recent editions of MUTCD require a yellow arrow for lagging lefts but don't require them for split-phasing.

So I guess this is different from how Ontario does their 4 section protected-permissive signals, which according to their guide (https://www.ontario.ca/document/official-mto-drivers-handbook/traffic-lights), it's a leading left, with the yellow left arrow sharing the same signal section as the green left arrow. My first thought of seeing the Columbus one was Ontario's, but I'm not sure if the MUTCD allows that for leading lefts, but only for lagging lefts as you described.

So the MUTCD is actually pretty flexible when it comes to left turn operation. Even yellow trap is still permitted, IIRC.

Based on mrsman's analysis, it would seem that the Ohio intersection/left turn you posted may not have a yellow arrow (so not quite like the Ontario examples you are familiar with), but because the green arrow would only display at the end, using the yellow orb to clear traffic rather than a yellow arrow (as would be required if the left turn were leading and the green orb was already being displayed).

Intersections that operate like this are not unusual. In fact, at one-way streets in many west and east coast cities, 4-section protected-permissive signals are the norm (example from Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/bdEPYcwuZNHsk2a19)). Because the left turns are always lagging, or skipped, there is no need for a yellow arrow because the end of the protected left turn phase will always coincide with the end of the through phase.

Leading left turns that have only four sections, like those in Canada (the Ontario setup, with a flashing green arrow and solid yellow arrow in a single aspect, is used across Canada and was actually pioneered outside Ontario), are actually quite common in parts of the US. Here in Tacoma, probably half of all left turns that use "yield-on-green" phasing use bimodal green/yellow arrows (good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/C7c6YuEJg5BvJAzQA) showing opposing green arrows). I don't know why these are used in place of 5-section "yield-on-green" signals, but they are very common nonetheless. Importantly, a shared signal face is absolutely allowed by the MUTCD for left turn arrows. Canada's variation is only different because of the flashing green arrow. But then they rarely use 5-section left turn signals, so something to improve the 4-section design was necessary. Here in the US, rather than innovate similarly, we decided to jump ship and adopt the FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 25, 2021, 02:29:24 PM
I thought this was pretty nifty.

The interchange between I-5 and 116 St NE in Marysville, WA was recently rebuilt from a diamond into a SPUI. However, unlike most SPUIs, there was a need for a through movement because of buses that use the ramps.

So to allow the buses to access the stops on the ramps, 8-8-8 right-angled arrows (https://goo.gl/maps/xV2bLDQf829Cx1az9) were installed specifically for the buses. When the buses get a green arrow, they make a sort-of 90 degree turn back onto the on-ramp and then stop.

I suppose the backplates could have been dropped, but WSDOT had a spec for those from all the 8-inch signals used at ramp meters.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50980309147_320367b7f1_o.png)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50980309207_b536d27fd3_o.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 26, 2021, 09:44:10 AM
Horizontal signal found in Massachusetts, of all places:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3399814,-71.0631048,3a,75y,70.07h,95.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shhEY6PKAQF48KhyzUvcRaw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 26, 2021, 11:29:37 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 26, 2021, 09:44:10 AM
Horizontal signal found in Massachusetts, of all places:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3399814,-71.0631048,3a,75y,70.07h,95.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shhEY6PKAQF48KhyzUvcRaw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210226/84c73a1d3d5041b904f808dd61c51e83.jpg)
Nice find! I only knew about this one in Dedham


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on February 26, 2021, 04:35:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 26, 2021, 11:29:37 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210226/84c73a1d3d5041b904f808dd61c51e83.jpg)
Nice find! I only knew about this one in Dedham


iPhone
Interesting, I wonder why the signals are suspended below the pole like that. All other pole-mounted horizontal signals I've seen have the signals mounted right on the pole like this. (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5558039,-95.3978368,3a,15y,255.13h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjMQVKhTopItm-Xa3hSgBPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 26, 2021, 05:03:46 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 26, 2021, 04:35:19 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 26, 2021, 11:29:37 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210226/84c73a1d3d5041b904f808dd61c51e83.jpg)
Nice find! I only knew about this one in Dedham


iPhone
Interesting, I wonder why the signals are suspended below the pole like that. All other pole-mounted horizontal signals I've seen have the signals mounted right on the pole like this. (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5558039,-95.3978368,3a,15y,255.13h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjMQVKhTopItm-Xa3hSgBPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Probably because of an overhead crossing at or right before the stop line that blocks vision from vertical signals or horizontal signals mounted on the pole.

Also, why are there two left red arrows per signal in your example?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on February 26, 2021, 06:55:49 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 26, 2021, 05:03:46 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 26, 2021, 04:35:19 PM
...signals mounted right on the pole like this. (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5558039,-95.3978368,3a,15y,255.13h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjMQVKhTopItm-Xa3hSgBPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Also, why are there two left red arrows per signal in your example?

Guess you've never been to Texas before.  :sombrero: Down here, it's the norm for left turn signals to have a double red to differentiate them from thru signals. Usually, it doesn't matter whether the double red is arrows or just orbs (though it seems the newer examples are arrows), so you can get some strange scenarios such as  this, where the first light has arrows, but the second light has orbs. (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.1733428,-95.4329597,3a,30.4y,77.82h,88.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ8ndMiq7XUtPpEB5y5zdkQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) At most lights there is no left turn yield phase, though I am starting to see the flashing yellow appear in some (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7615008,-94.3550407,3a,20.1y,164.75h,95.46t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbCR6OSrsNo_Ag0CSFlmUaw!2e0!5s20130601T000000!7i13312!8i6656) places (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9517723,-95.2876571,3a,15y,124.89h,94.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf1CWcdU0NouFFpYXn5dX1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (I think it works great with this setup).

To further complicate things, there's this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0978055,-95.6905486,3a,15y,49.45h,94.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8a0eOLxLHDni3P_YWuTN4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) junction near Sweeny where they used the double red for each signal, not just the turn signals (the turn signal has arrows, while the main lanes have orbs). It's either an error or designed that way for visibility reasons, but I don't really like it (jakeroot probably remembers my beef about this signal in another thread).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 26, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 26, 2021, 06:55:49 PM
To further complicate things, there's this (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0978055,-95.6905486,3a,15y,49.45h,94.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8a0eOLxLHDni3P_YWuTN4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) junction near Sweeny where they used the double red for each signal, not just the turn signals (the turn signal has arrows, while the main lanes have orbs). It's either an error or designed that way for visibility reasons, but I don't really like it (jakeroot probably remembers my beef about this signal in another thread).

I remember now, but only after looking through your post history.

It is rather odd to me that double reds for turn signals would be so common in Texas that any other double reds would likely be automatically identified by Average Joe as a turn signal. But every state has its own oddities, so who am I to judge?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on February 27, 2021, 06:06:43 PM
at this intersection in Red Bank, TN there used to be a third traffic light but it was removed about a couple of years ago
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0840473,-85.3176384,3a,90y,41.42h,84.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_i_zqSeV3E7gss2zuktXyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

May 2014
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0840244,-85.3176173,3a,75y,38.94h,84.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smVliznd5Nvhwb4_2ELocuA!2e0!5s20140501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 27, 2021, 08:05:43 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on February 27, 2021, 06:06:43 PM
at this intersection in Red Bank, TN there used to be a third traffic light but it was removed about a couple of years ago
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0840473,-85.3176384,3a,90y,41.42h,84.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_i_zqSeV3E7gss2zuktXyg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

May 2014
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0840244,-85.3176173,3a,75y,38.94h,84.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smVliznd5Nvhwb4_2ELocuA!2e0!5s20140501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

"Protected turn on green arrow only" seems like an odd variation I've not seen before. Seems kind of redundant, as a green arrow means protected turn. Obviously.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on February 28, 2021, 04:45:05 PM
What is the point of having dueling three-section FYA's like at this intersection in Indiana? Is it just to give opposing traffic a leadoff (via red left-turn arrows) to prevent accidents?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3026994,-86.1268606,3a,18.3y,0.5h,92.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTqgmVDMsHvpVvGhrSmexdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on February 28, 2021, 06:54:08 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on February 28, 2021, 04:45:05 PM
What is the point of having dueling three-section FYA's like at this intersection in Indiana? Is it just to give opposing traffic a leadoff (via red left-turn arrows) to prevent accidents?

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3026994,-86.1268606,3a,18.3y,0.5h,92.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTqgmVDMsHvpVvGhrSmexdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
A few intersections around here were switched to that because it reinforces that you need to yield to straight traffic a whole lot better then the previous sign did. However, they did it at intersections where there wasn't a whole lot of straight movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on February 28, 2021, 07:11:15 PM

I've seen this intersection before in Chattanooga, TN but one of the traffic lights only allow about 1 to 2 cars to go through
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.151582,-85.2184562,3a,85y,194.01h,69.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5j54iS-FgFh23znsPsjwkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 01, 2021, 10:19:59 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MjPvshr46sN6v63A7
Workers present redoing a signal head with assembly removed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on March 01, 2021, 03:11:14 PM
I actually stumbled upon a signal retrofit near my place a few weeks ago while running an errand. In your head you know they happen ("hey, this light wasn't an FYA yesterday"), but it was still really odd to see one in action, especially since, aside from a closed lane, the signal was still up and running.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 02, 2021, 06:08:52 PM
Something funky here in Hazelwood, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/GUL9E1nd7pZNAEX27).

Overhead is a standard doghouse, although it has the Chicago-style "Left On Green Arrow Only" message. Annoying, but okay. However, post-mounted off to the left is an RYG left turn signal. So coming up to this intersection you can see two overhead green orbs and a red orb to the left. Only during the protected phase (https://goo.gl/maps/aJMSSgwn4iggTPKE9) do things sort-of look okay, with two green arrows.

Clearly the protected phasing is used because of sight-distance issues. But then why not use a standard left turn signal overhead?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 02, 2021, 06:17:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2021, 06:08:52 PM
Something funky here in Hazelwood, MO (https://goo.gl/maps/GUL9E1nd7pZNAEX27).

Overhead is a standard doghouse, although it has the Chicago-style "Left On Green Arrow Only" message. Annoying, but okay. However, post-mounted off to the left is an RYG left turn signal. So coming up to this intersection you can see two overhead green orbs and a red orb to the left. Only during the protected phase (https://goo.gl/maps/aJMSSgwn4iggTPKE9) do things sort-of look okay, with two green arrows.

Clearly the protected phasing is used because of sight-distance issues. But then why not use a standard left turn signal overhead?
I wouldn't be surprised if it's a doghouse just to meet the 2 green lights for the straight movement requirement, though that can easily be done by installing a green bulb on the side and turn the doghouse into a protected only signal. Though that area is pretty dead now with St Louis Mills dead and closed (I thought it was weird to place a mall in a mainly industrial zone and close to a floodplain for the two times I've been inside the mall, but that's a topic for the dead malls thread).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 02, 2021, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 02, 2021, 06:17:20 PM
Though that area is pretty dead now with St Louis Mills dead and closed (I thought it was weird to place a mall in a mainly industrial zone and close to a floodplain for the two times I've been inside the mall, but that's a topic for the dead malls thread).

My father took my sister and I to "Saint Louis Mills" in 2011 with the expressed purpose of viewing a dead mall. No surprise that it has bit the dust completely since then. It was strange then, with the themed areas that were all very quiet, although the race track was fun.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 02, 2021, 08:28:07 PM
Another traffic signal set for a dead mall in the St Louis area: Crestwood Court (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5573828,-90.3815385,3a,89.5y,199.33h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqylJ9aE-u3BEKg4pd2-qxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Something interesting about this setup is that there were never overhead signals for either the mall exit or Old Sappington; the overhead poles were up there only to display the street name lane configuration and red light camera. When the mall closed, the signals for Old Sappington were changed from a green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5572557,-90.3816322,3a,75y,340.61h,81.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1q_UCytvO_WlzLjZEKYLHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) to green left arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5572495,-90.3816189,3a,74.4y,340.61h,81.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLshLG_YpkqXAwb5k8YRdBQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but none of the signals on I-366 was modified. The straight arrow/right arrow bimodal on WB 366 was changed to displaying the straight only instead of replacing the whole signal, and the protected left turn to the mall on EB 366 was covered up instead of removed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on March 11, 2021, 12:55:22 AM
A rare red-ball flashing yellow arrow:

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4620107,-98.4910055,3a,27.2y,364.45h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si6PGsIjfq486p6kjSqGO0A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 12, 2021, 05:53:15 PM
An interesting doghouse equivalent in Brooklyn, NY:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6687397,-73.9283679,3a,75y,103.66h,88.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVfoxMo5HEmAbx7sgIbMAuQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 13, 2021, 08:46:07 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2021, 05:53:15 PM
An interesting doghouse equivalent in Brooklyn, NY:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6687397,-73.9283679,3a,75y,103.66h,88.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVfoxMo5HEmAbx7sgIbMAuQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

While NYC does use that setup in place of a normal doghouse (when FYA isnt otherwise used) similar to LI or WV, usually pole mounted signals are all vertical. Nice find.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 13, 2021, 09:08:19 PM
Here in Nassau County we have some side-by-side pole-mounted signals installed by County DPW, though I agree that a vertical stack looks better on a pole-mount.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 14, 2021, 08:41:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2021, 05:53:15 PM
An interesting doghouse equivalent in Brooklyn, NY:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6687397,-73.9283679,3a,75y,103.66h,88.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVfoxMo5HEmAbx7sgIbMAuQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That's really cool! The spacing, if it was any further apart, would look wonky. But they hit it just right for me to still like it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman on March 15, 2021, 02:22:20 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's interesting that all the signal heads are still there even though the the signal is no longer operating.  Under the standard California Vehicle Code, at a traffic signal that's not operating (for example, if the power goes out), traffic must treat it as an all-way stop.  Hence, if the signal was turned off, the city would have removed all of the signal heads and added stop sign(s), rather than just turning off the power and leaving it to rust.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on March 15, 2021, 02:45:43 AM
Quote from: mapman on March 15, 2021, 02:22:20 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That's interesting that all the signal heads are still there even though the the signal is no longer operating.  Under the standard California Vehicle Code, at a traffic signal that's not operating (for example, if the power goes out), traffic must treat it as an all-way stop.  Hence, if the signal was turned off, the city would have removed all of the signal heads and added stop sign(s), rather than just turning off the power and leaving it to rust.
Street View seems to indicate it is set to flash mode, as of 2019, not turned off
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on March 15, 2021, 08:37:31 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It looks like it's functioning....to some extent: https://goo.gl/maps/eDeyCRxbtxayum2Z8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on March 15, 2021, 01:13:16 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on March 15, 2021, 08:37:31 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It looks like it's functioning....to some extent: https://goo.gl/maps/eDeyCRxbtxayum2Z8

a lot of times those traffic lights in that intersection are usually flashing yellow
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on March 15, 2021, 01:30:02 PM
Streetcar signal mounted on top of a vehicular signal on Woodward Avenue in downtown Detroit: 
https://goo.gl/maps/GEwJPeHSxbDT8Wxr9

Note also that the mast arm wiring comes out of the arm and connects to a box mounted on the pole.  This provides a quick disconnect of the electrical when the mast arms are removed for the annual Thanksgiving Day parade.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 15, 2021, 04:01:15 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on March 15, 2021, 01:30:02 PM
Streetcar signal mounted on top of a vehicular signal on Woodward Avenue in downtown Detroit: 
https://goo.gl/maps/GEwJPeHSxbDT8Wxr9

Note also that the mast arm wiring comes out of the arm and connects to a box mounted on the pole.  This provides a quick disconnect of the electrical when the mast arms are removed for the annual Thanksgiving Day parade.

This can fit into the Thickest Mast Arms thread as well
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 04:00:54 PM
Quote from: plain on March 15, 2021, 04:01:15 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on March 15, 2021, 01:30:02 PM
Streetcar signal mounted on top of a vehicular signal on Woodward Avenue in downtown Detroit: 
https://goo.gl/maps/GEwJPeHSxbDT8Wxr9

Note also that the mast arm wiring comes out of the arm and connects to a box mounted on the pole.  This provides a quick disconnect of the electrical when the mast arms are removed for the annual Thanksgiving Day parade.

This can fit into the Thickest Mast Arms thread as well

Actually the most interesting point for me is that we're finally seeing Street Views from 2020. I haven't noticed much up to this point.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 16, 2021, 08:58:36 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/JZqS5N9iUjanAGu48
Not one but two visors missing.

Oh how about four visors missing.
https://goo.gl/maps/xvBA6QMTqceWJAjH7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 17, 2021, 12:00:24 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on March 14, 2021, 03:13:58 PM
this intersection in Chattanooga, TN doesn't get much traffic even though the traffic lights are off
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0060267,-85.2160262,3a,75y,29.83h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stA0_8A73vX-txHjFaCkPwA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Go back one space and there is a yellow arrow where the yellow ball should be on the shared signal. Wonder what the phasing was when the signals were fully operational.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 17, 2021, 01:21:31 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 16, 2021, 08:58:36 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/JZqS5N9iUjanAGu48
Not one but two visors missing.

Oh how about four visors missing.
https://goo.gl/maps/xvBA6QMTqceWJAjH7

I noticed this intersection in Chehalis, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/Uj6qe7K5ukrWzmtN8) has a signal with a couple missing visors. Rare to see that around here.

I also remember around New Orleans that a substantial number of downtown signals were missing visors. But that was seven years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on March 19, 2021, 09:54:55 PM
I was fooled by this light as a driver, thinking the pedestrian countdown would go to yellow, but the yellow started early.  Maybe the city did this to discourage driving by the countdown.  Then I found out (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4e_02_longdesc.htm?fbclid=IwAR1UkG0-CAcoDhTnd2Qwl12IQZIR8jkEvD1kWK84CAi4Vwxz7xe1Zb4RLvU) ped signals are supposed to get three seconds of clearance before the next green, but they don't here.  Renton has been responsive to inquiries in the past, so you never know.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on March 19, 2021, 10:17:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 02, 2021, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 02, 2021, 06:17:20 PM
Though that area is pretty dead now with St Louis Mills dead and closed (I thought it was weird to place a mall in a mainly industrial zone and close to a floodplain for the two times I've been inside the mall, but that's a topic for the dead malls thread).

My father took my sister and I to "Saint Louis Mills" in 2011 with the expressed purpose of viewing a dead mall. No surprise that it has bit the dust completely since then. It was strange then, with the themed areas that were all very quiet, although the race track was fun.
When I was 9 I went to a classmate's birthday party there (miniature golf course inside). Even in 2013 it was struggling.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 19, 2021, 10:38:00 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 02, 2021, 08:28:07 PM
Another traffic signal set for a dead mall in the St Louis area: Crestwood Court (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5573828,-90.3815385,3a,89.5y,199.33h,94.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqylJ9aE-u3BEKg4pd2-qxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Something interesting about this setup is that there were never overhead signals for either the mall exit or Old Sappington; the overhead poles were up there only to display the street name lane configuration and red light camera. When the mall closed, the signals for Old Sappington were changed from a green ball (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5572557,-90.3816322,3a,75y,340.61h,81.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1q_UCytvO_WlzLjZEKYLHQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) to green left arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5572495,-90.3816189,3a,74.4y,340.61h,81.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLshLG_YpkqXAwb5k8YRdBQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but none of the signals on I-366 was modified. The straight arrow/right arrow bimodal on WB 366 was changed to displaying the straight only instead of replacing the whole signal, and the protected left turn to the mall on EB 366 was covered up instead of removed.
There's 2 more signal sets to Crestwood Court I decided to take a look today. The easternmost of the trio had a disused FYA (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5597593,-90.3744309,3a,75y,48.26h,85.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMP9xnhuSL3LlH-sQZIvo5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). The one in the middle (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5585208,-90.3777903,3a,38.1y,155.23h,90.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm0MlObgbvxdyINHyFXJvRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) have new looking overhead signals for the former mall exit.

Unrelated to Crestwood, this left turn signal set on MO 340 for I-64 is a minor annoyance for me, that they don't match each other (this used to be a single left turn lane, until it was expanded to two later on), the new signal is slightly angled away from the left turn lane, and that the left turn plaque is on the overhead mast arm instead of below the two vertically mounted signals. I thought St Louis is trying to replace their signals with yellow backs on them with the standard black backs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 19, 2021, 11:26:05 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on March 19, 2021, 09:54:55 PM
I was fooled by this light as a driver, thinking the pedestrian countdown would go to yellow, but the yellow started early.  Maybe the city did this to discourage driving by the countdown.  Then I found out (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4e_02_longdesc.htm?fbclid=IwAR1UkG0-CAcoDhTnd2Qwl12IQZIR8jkEvD1kWK84CAi4Vwxz7xe1Zb4RLvU) ped signals are supposed to get three seconds of clearance before the next green, but they don't here.  Renton has been responsive to inquiries in the past, so you never know.



Watching the time on the video, it's actually very close to 3 seconds.  Maybe 2.5 seconds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 20, 2021, 08:37:05 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on March 19, 2021, 09:54:55 PM
I was fooled by this light as a driver, thinking the pedestrian countdown would go to yellow, but the yellow started early.  Maybe the city did this to discourage driving by the countdown.  Then I found out (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4e_02_longdesc.htm?fbclid=IwAR1UkG0-CAcoDhTnd2Qwl12IQZIR8jkEvD1kWK84CAi4Vwxz7xe1Zb4RLvU) ped signals are supposed to get three seconds of clearance before the next green, but they don't here.  Renton has been responsive to inquiries in the past, so you never know.


This is known as FDW on yellow. It's an idea that I personally love, because it's more pedestrian friendly.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 20, 2021, 01:22:54 PM
Milwaukee uses FDW extensively
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 02:23:31 PM
New HAWK Signal in Renton, WA:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51059845666_c6349e04a7_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 21, 2021, 02:28:44 PM
^^ Does the MUTCD black backplate rule apply to HAWKs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on March 21, 2021, 02:36:29 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 20, 2021, 08:37:05 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on March 19, 2021, 09:54:55 PM
I was fooled by this light as a driver, thinking the pedestrian countdown would go to yellow, but the yellow started early.  Maybe the city did this to discourage driving by the countdown.  Then I found out (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/fig4e_02_longdesc.htm?fbclid=IwAR1UkG0-CAcoDhTnd2Qwl12IQZIR8jkEvD1kWK84CAi4Vwxz7xe1Zb4RLvU) ped signals are supposed to get three seconds of clearance before the next green, but they don't here.  Renton has been responsive to inquiries in the past, so you never know.


This is known as FDW on yellow. It's an idea that I personally love, because it's more pedestrian friendly.


iPhone

There are lots of allowed options in the MUTCD (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/fig4e_02_longdesc.htm) for overlap of the flashing Don't Walk, with the countdown reaching 0 either before the yellow light or after. 

(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/images/fig4e_02.gif)

Some folks in Chicago were pushing to install countdown pedestrian signals specifically so motorists could see the countdown to yellow, completely contrary to regulation.  (That seemed to start with the red light camera abuse.)

One issue with the signal in the video is that we can't see the signals for both streets at the same time; the cross street seems to already have green at :05 when we first see it (the arrows) but the clock strikes 0 on the pedestrian signal at :02 so there may be 3 seconds to the nearest second but one would have to see when exactly the green arrows came on.  If it's 3 seconds after the other street's signal turned red, then it's not enough clearance.  If it does change right then, then it's barely enough.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 21, 2021, 02:28:44 PM
^^ Does the MUTCD black backplate rule apply to HAWKs?

This was my thought/concern. I would think so. I know it doesn't apply for bike signals.

Renton has all-yellow (front + back) signals downtown too. This is rather typical of them :-D.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2021, 05:17:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 02:23:31 PM
New HAWK Signal in Renton, WA:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51059845666_c6349e04a7_k.jpg)

Not a fan of how short those mast arms are. Other than that it's alright.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 21, 2021, 08:02:43 PM
My opinion: HAWK Signals are total BS.

And re: backplate color: The new (since 2009) MUTCD allowing yellow reflective strips almost totally obliterates the purpose of dark colored backplates that the MUTCD requires. I won't be surprised if the next edition of the Manual allows yellow backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 09:36:10 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2021, 05:17:58 PM
Not a fan of how short those mast arms are. Other than that it's alright.

I mean, any longer wouldn't be necessary. The mast arm with the signals facing the camera is already longer than necessary. The mast arm facing away from the camera looks about right.

Quote from: SignBridge on March 21, 2021, 08:02:43 PM
My opinion: HAWK Signals are total BS.

Yeah I'm not keen on them either. But agencies seem to like them, regardless of how well they actually work. I think if you plopped an engineer down in front of one for a day, and actually had them watch how drivers interacted with them, they'd change their view. I think we all know how poorly drivers understand the basics of their operation.

Quote from: SignBridge on March 21, 2021, 08:02:43 PM
And re: backplate color: The new (since 2009) MUTCD allowing yellow reflective strips almost totally obliterates the purpose of dark colored backplates that the MUTCD requires. I won't be surprised if the next edition of the Manual allows yellow backplates.

Based on the draft, they don't seem to be changing their opinion. But I agree that it should be allowed. I see nothing wrong with all-yellow signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 21, 2021, 11:12:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 02:23:31 PM
New HAWK Signal in Renton, WA:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51059845666_c6349e04a7_k.jpg)

HAWKs shouldn't be used on bike trail xings so this is not great. In general, HAWKs are a cool idea, but the alternating red, and the confusing bike compatibility sink it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 22, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
States like HAWK signals because they require drivers to actually give way at crosswalks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on March 22, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on March 22, 2021, 10:26:05 AM
States like HAWK signals because they require drivers to actually give way at crosswalks.
Which the drivers probably would do, except there's not really any common knowledge of what to do when you encounter a HAWK, so they might not. My (very good) Driver's Ed curriculum online said nothing about them, and I'm sure that's the same for 99% of the population. If states really want to incorporate HAWKs, then they need to put them in Driver's Ed curriculum so people aren't confused when they see them. I'm pretty sure I don't even know what a HAWK does. Here's my guesses (and correct me if I'm wrong):

Dark: treat the HAWK as invisible
Flashing Red: Yield to pedestrians if they are present
Solid Red: Stop

My big beef about HAWKs is that why can't you use a normal traffic light instead? Drivers understand those.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 22, 2021, 04:17:37 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 22, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
My big beef about HAWKs is that why can't you use a normal traffic light instead? Drivers understand those.

The whole point was that when the HAWK switches to flashing red, cars can proceed if there isn't anyone else trying to cross the road. The problem is that the flashing red resembles an active railroad crossing - something you are legally supposed to stop at. It's needlessly confusing for, I think an unworthy benefit. It's just not intuitive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on March 22, 2021, 06:21:45 PM
This is a very naïve question I know, but literally why do HAWKs exist? They don't seem to be any cheaper than a traditional RYG pedestrian signal setup and they go against most logic we're taught in driver's ed. I was taught that if a signal is dark (and not covered by tarp or otherwise obviously not in use) that you should treat it as an all-way stop. I've had several situations with my hometown HAWK signal where drivers will either slow way down or stop because they think the signal is having some sort of maintenance issue and that's why it's dark. And don't even get me started on what happens when someone actually has to cross. Most drivers just ignore the flashing lights because they assume they are the same as the single flashing yellow beacons and meant simply as an advisory not as a mandate to stop. I've had two close calls at that HAWK signal before and I actively avoid it now. Just do what was done for decades before the HAWK and have a pedestrian signal that stays green until manually activated by someone who needs to cross. I know deep down that there must be some advantage to the HAWK or it wouldn't have ever been implemented but like the saying goes... if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 22, 2021, 08:31:05 PM
Here's one in Durango, CO.

1205 US-550
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZLU3atVycqDq7JsWA

This crosswalk HAWK doubles as a Fire Station signal, which really Fubars drivers, because some will wait the ENTIRE cycle thinking an emergency vehicle may be coming out.

Can't tell you how many times I've had to wait for those uneducated drivers who insist on waiting until all the lights go off before proceeding.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 22, 2021, 08:34:05 PM
Yeah, this one seems particularly bad. The way the crosswalk is offset from the lights is really not good. Using a HAWK for dual purpose like that only makes the situation worse. A regular traffic signal would be more clear.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:26:42 PM
In the Manual the primary stated reason for HAWK signals is as follows in Sec.4F.01.02: A pedestrian hybrid beacon may be considered for installation to facilitate pedestrian crossings at a location that does not meet traffic signal warrants.

My guess is the real reason they are used is that they are less expensive to engineer and install than a conventional traffic signal. In the end most such things almost always come down to less monetary cost.

I completely agree with the above posters about them not being intuitive and well understood by many drivers. A good point was made about the wig-wag flashing similar to a rail crossing signal. How the FHWA could have allowed the same type signal to mean two different things is beyond my understanding. Once again (just like with APL BGS's), they have created a problem where there wasn't one before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 22, 2021, 09:30:59 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:26:42 PM
In the Manual the primary stated reason for HAWK signals is as follows in Sec.4F.01.02: A pedestrian hybrid beacon may be considered for installation to facilitate pedestrian crossings at a location that does not meet traffic signal warrants.

My guess is the real reason they are used is that they are less expensive to engineer and install than a conventional traffic signal. In the end most such things almost always come down to less monetary cost.

I completely agree with the above posters about them not being intuitive and well understood by many drivers. A good point was made about the wig-wag flashing similar to a rail crossing signal. How the FHWA could have allowed the same type signal to mean two different things is beyond my understanding. Once again (just like with APL BGS's), they have created a problem where there wasn't one before.

Resting on green until pressed with no cross street is not a conventional traffic signal.

By the way, wig-wag flashing red means the same thing in both cases (if there's no gate, in the case of a train crossing): stop until the train or pedestrian has passed and it's clear, then you can go, even if it's still flashing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:56:46 PM
1, Point taken about the wig-wag RR crossing signal, at least in New York State. (VTL Sec. 1170)

When I said conventional traffic signal, I meant one with red, yellow, and green lights with the customary meanings of each color.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on March 22, 2021, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:26:42 PM
My guess is the real reason they are used is that they are less expensive to engineer and install than a conventional traffic signal. In the end most such things almost always come down to less monetary cost.
But are they really? They have the same amount of signal orbs as a normal signal, the hardware holding them up is basically the same (to my knowledge), and the fact that they are put on timers at different times of day probably adds to the cost. I don't really see how they can be much cheaper than a regular signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on March 22, 2021, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 09:36:10 PM

Quote from: SignBridge on March 21, 2021, 08:02:43 PM
And re: backplate color: The new (since 2009) MUTCD allowing yellow reflective strips almost totally obliterates the purpose of dark colored backplates that the MUTCD requires. I won't be surprised if the next edition of the Manual allows yellow backplates.

Based on the draft, they don't seem to be changing their opinion. But I agree that it should be allowed. I see nothing wrong with all-yellow signals.

Virginia's new signals are basically all-yellow anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 01:26:04 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on March 22, 2021, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:26:42 PM
My guess is the real reason they are used is that they are less expensive to engineer and install than a conventional traffic signal. In the end most such things almost always come down to less monetary cost.
But are they really? They have the same amount of signal orbs as a normal signal, the hardware holding them up is basically the same (to my knowledge), and the fact that they are put on timers at different times of day probably adds to the cost. I don't really see how they can be much cheaper than a regular signal.

Based on the number of fully-signalized red-yellow-green crossings I see here in Washington State, the cost is not any different.

The HAWK is popular for the same reason that roundabouts are popular: because they're something new with some recent data behind them and agencies look good when they install them.

Quote from: Caps81943 on March 22, 2021, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 21, 2021, 09:36:10 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 21, 2021, 08:02:43 PM
And re: backplate color: The new (since 2009) MUTCD allowing yellow reflective strips almost totally obliterates the purpose of dark colored backplates that the MUTCD requires. I won't be surprised if the next edition of the Manual allows yellow backplates.

Based on the draft, they don't seem to be changing their opinion. But I agree that it should be allowed. I see nothing wrong with all-yellow signals.

Virginia's new signals are basically all-yellow anyway.

Well, and a couple new ones in Renton are literally all yellow anyways (which was really the point of my picture  -- I don't care much about the HAWK).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on March 23, 2021, 02:41:49 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 22, 2021, 09:26:42 PM
In the Manual the primary stated reason for HAWK signals is as follows in Sec.4F.01.02: A pedestrian hybrid beacon may be considered for installation to facilitate pedestrian crossings at a location that does not meet traffic signal warrants.

My guess is the real reason they are used is that they are less expensive to engineer and install than a conventional traffic signal. In the end most such things almost always come down to less monetary cost.

I completely agree with the above posters about them not being intuitive and well understood by many drivers. A good point was made about the wig-wag flashing similar to a rail crossing signal. How the FHWA could have allowed the same type signal to mean two different things is beyond my understanding. Once again (just like with APL BGS's), they have created a problem where there wasn't one before.

Honestly, I feel like if transportation officials determine that a location is insufficient to warrant a signal but still are looking to increase pedestrian safety, they should just install pedestrian-activated RRFBs (rectangular rapid flashing beacons) at the crosswalks, not HAWKs. They are much cheaper to install and operate, provide a clearer message, decrease waiting times, and leave way less doubt as to whether a pedestrian is actually present or not. In my honest opinion I believe if they were used universally and drivers always knew that flashing orange lights below a ped sign meant someone was about to cross, pedestrian safety around the nation would be significantly improved.

Here's an article that explains the benefits of RRFBs and basically states that when it comes to motorist compliance they're on par with conventional traffic signals and HAWKs:

https://resources.nctcog.org/trans/sustdev/bikeped/workshops/documents/7_DPS201_RRFB.pdf
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 02:57:04 AM
Three different levels of mast-mounted signals at this North Vancouver (BC) intersection: https://goo.gl/maps/1MEZ9gkBT5RiCEMc6

(If you're not sure what I mean...just click the link).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 23, 2021, 01:56:26 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 22, 2021, 04:17:37 PM
The whole point was that when the HAWK switches to flashing red, cars can proceed if there isn't anyone else trying to cross the road.

Quote from: EpicRoadways on March 22, 2021, 06:21:45 PM
This is a very naïve question I know, but literally why do HAWKs exist?

That was answered in the post immediately before yours.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 02:23:39 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 23, 2021, 01:56:26 PM
That was answered in the post immediately before yours.

Yes, but also no. JoePCool14 explained how the HAWK works, but not why they need to exist.

Solid red to flashing red is a function of regular red-yellow-green 3-orb traffic signals as well. The HAWK does not offer any unique functionality not already possible with a regular traffic light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on March 23, 2021, 02:45:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 02:23:39 PM
Solid red to flashing red is a function of regular red-yellow-green 3-orb traffic signals as well.

Is there a yellow interval between flashing red and solid red if/when this is used?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 23, 2021, 03:22:07 PM
If you're stopped and looking out of the corner of your eye for a color change (maybe you're looking at the crosswalk to see if there's a second person coming), you won't see it change if it turns from solid red to flashing red. That said, I would still prefer it over a HAWK.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on March 23, 2021, 02:45:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 02:23:39 PM
Solid red to flashing red is a function of regular red-yellow-green 3-orb traffic signals as well.

Is there a yellow interval between flashing red and solid red if/when this is used?

It would sit in green. Then go solid yellow, solid red. After some period of time (8 to 14 seconds), it would flash red before returning to green.

Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2021, 03:22:07 PM
If you're stopped and looking out of the corner of your eye for a color change (maybe you're looking at the crosswalk to see if there's a second person coming), you won't see it change if it turns from solid red to flashing red. That said, I would still prefer it over a HAWK.

The problem is flashing to solid (like at an FYA signal), not solid to flashing. There's really no safety issues if drivers don't immediately notice a solid to flashing change. But besides that, I think most drivers would notice the change rather quickly (within a couple seconds).

If visibility is an issue, put the signals at eye level where you would normally look for pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 24, 2021, 12:02:37 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on March 23, 2021, 02:45:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 23, 2021, 02:23:39 PM
Solid red to flashing red is a function of regular red-yellow-green 3-orb traffic signals as well.

Is there a yellow interval between flashing red and solid red if/when this is used?

It would sit in green. Then go solid yellow, solid red. After some period of time (8 to 14 seconds), it would flash red before returning to green.



Something like this would be the ideal pedestrian mid-block crossing.  The city of Los Angeles uses something similar in Downtown and other areas with heavy pedestrian presence (like Fairfax Ave).  The one difference is that the solid red is very brief.  For safety, I recommend that the solid red be put in place for at least the walk period and the flashing red during the pedestrian's FDW phase.  The idea is that you'd come to a complete stop if a ped pushes the button, and you'd have time to assess the situation.  When the flashing red begins, you may proceed (after coming to a brief stop).  This allows you to proceed if you are dealing with a faster pedestrian who may no longer be in the roadway and to remain stopped if you are dealing with a slower pedestrian.

The HAWKs seem to still cause too much confusion in some areas. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM
There is also a HAWK at this intersection in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DNcP68ytQQJAa8tB8) (the best signalized HAWK I've personally seen, for the record -- too many lack left-side repeaters). I don't think it's too unusual.

I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 25, 2021, 11:29:02 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM

I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.

Like Vancouver's but without the flashing green
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 25, 2021, 11:31:36 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.
For a three way intersection with pedestrian crossings on all three sides, it seems like a missed opportunity to me to just signalize all three ways either with HAWKs or even standard traffic signals. It looks like they're constructing new campus housing at that area, so the crosswalks may get used much more often once it gets finished.

There may be something about that area I'm missing about though. Only started to get myself familiar with the Purdue campus.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:34:36 PM
Quote from: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.

If a PHB/HAWK is pointed at the side street with the STOP sign, does that mean when it's active, the PHB/HAWK temporarily overrides the STOP sign during the steady and flashing red phase? Is right on red technically still permitted under this setup?

Two NH examples where I've seen this: Londonderry (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.917896,-71.3991377,3a,36.4y,246.53h,86.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3hKbVejYTsuIRHsY4a9erA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), Epping (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0326235,-71.0724857,3a,75y,358.14h,88.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D56.251484%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM
I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.

I remember seeing a video about a bike and ped HAWK in Portland OR and at first, it confused me how this all worked with so many conflicts... was wondering why a normal traffic signal wouldn't work here.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 25, 2021, 11:44:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:34:36 PM
Quote from: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.

If a PHB/HAWK is pointed at the side street with the STOP sign, does that mean when it's active, the PHB/HAWK temporarily overrides the STOP sign during the steady and flashing red phase? Is right on red technically still permitted under this setup?

Two NH examples where I've seen this: Londonderry (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.917896,-71.3991377,3a,36.4y,246.53h,86.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3hKbVejYTsuIRHsY4a9erA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), Epping (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0326235,-71.0724857,3a,75y,358.14h,88.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D56.251484%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).
The Epping one has no marked crossing.  Is that allowed with a HAWK?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:46:59 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 25, 2021, 11:44:04 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:34:36 PM
Quote from: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.

If a PHB/HAWK is pointed at the side street with the STOP sign, does that mean when it's active, the PHB/HAWK temporarily overrides the STOP sign during the steady and flashing red phase? Is right on red technically still permitted under this setup?

Two NH examples where I've seen this: Londonderry (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.917896,-71.3991377,3a,36.4y,246.53h,86.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3hKbVejYTsuIRHsY4a9erA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), Epping (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0326235,-71.0724857,3a,75y,358.14h,88.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjgioZM2JwyN0vg8i01Iing%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D56.251484%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).
The Epping one has no marked crossing.  Is that allowed with a HAWK?

I think the marked crosswalk is simply just faded... I am expected to pass thru there tomorrow morning so I'll see if NHDOT actually repainted the marked crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 25, 2021, 11:49:03 PM
Quote from: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.

Agree completely.  It seems to me the whole point of the HAWK is to allow for a signalized ped crossing that is cheaper than a full signal (or to put in places where the signal warrants aren't met).  If that is the case, then you can move the crossing a half-block over to reduce the confusion.

Of course, there are likely to be more people wanting to cross at an intersection than at mid-block.  THe folks who are wanting to simply get from one side of the big street to the other may be ambivalent as to where they cross, they'll walk to the nearest safe crossing.  If regular signals are three blocks apart, a mid-block signal 1.5 blocks from both signals will halve the distance that one needs to walk to cross.  But for those who are walking down the side street, they would prefer NOT to detour to the mid-block crossing and would prefer if the signal were on their street.

For the most part, though, it seems that it is main street activities that bring in enough folks who are crossing the street to merit the HAWKs.  Here is a HAWK at 11th and Florida, NE in Washington DC.  Florida is a street with a lot of safety issues and DDOT is working on a lot of things to make it safer, (like bike lanes and a fix at the nearby large intersections with NY Ave and the "starburst" where it meets H st).  Yet, I bet, its not 11th st pedestrians per se that brought in the HAWK, but rather the presence of the church.  Perhaps it would be safer if the crossing were moved half a block further up the street and the crosswalk led right to the church's door mid-block, so as not to confuse 11th st drivers.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9033244,-76.9914847,3a,75y,313.21h,90.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_CCayQ4Hmd8xSGnpIFHaMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://wtop.com/dc/2019/08/after-fatal-crashes-interim-florida-avenue-ne-bike-safety-improvements-in-place/

Quote from: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM
There is also a HAWK at this intersection in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DNcP68ytQQJAa8tB8) (the best signalized HAWK I've personally seen, for the record -- too many lack left-side repeaters). I don't think it's too unusual.

I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.

Found this at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part4.htm

Quote

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
Q: Why does Section 4F.02 say that Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons should not be installed at or within 100 feet of side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs? Sometimes the only reasonable place to install a hybrid pedestrian beacon is at the intersection.
A: The FHWA has been discouraging "half signals" for several decades because of the issues such designs cause when the interruption of the major-street traffic flow by a pedestrian actuation is used by side-street drivers as their opportunity to turn onto the major street, in conflict with the crossing pedestrians. Hybrid beacons placed at or adjacent to an intersection with a STOP or YIELD sign controlled side street is a half signal with the same operational and safety issues. The provision in Section 4F.02 is also consistent with the half-signal prohibitions that were adopted in Sections 4C.05 and 4C.06. Please note that these provisions in 4C.05, 4C.06, and 4F.02 are Guidance, not Standards. Thus, based on an engineering study or engineering judgment, a jurisdiction can decide to install the device at such an intersection if it determines that is the best location for it, considering all pertinent factors, and/or there are mitigating measures, such as blank-out No Right Turn/No Left Turn signs for the side street or making the side street one-way away from the intersection. The decisions should be documented in the jurisdictions' files as basis for deviating from a Guidance statement in the MUTCD. It should also be noted that the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) has recommended to the FHWA that the Section 4F.02 guidance against installing pedestrian hybrid beacons within 100 feet of an intersection should be removed from the MUTCD, because a study of hybrid beacons at intersections in Tucson, Arizona, did not find significant operational or safety issues. The FHWA will give consideration to proposing the removal of the 100 feet guidance for the next edition of the MUTCD.


So while there are issues in allowing this as the opportunity for side street traffic, it probably aren't huge issues in any measured way.  In my view, only full signals should be allowed at intersections so that side street cars also have right of way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 26, 2021, 12:42:05 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 25, 2021, 11:38:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM
I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.

I remember seeing a video about a bike and ped HAWK in Portland OR and at first, it confused me how this all worked with so many conflicts... was wondering why a normal traffic signal wouldn't work here.




In the busiest cities, if a minor street has a signal at the intersection with a major street, it will induce traffic onto the minor street, because now the new signal has made it easier to cross (or turn left at) the major street. 

The short answer to your question is that a normal traffic signal will work well here, too well.  A regular traffic signal would encourage cut through auto traffic to use 41st Ave.  They don't want to encourage cut-through traffic, only provide a brief stop of Burnside in order to allow peds and bikes to cross.  Legally, for vehicles to cross, they would need a longer red on Burnside.

[Obviously, a vehicle will take advantage of the stopped condition, and that is the problem we are discussing.]

A better answer would force drivers to make rights at Burnside, to avoid cut-through traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 26, 2021, 08:25:16 AM
What's the best way to have a pedestrian-only signal across the main road at an intersection? HAWKs are confusing, especially at intersections. Flashing yellow means the cross street has flashing red; while this will usually be the case if the intersection itself isn't signalized, there might be some vehicle uncontrolled intersections with a pedestrian crossing. Solid green means the cross street has solid red, which it doesn't. Flashing green is only used in eastern Massachusetts (being phased out) and parts of Canada, and the ones in Massachusetts at an intersection have flashing red on the cross street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2021, 08:34:33 AM
Quote from: 1 on March 26, 2021, 08:25:16 AM
What's the best way to have a pedestrian-only signal across the main road at an intersection? HAWKs are confusing, especially at intersections. Flashing yellow means the cross street has flashing red; while this will usually be the case if the intersection itself isn't signalized, there might be some vehicle uncontrolled intersections with a pedestrian crossing. Solid green means the cross street has solid red, which it doesn't. Flashing green is only used in eastern Massachusetts (being phased out) and parts of Canada, and the ones in Massachusetts at an intersection have flashing red on the cross street.

I don't think there's a single best solution.  HAWKS work well when there's no issue with traffic light timing, as once the button is pressed, usually the HAWK activates right away.  Otherwise, a traffic light would probably be the best solution where a pedestrian crossing could/should be timed in conjunction with other traffic lights.

The biggest issue is human nature:  Once someone presses the button, they believe that light should turn for them immediately.  It doesn't matter if that light had just turned green for thru traffic from a previous pedestrian crossing; hitting that button 1 second later, in a pedestrian's mind, means that the traffic should get a red light again right away.  Pedestrians don't want to wait, and will have a tendency to try to walk against the Don't Walk signal if they need to wait more than several seconds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on March 26, 2021, 08:45:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2021, 08:34:33 AM
The biggest issue is human nature:  Once someone presses the button, they believe that light should turn for them immediately.  It doesn't matter if that light had just turned green for thru traffic from a previous pedestrian crossing; hitting that button 1 second later, in a pedestrian's mind, means that the traffic should get a red light again right away.  Pedestrians don't want to wait, and will have a tendency to try to walk against the Don't Walk signal if they need to wait more than several seconds.

Part of the problem is that if I'm waiting for a long time, I often think it doesn't work, often compounded by a few of them that actually are broken and don't recognize it being pressed from a specific direction. A few of them have an indicator that shows that it's been pressed, which helps.

For roads with one lane in each direction, or any width with a median, I typically don't press the button, because I don't want to delay the cars.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2021, 11:22:26 AM
Quote from: 1 on March 26, 2021, 08:45:56 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 26, 2021, 08:34:33 AM
The biggest issue is human nature:  Once someone presses the button, they believe that light should turn for them immediately.  It doesn't matter if that light had just turned green for thru traffic from a previous pedestrian crossing; hitting that button 1 second later, in a pedestrian's mind, means that the traffic should get a red light again right away.  Pedestrians don't want to wait, and will have a tendency to try to walk against the Don't Walk signal if they need to wait more than several seconds.

Part of the problem is that if I'm waiting for a long time, I often think it doesn't work, often compounded by a few of them that actually are broken and don't recognize it being pressed from a specific direction. A few of them have an indicator that shows that it's been pressed, which helps.

For roads with one lane in each direction, or any width with a median, I typically don't press the button, because I don't want to delay the cars.

A long time for a pedestrian is usually a different time for drivers.  If you waited more than a half-minute as a pedestrian, that probably seems like a long time.  Yet, if you were a driver, you wouldn't think twice about a red light for a half-minute.  For a road with a green light, if it was the main road, especially one with traffic, a 30 second green would be quite short.  For a pedestrian, they're wondering if they'll ever make it across.

The cross-traffic pedestrian signal helps a lot with this, as a pedestrian waiting can look to see the cross traffic's Don't Walk signal flashing (If they actually look at it).  At least that also helps to know the button is probably working.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on March 26, 2021, 01:48:25 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 25, 2021, 11:49:03 PM
Quote from: corco on March 25, 2021, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 25, 2021, 10:13:41 PM
I am not sure that a HAWK at an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/3D2f9TUchbiUoEzv7) is really legit.  Does turning traffic off the side street have to try to watch the HAWK on the main road to see when they are not allowed to turn out?  Or are they allowed to turn out?  Pedestrians would have the idea that their crossing is totally protected but there may be turning traffic that sees the main road is stopped so now is the chance to turn out.  Just seems like asking for trouble.  I was pretty sure that FHWA wanted HAWK signals at midblock type crossings only, not at intersections.

I used to live where I lived off a side street where I had to approach a HAWK at an intersection - https://goo.gl/maps/ws6BNJBfjQv7w6rx9

It was pretty confusing if you rolled up when it was activated. Most cars would roll through and not yield to me - but occasionally some car would try to wave me out. I'd wave them on because I didn't trust the other cars to also do so. But I always thought it was a bad design and not very clear who had the right of way in that situation.

Agree completely.  It seems to me the whole point of the HAWK is to allow for a signalized ped crossing that is cheaper than a full signal (or to put in places where the signal warrants aren't met).  If that is the case, then you can move the crossing a half-block over to reduce the confusion.

Of course, there are likely to be more people wanting to cross at an intersection than at mid-block.  THe folks who are wanting to simply get from one side of the big street to the other may be ambivalent as to where they cross, they'll walk to the nearest safe crossing.  If regular signals are three blocks apart, a mid-block signal 1.5 blocks from both signals will halve the distance that one needs to walk to cross.  But for those who are walking down the side street, they would prefer NOT to detour to the mid-block crossing and would prefer if the signal were on their street.

For the most part, though, it seems that it is main street activities that bring in enough folks who are crossing the street to merit the HAWKs.  Here is a HAWK at 11th and Florida, NE in Washington DC.  Florida is a street with a lot of safety issues and DDOT is working on a lot of things to make it safer, (like bike lanes and a fix at the nearby large intersections with NY Ave and the "starburst" where it meets H st).  Yet, I bet, its not 11th st pedestrians per se that brought in the HAWK, but rather the presence of the church.  Perhaps it would be safer if the crossing were moved half a block further up the street and the crosswalk led right to the church's door mid-block, so as not to confuse 11th st drivers.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9033244,-76.9914847,3a,75y,313.21h,90.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_CCayQ4Hmd8xSGnpIFHaMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://wtop.com/dc/2019/08/after-fatal-crashes-interim-florida-avenue-ne-bike-safety-improvements-in-place/

Quote from: jakeroot on March 25, 2021, 11:17:08 PM
There is also a HAWK at this intersection in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/DNcP68ytQQJAa8tB8) (the best signalized HAWK I've personally seen, for the record -- too many lack left-side repeaters). I don't think it's too unusual.

I would guess that "HAWK at intersection" is a distant cousin of the half-signal (https://goo.gl/maps/3xH9tpkPAb8BRE9z8).

So far as I know: it's permitted.

Found this at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part4.htm

Quote

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
Q: Why does Section 4F.02 say that Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons should not be installed at or within 100 feet of side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs? Sometimes the only reasonable place to install a hybrid pedestrian beacon is at the intersection.
A: The FHWA has been discouraging "half signals" for several decades because of the issues such designs cause when the interruption of the major-street traffic flow by a pedestrian actuation is used by side-street drivers as their opportunity to turn onto the major street, in conflict with the crossing pedestrians. Hybrid beacons placed at or adjacent to an intersection with a STOP or YIELD sign controlled side street is a half signal with the same operational and safety issues. The provision in Section 4F.02 is also consistent with the half-signal prohibitions that were adopted in Sections 4C.05 and 4C.06. Please note that these provisions in 4C.05, 4C.06, and 4F.02 are Guidance, not Standards. Thus, based on an engineering study or engineering judgment, a jurisdiction can decide to install the device at such an intersection if it determines that is the best location for it, considering all pertinent factors, and/or there are mitigating measures, such as blank-out No Right Turn/No Left Turn signs for the side street or making the side street one-way away from the intersection. The decisions should be documented in the jurisdictions' files as basis for deviating from a Guidance statement in the MUTCD. It should also be noted that the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) has recommended to the FHWA that the Section 4F.02 guidance against installing pedestrian hybrid beacons within 100 feet of an intersection should be removed from the MUTCD, because a study of hybrid beacons at intersections in Tucson, Arizona, did not find significant operational or safety issues. The FHWA will give consideration to proposing the removal of the 100 feet guidance for the next edition of the MUTCD.


So while there are issues in allowing this as the opportunity for side street traffic, it probably aren't huge issues in any measured way.  In my view, only full signals should be allowed at intersections so that side street cars also have right of way.

The problem I see with HAWKs at intersections is that the driver on the side street may not really know when the drivers on the main road will go, especially with the flashing red aspect, which is even worse than a half-signal, which at least stays red and keeps people stopped.  Like half-signals, HAWKs at intersections seem like something that should be rare and on the way out, not encouraged to appear more and more, because they are confusing.  (I'd say the same thing for HAWKs in general actually.  Use midblock pedestrian signals Los Angeles style that flash red after the solid red during the WALK signal and rest on green, which make sense.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 26, 2021, 03:08:17 PM
^^^^^

Yes.  Agreed.  Use only full signals at regular intersections.

If full signals aren't desired because warrants aren't met and/or DOT does not want to induce side street traffic, then the crossing should move half a block over to become mid-block.

And with the specific example on Florida Ave in DC that I cited earlier, move it away from 11th so that the new mid-block crosswalk goes right to the church's front door.  It is far safer for the peds (fewer conflicts) and it also removes an inducement for 11th st traffic to make use of the stopped traffic to make a left onto Florida.

The L.A. style is really the best, since stopping is not a surprise, since its RYG.  But, the R flashes, so if a ped is fast and makes it across, you can continue to drive once the crossing is clear (and not wait around just for the light to change when there is nobody).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 26, 2021, 08:23:38 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 26, 2021, 03:08:17 PM
^^^^^

Yes.  Agreed.  Use only full signals at regular intersections.

If full signals aren't desired because warrants aren't met and/or DOT does not want to induce side street traffic, then the crossing should move half a block over to become mid-block.

And with the specific example on Florida Ave in DC that I cited earlier, move it away from 11th so that the new mid-block crosswalk goes right to the church's front door.  It is far safer for the peds (fewer conflicts) and it also removes an inducement for 11th st traffic to make use of the stopped traffic to make a left onto Florida.

The L.A. style is really the best, since stopping is not a surprise, since its RYG.  But, the R flashes, so if a ped is fast and makes it across, you can continue to drive once the crossing is clear (and not wait around just for the light to change when there is nobody).
CT and MA love doing this for some reason.

There was a crosswalk with a full signal in Hartford that only went red once in a blue moon. Then there's another in Chatham out on the Cape that I've never seen activated.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on March 28, 2021, 03:01:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on March 25, 2021, 11:49:03 PM
Found this at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part4.htm

Quote

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
Q: Why does Section 4F.02 say that Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons should not be installed at or within 100 feet of side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs? Sometimes the only reasonable place to install a hybrid pedestrian beacon is at the intersection.
A: The FHWA has been discouraging "half signals" for several decades because of the issues such designs cause when the interruption of the major-street traffic flow by a pedestrian actuation is used by side-street drivers as their opportunity to turn onto the major street, in conflict with the crossing pedestrians.

I kind of get what they're saying here, but how is this any different from a normal full signal? Unless there are protected turns (which there probably wouldn't be at an intersection with a minor street where the signal is being installed primarily for pedestrians), turns on the side-street green would still conflict with crossing pedestrians.

Regardless, I still think the best option is to have a full signal with diverters to make the side street RIRO. That removes the confusion from HAWK signals (and, to a lesser extent, half-signals) while removing the cut-through traffic problem, and I can't imagine the cost is that much more than a half-signal or HAWK signal (which should cost about the same as each other). For lower-volume major streets, an RRFB is certainly better from a cost perspective (and I always prefer them when walking or biking, as I don't have to wait for the signal to slowly cycle around to let me cross... at least in Seattle, it's all too common for half-signals to take a few minutes to change even if there are no cars around).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 28, 2021, 03:14:34 AM
One approach for crosswalks at minor intersections might be to use FYA signals facing the respective crossing from the side-street. So when the crossing is activated, the arrows flash yellow. Otherwise they are solid green.

Federal Way, WA uses this at many of their T-intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/PNntLCKdFZRjHwK79).

Personally, having experienced half-signals all over the place (Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver), they really aren't problematic. Yeah, you have people who make very half-assed stops when the crossing is on, but there seems to be little safety issue apart from drivers sneaking in right as the main road goes green. And even then, it's mostly just a symphony of horns from the arterial road traffic, not a crash :-D.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on March 28, 2021, 05:10:06 PM
Quote from: mrsman on March 25, 2021, 11:49:03 PM
Found this at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part4.htm

Quote

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
Q: Why does Section 4F.02 say that Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons should not be installed at or within 100 feet of side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs? Sometimes the only reasonable place to install a hybrid pedestrian beacon is at the intersection.
A: The FHWA has been discouraging "half signals" for several decades because of the issues such designs cause when the interruption of the major-street traffic flow by a pedestrian actuation is used by side-street drivers as their opportunity to turn onto the major street, in conflict with the crossing pedestrians.

Quote from: jay8g on March 28, 2021, 03:01:39 AM
I kind of get what they're saying here, but how is this any different from a normal full signal? Unless there are protected turns (which there probably wouldn't be at an intersection with a minor street where the signal is being installed primarily for pedestrians), turns on the side-street green would still conflict with crossing pedestrians.

Most places I've been, the densely travelled arterials have time-coordinated intersections paced at a certain speed in areas where traffic would normally get jammed up.  Some are big enough to have full-blown traffic control systems.  HAWK signals disrupt this flow of traffic.  But so do railroad crossings.  I worked on a rail project within the Port of Long Beach just before the Alameda Corridor started construction and was amazed that the traffic control system was able to track the train movements via the signal preempt inputs.  Unfortunately, that feature would make HAWK signals unbelievably expensive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on March 30, 2021, 10:25:11 AM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 28, 2021, 05:10:06 PM
Most places I've been, the densely travelled arterials have time-coordinated intersections paced at a certain speed in areas where traffic would normally get jammed up.  Some are big enough to have full-blown traffic control systems.  HAWK signals disrupt this flow of traffic.  But so do railroad crossings.

So would pedestrians using an unsignalized crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 31, 2021, 03:51:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 28, 2021, 03:14:34 AM
One approach for crosswalks at minor intersections might be to use FYA signals facing the respective crossing from the side-street. So when the crossing is activated, the arrows flash yellow. Otherwise they are solid green.

Federal Way, WA uses this at many of their T-intersections (https://goo.gl/maps/PNntLCKdFZRjHwK79).


I do like this approach as it does give a protected turn when peds are not present.  That is probably a way to address some of the issues that come up if you force side street traffic to turn while allowing peds to cross at a HAWK or half-signal at an intersection.  When main street has red, peds and side street would normally have green.  But if you do not want to induce traffic on minor streets, you force all the minor street traffic to turn right - directly into pedestrians crossing.  But a flashing yellow arrow in place of a green orb would warn the drivers making the turn to caution.

Here is a currently unsignalized intersection near me that I think deserves some kind of pedestrian crossing signal.  Georgia Ave @ Noyes Drive in Silver Spring, MD.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0024276,-77.0349793,3a,75y,339.49h,83.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svmTx4qJ33_joshv6pwL8LQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The building at right is actually an orthodox jewish synagogue and a significant number of people walk there on Saturdays and Jewish holidays.  Even the GSV vehicle caught people making the crossing with their dog.  As it is, there is a significant walking destination at the corner (synagogue + bus stops) and it is about 1/4 mile to the nearest existing signals (south to Spring or north to 16th).  I also know that the side streets here are quite narrow and the neighborhood is concerned about thru traffic as there are rush hour turn restrictions at many intersections from major streets to minor streets in the area.  [At this area, there is a right turn prohibition during morning rush from southbound Georgia to westbound Noyes which you can see if you pan around.]

For safety of those crossing, probalby a regular traffic signal would be best.  If side street traffic is a big concern, then perhaps forcing all traffic from Noyes to turn right by using diverters would be helpful.  This means that when pedestrians get a crossing signal, traffic on Noyes will get a green, but then be forced to only turn right.  Eastbound Noyes to southbound Georgia could probably get a green arrow, but westbound Noyes to northbound Georgia should get a flashing yellow arrow as that path will cross the path of the peds using the crosswalk.  Unfortunately, MD still does not seem to allow FYA, so instead you'll probably see a green org with signs warning about the pedestrian danger when turning.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on March 31, 2021, 07:43:11 PM
Here's some signals showing their true colors (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.098146,-88.2580523,3a,22.4y,65.87h,107.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smBXR-swvUioh-neETPFQhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) in Champaign, IL.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 02, 2021, 02:52:25 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8

That's insane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on April 02, 2021, 03:19:57 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8

Bit of a stretch there ;)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 02, 2021, 03:27:22 PM
Besides the post mount, if that was span wire, it would've been fine  :)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 02, 2021, 07:28:32 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 02, 2021, 03:27:22 PM
Besides the post mount, if that was span wire, it would've been fine  :)

Yeah. I wouldn't normally advocate span-wire (I find mast arms are as good at indicating an approaching signal as the signals themselves), but I would take it over that install.

My preference would be a mast arm over the through lane and a post-mounted left turn signal before any span-wire, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 02, 2021, 07:50:06 PM
I think that extended California style mast-arm is kind of cool actually. Looks very new.....
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on April 02, 2021, 09:43:16 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8

I could see an install like that somewhere in NYS too. I don't get why some agencies are so thoroughly uncreative with their signal placement. The MUTCD guidance is no help either. The "every signal on a big far-side mast arm" system is one of the worst.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 02, 2021, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8

I wonder what that looks like on a windy day.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on April 03, 2021, 01:09:03 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 02, 2021, 02:52:25 PM
Quote from: EpicRoadways on April 02, 2021, 02:44:16 PM
Just wait until Mississippi learns about post-mounted median signals...
https://goo.gl/maps/whtw4SHxaFgWtNaB8

That's insane.

That legitimately may be one of the most ridiculous stoplight setups I have ever seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 03, 2021, 01:34:27 AM
I was trying to find a MoDOT example of the super long mast arm, but it seems like they do post mounted signals for left turn lanes in that situation pretty well. But one full set of signals for this road wasn't enough, so there's two (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5076367,-90.4430437,3a,75y,259.01h,85.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg8ZOjQCOwT5_1rc0qfhN-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 03, 2021, 02:12:46 PM
^^ Looks like the far-side signals were too far away from the stop line per MUTCD requirements so they had to install closer signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 03, 2021, 02:23:16 PM
Quote from: Big John on April 03, 2021, 02:12:46 PM
^^ Looks like the far-side signals were too far away from the stop line per MUTCD requirements so they had to install closer signals.
If you look at the other signals in this area, the signals for the perpendicular street are generally installed in the median of MO 141, like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5251446,-90.4732062,3a,75y,337.28h,87.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLiR71hdjftA5jklDmxcHag!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). There may be a good reason that I can't think of why 2 sets instead of one in the median was chosen for the above intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on April 04, 2021, 12:16:44 AM
Long mast arm, Maple Valley Highway, (https://goo.gl/maps/mJUt2icnKt3e9g7V7) with a supplemental post on the right.  There used to be a railroad line on the right that might have prevented installing the mast there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 04, 2021, 12:20:22 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 04, 2021, 12:16:44 AM
Long mast arm, Maple Valley Highway, (https://goo.gl/maps/mJUt2icnKt3e9g7V7) with a supplemental post on the right.  There used to be a railroad line on the right that might have prevented installing the mast there.
Thanks for reminding me of what St Louis area example I was trying to find yesterday.

When a long mast arm isn't long enough (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6650449,-90.5020116,3a,75y,25.34h,90.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smfVoj_BBNFAN7i096KpBkw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 04, 2021, 12:25:49 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 04, 2021, 12:16:44 AM
Long mast arm, Maple Valley Highway, (https://goo.gl/maps/mJUt2icnKt3e9g7V7) with a supplemental post on the right.  There used to be a railroad line on the right that might have prevented installing the mast there.
Another odd thing is that there is no pedestrian signal on the supplemental signal post on the right but the is one on facing the opposite direction across the side road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 04, 2021, 12:30:07 AM
Quote from: Big John on April 04, 2021, 12:25:49 AM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on April 04, 2021, 12:16:44 AM
Long mast arm, Maple Valley Highway, (https://goo.gl/maps/mJUt2icnKt3e9g7V7) with a supplemental post on the right.  There used to be a railroad line on the right that might have prevented installing the mast there.
Another odd thing is that there is no pedestrian signal on the supplemental signal post on the right but the is one on facing the opposite direction across the side road.
There is one. Just need to move a bit closer to see it as it blends well with the trees behind it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on April 04, 2021, 04:14:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 03, 2021, 01:34:27 AM
I was trying to find a MoDOT example of the super long mast arm, but it seems like they do post mounted signals for left turn lanes in that situation pretty well. But one full set of signals for this road wasn't enough, so there's two (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5076367,-90.4430437,3a,75y,259.01h,85.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg8ZOjQCOwT5_1rc0qfhN-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)!

Also interesting with that set is using green straight arrows where not really necessary, but using circular reds and "left turn signal" signs where a red arrow would have been much more appropriate...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ahmx1 on April 04, 2021, 09:20:24 PM
Worst Traffic Light font and design: Triangle, Virgina  https://maps.app.goo.gl/j4jmtHy9j5S9KW68A  (https://maps.app.goo.gl/j4jmtHy9j5S9KW68A)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 04, 2021, 10:49:41 PM
Quote from: roadfro on April 04, 2021, 04:14:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 03, 2021, 01:34:27 AM
I was trying to find a MoDOT example of the super long mast arm, but it seems like they do post mounted signals for left turn lanes in that situation pretty well. But one full set of signals for this road wasn't enough, so there's two (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5076367,-90.4430437,3a,75y,259.01h,85.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg8ZOjQCOwT5_1rc0qfhN-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)!

Also interesting with that set is using green straight arrows where not really necessary, but using circular reds and "left turn signal" signs where a red arrow would have been much more appropriate...
MoDOT likes to use green straight arrows for straight only movements. Not sure if any other DOTs actively do that, but Missouri is the only one that I noticed so far. For the red balls on left turns, MoDOT haven't switched out the red balls for red arrows on a lot of the protective only left turn older signals yet. I mostly see the red arrows on FYA installations in Missouri, as well as the new ones after the red arrow change.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on April 05, 2021, 01:28:33 AM
Quote from: ahmx1 on April 04, 2021, 09:20:24 PM
Worst Traffic Light font and design: Triangle, Virgina  https://maps.app.goo.gl/j4jmtHy9j5S9KW68A  (https://maps.app.goo.gl/j4jmtHy9j5S9KW68A)

I like that they were thoughtful enough to not put a post in front of the statue, even though it meant installing this ridiculously long mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on April 05, 2021, 05:38:24 PM
does anyone know what type of traffic lights these are at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0496934,-85.3085709,3a,43.1y,48.04h,106.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svPHXldmdwJUR7QTBvr8hdg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DvPHXldmdwJUR7QTBvr8hdg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D44.094418%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 06, 2021, 12:03:43 AM
I forgot to take a picture when I went to New Jersey back in January 2021, but I spotted this unusual red left turn arrow in Newark (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.721138,-74.1784142,3a,15y,352.71h,89.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIaYdlnLIXs3I4MyY2OBNUQ!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192). What kind of red arrow shape is this? This seems to be a recent installation because the previous GSV's from October 2020 and prior shows this post-mounted signal used to have a circular red indication.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on April 06, 2021, 10:57:34 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 06, 2021, 12:03:43 AM
I forgot to take a picture when I went to New Jersey back in January 2021, but I spotted this unusual red left turn arrow in Newark (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.721138,-74.1784142,3a,15y,352.71h,89.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIaYdlnLIXs3I4MyY2OBNUQ!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192). What kind of red arrow shap is this? This seems to be a recent installation because the previous GSV's from October 2021 and prior shows this post-mounted signal used to have a circular red indication.

Looks like they tried to take a standard MUTCD arrow design (not sure which) and stick it in a traffic light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 12:22:50 PM
Since this got buried at the bottom of the previous page, I'll repost.

Not sure how common this is, but I found overhead bicycle signals while on a college campus visit yesterday.
(https://i.imgur.com/ScZIsTQ.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 06, 2021, 03:59:53 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 12:22:50 PM
Since this got buried at the bottom of the previous page, I'll repost.

Not sure how common this is, but I found overhead bicycle signals while on a college campus visit yesterday.
(https://i.imgur.com/ScZIsTQ.jpg)


To me, that looks like bulbs that are partially burnt out or otherwise obscured.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 06, 2021, 04:59:49 PM
^^^
I would really like to see the overall setup at that intersection. I strongly dislike pedestrian and cycling infrastructure mounted overhead, so something like the above makes me vomit a bit in my mouth.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 05:16:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 06, 2021, 04:59:49 PM
^^^
I would really like to see the overall setup at that intersection. I strongly dislike pedestrian and cycling infrastructure mounted overhead, so something like the above makes me vomit a bit in my mouth.
This is a recent change, so it's not on GSV yet, but 3rd Street between Martin Jischke Dr and University St got turned into a pedestrian zone (https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2020/Q1/third-street-to-become-new-people-friendly-corridor.html), with bike lanes running through it and tables/seating (probably as study areas) on the (former) roadway. They kept the mast arms from when it had motor vehicles, and refitted the lights on the pedestrian only area of 3rd Street as bicycle lights for the bike lanes. Pedestrian crossings on both sides of 3rd street were also kept, despite it's more like a single large pedestrian crossing now.

Here's a comparison on GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4272721,-86.9167774,3a,75y,96.93h,84.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9tsMV96zXGo6LSWU1OyloA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) with the image I posted above. It's what the intersection looked like before the street closed to motor vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on April 07, 2021, 12:19:28 AM
Very tall pole for pedestrian actuator buttons. (https://goo.gl/maps/RyjYgRVRUVKa1JqL9)  The actual signals are mounted elsewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 07, 2021, 03:47:15 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 06, 2021, 10:57:34 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 06, 2021, 12:03:43 AM
I forgot to take a picture when I went to New Jersey back in January 2021, but I spotted this unusual red left turn arrow in Newark (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.721138,-74.1784142,3a,15y,352.71h,89.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIaYdlnLIXs3I4MyY2OBNUQ!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192). What kind of red arrow shap is this? This seems to be a recent installation because the previous GSV's from October 2021 and prior shows this post-mounted signal used to have a circular red indication.

Looks like they tried to take a standard MUTCD arrow design (not sure which) and stick it in a traffic light.

Closeup of the arrow. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7212881,-74.1784161,3a,15y,353.01h,91.43t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sn9OWAXyMWHD9tQ-LVWyfpQ!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192) It also appears it has also made it to the opposing directions mast arm as well for the left turn signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7213172,-74.1782247,3a,15y,226.94h,96.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDwVUmlodhoyaC2bbFu2x4g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). I have a feeling it may be a Type D arrow as shown in Figure 2D-2 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2d_02_longdesc.htm) of the 2009 MUTCD:

(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2d_02.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 07, 2021, 03:52:02 PM
I'm betting it has nothing to with the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on April 07, 2021, 03:56:32 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 07, 2021, 03:52:02 PM
I'm betting it has nothing to with the MUTCD.

Some mistakes are caused by overapplication of the MUTCD, like the three-fourths error.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 07, 2021, 05:32:05 PM
Arrows like that one in New Jersey have been seen elsewhere.

One example near me for a U-turn signal: https://goo.gl/maps/yLMjCFDep1bYUQDp6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2021, 10:23:26 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 12:22:50 PM
Since this got buried at the bottom of the previous page, I'll repost.

Not sure how common this is, but I found overhead bicycle signals while on a college campus visit yesterday.
(https://i.imgur.com/ScZIsTQ.jpg)
They look nice! Good visibility.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2021, 10:23:26 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 12:22:50 PM
Since this got buried at the bottom of the previous page, I'll repost.

Not sure how common this is, but I found overhead bicycle signals while on a college campus visit yesterday.
(https://i.imgur.com/ScZIsTQ.jpg)
They look nice! Good visibility.


iPhone

From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on April 11, 2021, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.

Good thing it's installed in a pedestrian-only area then, huh?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 11, 2021, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.

Good thing it's installed in a pedestrian-only area then, huh?

That FedEx truck seems to indicate otherwise.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 11, 2021, 01:10:45 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 11, 2021, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.

Good thing it's installed in a pedestrian-only area then, huh?

That FedEx truck seems to indicate otherwise.
Pedestrian only area ends past the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 11, 2021, 02:57:22 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 11, 2021, 01:10:45 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 11, 2021, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.

Good thing it's installed in a pedestrian-only area then, huh?

That FedEx truck seems to indicate otherwise.
Pedestrian only area ends past the signal.

This is in West Lafayette, IN near Purdue University campus.  It seems that 3rd street was originally a regular street and now the section behind the traffic signal is for bikes only, so they simply replaced the RYG signals with bike signals.  Jakeroot is correct that most of these bike signal installations would not put the bike signals overhead, since it is way over the normal sightline of bikes and is normally where auto signals go - so to avoid confusion of car drivers, it is best to not put bike signals there.  However, in this case, it is not so critical, since only bicycles will see this light, since the street is otherwise closed to cars.

In many cases, bike signals are used at intersections to give bikes a protected phase of some sort, often by restricting some turns during the bicycle green light.  At those intersections, it is critical that drivers are aware which signal is theirs and not to be confused by the bike lights.  But that is not the case here.  In fact, I would say, there is no need to even have a bicycle filter over these signals and a regular RYG would be well enough, even though it is only bikes who travel through.  The bike signals are only truly necessary where they need to control bikes where drivers can also see the lights.

Here is another college town with bike lights on a mast arm.  This intersection is a T-intersection, but the bike path goes through the T.  Only bikes see this signal.  Russell and Sycamore in Davis, CA.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5462744,-121.7617925,3a,37.5y,343.81h,86.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCSN_rDOpiOWStSEjoumNcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The bike signal is critical here because in the opposite direction cars and bikes on Sycamore have separate phases.  One phase allows cars on Sycamore to make protected lefts and rights on Russell.  The other phase is for bikes and peds to cross and to turn at this corner.  A Barnes dance for bikes and peds.  Many bikes coming off the bike path continue north on Sycamore and many also make a left turn onto the Russell northside sidewalk (which is a shared ped/bike path).  When campus is in session, the number of bikes that pass through here is intense.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5463992,-121.7618175,3a,75y,165.21h,76.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKACjEr0wnDFHvMuMEWBhQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here's an article about it:

http://www.pedbikesafe.org/BIKESAFE/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_NUM=702
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2021, 10:29:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2021, 10:23:26 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 06, 2021, 12:22:50 PM
Since this got buried at the bottom of the previous page, I'll repost.

Not sure how common this is, but I found overhead bicycle signals while on a college campus visit yesterday.
(https://i.imgur.com/ScZIsTQ.jpg)
They look nice! Good visibility.


iPhone

From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.
Cars shouldn't see them they're for bikes (:


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 11, 2021, 10:36:22 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 11, 2021, 02:57:22 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 11, 2021, 01:10:45 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 11, 2021, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 11, 2021, 12:10:01 PM
From a stopped position, looking at a close photo, maybe. From a moving car, not so much.

Good thing it's installed in a pedestrian-only area then, huh?

That FedEx truck seems to indicate otherwise.
Pedestrian only area ends past the signal.

This is in West Lafayette, IN near Purdue University campus.  It seems that 3rd street was originally a regular street and now the section behind the traffic signal is for bikes only, so they simply replaced the RYG signals with bike signals.  Jakeroot is correct that most of these bike signal installations would not put the bike signals overhead, since it is way over the normal sightline of bikes and is normally where auto signals go - so to avoid confusion of car drivers, it is best to not put bike signals there.  However, in this case, it is not so critical, since only bicycles will see this light, since the street is otherwise closed to cars.

In many cases, bike signals are used at intersections to give bikes a protected phase of some sort, often by restricting some turns during the bicycle green light.  At those intersections, it is critical that drivers are aware which signal is theirs and not to be confused by the bike lights.  But that is not the case here.  In fact, I would say, there is no need to even have a bicycle filter over these signals and a regular RYG would be well enough, even though it is only bikes who travel through.  The bike signals are only truly necessary where they need to control bikes where drivers can also see the lights.

Here is another college town with bike lights on a mast arm.  This intersection is a T-intersection, but the bike path goes through the T.  Only bikes see this signal.  Russell and Sycamore in Davis, CA.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5462744,-121.7617925,3a,37.5y,343.81h,86.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCSN_rDOpiOWStSEjoumNcg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The bike signal is critical here because in the opposite direction cars and bikes on Sycamore have separate phases.  One phase allows cars on Sycamore to make protected lefts and rights on Russell.  The other phase is for bikes and peds to cross and to turn at this corner.  A Barnes dance for bikes and peds.  Many bikes coming off the bike path continue north on Sycamore and many also make a left turn onto the Russell northside sidewalk (which is a shared ped/bike path).  When campus is in session, the number of bikes that pass through here is intense.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5463992,-121.7618175,3a,75y,165.21h,76.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKACjEr0wnDFHvMuMEWBhQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here's an article about it:

http://www.pedbikesafe.org/BIKESAFE/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_NUM=702
Separation of bike and vehicle signals is a big issue. My town of Arlington used louvers and it typically works well.

From right turn lane:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210412/94b6ce2160d60400e54b96ade60cfb13.jpg)

From bike lane:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210412/65aa5520df3a09ded0ff03b78f06cdab.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 11, 2021, 10:40:46 PM
I like how they painted the bike lane green in the Arlington example. What I normally see is that they're left unpainted and you have to look for it from the bicycle symbol on the pavement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 11, 2021, 11:41:16 PM
From the prior 2 examples, did the requirement of labeling bike signals go away?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/89qY1MBmGiyhag6N8
This one in NJ gets me wondering.  Why is not the overhead heads also double red as well as the two side mounts?

In addition prior to the signal there is an overhead flashing warning of the signal indicating that this is a problem intersection with red light jumpers.  However, being three signals are immediately behind this one intersection, I find that one hard to believe that someone would miss this particular signal yet they do.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 14, 2021, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/89qY1MBmGiyhag6N8
This one in NJ gets me wondering.  Why is not the overhead heads also double red as well as the two side mounts?

In addition prior to the signal there is an overhead flashing warning of the signal indicating that this is a problem intersection with red light jumpers.  However, being three signals are immediately behind this one intersection, I find that one hard to believe that someone would miss this particular signal yet they do.
What are the double red signals even used for? I have never seen one before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 14, 2021, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/89qY1MBmGiyhag6N8
This one in NJ gets me wondering.  Why is not the overhead heads also double red as well as the two side mounts?

In addition prior to the signal there is an overhead flashing warning of the signal indicating that this is a problem intersection with red light jumpers.  However, being three signals are immediately behind this one intersection, I find that one hard to believe that someone would miss this particular signal yet they do.

What are the double red signals even used for? I have never seen one before.

Double red signals are usually reserved for intersections where a municipality has somewhat regular issues with signal compliance (typically, lots of red light running). I only knew of two signals in Washington with double reds, but they've been removed.

As to the signals in New Jersey: my guess is that the double red signals were used at the stop line to more clearly indicate to approaching traffic exactly where the stop line is. With the curve, it might also be the case that the near side signals are the first ones visible. It's possible that the overhead near side mast arm was not strong enough to support a fourth signal head, so only the post-mounted signals received double reds.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 02:40:14 PM
Here's a similar one in Illinois (https://goo.gl/maps/74422QqwLAQfaDxi8).  The post-mounted signals have double reds, but the overhead ones do not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jmacswimmer on April 14, 2021, 02:43:38 PM
Here's one from US 158/Croatan Highway on the Outer Banks (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0664125,-75.6935194,3a,90y,164.44h,85.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sikWezu0fdBmnQPH5NAYE8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1?hl=en).  I remember being surprised when I first saw it driving by last summer, so interesting to see some discussion about this being a thing in multiple locations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 02:51:16 PM
While we're on the topic of bike signals, does anyone know how long a bicycle yellow is?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 02:57:28 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 02:51:16 PM
While we're on the topic of bike signals, does anyone know how long a bicycle yellow is?

12 inches
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 14, 2021, 06:28:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 14, 2021, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/89qY1MBmGiyhag6N8
This one in NJ gets me wondering.  Why is not the overhead heads also double red as well as the two side mounts?

In addition prior to the signal there is an overhead flashing warning of the signal indicating that this is a problem intersection with red light jumpers.  However, being three signals are immediately behind this one intersection, I find that one hard to believe that someone would miss this particular signal yet they do.

What are the double red signals even used for? I have never seen one before.

Double red signals are usually reserved for intersections where a municipality has somewhat regular issues with signal compliance (typically, lots of red light running). I only knew of two signals in Washington with double reds, but they've been removed.

As to the signals in New Jersey: my guess is that the double red signals were used at the stop line to more clearly indicate to approaching traffic exactly where the stop line is. With the curve, it might also be the case that the near side signals are the first ones visible. It's possible that the overhead near side mast arm was not strong enough to support a fourth signal head, so only the post-mounted signals received double reds.

It seems that they are used to emphasize the reds.  Kind of like the 12-8-8 signals that emphasize the reds over a regular 8-8-8 signal.  Now in a world where every signal is 12-12-12 and there does not seem to be an interest in signal heads larger than 12 inches a double red is needed to provide the emphasis.

It really should only be used in intersections with red light running problems.  We shouldn't see this all over the place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 07:05:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.

In most places with reduced sight lines, there's a Signal Ahead symbol sign and that's usually enough. I wonder what situations specifically necessitate a sign and a double red signal. Plus, I've seen curves with much worse sight lines that only had a sign (or even nothing at all).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on April 14, 2021, 08:41:51 PM
at this intersection in Chattanooga to the right there is a walking bridge but only bikes can turn right except for cars
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0623788,-85.3068058,2a,75y,88.4h,87.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHOcFl19O9lLLkHy9sGYJmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 07:05:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.

In most places with reduced sight lines, there's a Signal Ahead symbol sign and that's usually enough. I wonder what situations specifically necessitate a sign and a double red signal. Plus, I've seen curves with much worse sight lines that only had a sign (or even nothing at all).

Typically with reduced sightlines, you also want supplemental signals, either on the near-side or far-side, typically in the corners of intersections or overhead on the mast arm, facing away from the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 14, 2021, 10:37:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 14, 2021, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 14, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/89qY1MBmGiyhag6N8
This one in NJ gets me wondering.  Why is not the overhead heads also double red as well as the two side mounts?

In addition prior to the signal there is an overhead flashing warning of the signal indicating that this is a problem intersection with red light jumpers.  However, being three signals are immediately behind this one intersection, I find that one hard to believe that someone would miss this particular signal yet they do.

What are the double red signals even used for? I have never seen one before.

Double red signals are usually reserved for intersections where a municipality has somewhat regular issues with signal compliance (typically, lots of red light running). I only knew of two signals in Washington with double reds, but they've been removed.

As to the signals in New Jersey: my guess is that the double red signals were used at the stop line to more clearly indicate to approaching traffic exactly where the stop line is. With the curve, it might also be the case that the near side signals are the first ones visible. It's possible that the overhead near side mast arm was not strong enough to support a fourth signal head, so only the post-mounted signals received double reds.

With signals like this, I just chalk it up to an intern trying to impress the bosses with the unique (for NJ) double reds. 

The prior signal, seen in the older GSVs, it pretty standard for a NJ signal.  2 signals over 3 lanes on the far side; 1 signal on the near side over the opposing lanes. 

With the signal additions, there's now 8 red lights on 6 signal assemblies.  There's an overhead 'Signal Ahead' sign with yellow blinkers, and 2 'Signal Ahead' signs on the shoulder.  And there was a light post and mast added in the median, when the state is generally moving them away.  Even in this state that often has a lot of signal placements at each intersection, what you see here is very unusual.

It appears this may have been done at the same time the signal to the west was modified, which was done in a much more typical style for modern signals in NJ.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 10:42:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 07:05:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.

In most places with reduced sight lines, there's a Signal Ahead symbol sign and that's usually enough. I wonder what situations specifically necessitate a sign and a double red signal. Plus, I've seen curves with much worse sight lines that only had a sign (or even nothing at all).

Typically with reduced sightlines, you also want supplemental signals, either on the near-side or far-side, typically in the corners of intersections or overhead on the mast arm, facing away from the intersection.

Yes, but when do you need double red signals? They're right next to each other on the same signal head, there isn't much of a benefit unless you only have a few seconds to perceive and react to the current signal indication upon coming in view of it. And even then, the benefit is very small. I feel like the better option is to erect 1 or 2 advance signals, kind of like what some states do when the intersection is very large and the mast arm holding the main set is far from the stop line.

Here is an example on NY-22 of where I think a double red would make sense. The signal is situated in the middle of a sharp curve on a 55 MPH stretch of roadway. Even with the warning sign in place, a double red on each of the through signal heads would help give drivers more time to react and stop if necessary.

https://goo.gl/maps/CuwvGftiEvKRg9bn8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 01:03:55 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 10:42:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 07:05:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.

In most places with reduced sight lines, there's a Signal Ahead symbol sign and that's usually enough. I wonder what situations specifically necessitate a sign and a double red signal. Plus, I've seen curves with much worse sight lines that only had a sign (or even nothing at all).

Typically with reduced sightlines, you also want supplemental signals, either on the near-side or far-side, typically in the corners of intersections or overhead on the mast arm, facing away from the intersection.

Yes, but when do you need double red signals? They're right next to each other on the same signal head, there isn't much of a benefit unless you only have a few seconds to perceive and react to the current signal indication upon coming in view of it. And even then, the benefit is very small. I feel like the better option is to erect 1 or 2 advance signals, kind of like what some states do when the intersection is very large and the mast arm holding the main set is far from the stop line.

I was more replying to your comment that "signal ahead symbol signs" are "usually enough", which I would say is only half true and that you also want some "custom" signalization (i.e., supplemental signals). But I can see from the rest of your reply that you're already in agreement with me in that regard, so I'll just leave it there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 01:06:23 AM
This is perhaps a one-off in terms of signal placement:

3rd Ave SE @ 112th St SE (https://goo.gl/maps/q4g3jaec7kGzunsZ6), south of Everett, WA.

Two far-side post-mounted signals, and a single near-side overhead signal. Not sure I've seen anything like this before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 15, 2021, 01:11:47 AM
When you reuse a left turn signal that's now a closed exit from a dead mall to a right turn signal for the opposite side... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5595798,-90.3742903,3a,33.3y,355.44h,83.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJLPUE0pq_fNGArVM0U4eEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 01:21:56 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 15, 2021, 01:11:47 AM
When you reuse a left turn signal that's now a closed exit from a dead mall to a right turn signal for the opposite side... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5595798,-90.3742903,3a,33.3y,355.44h,83.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJLPUE0pq_fNGArVM0U4eEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

It looks like it fell backwards? Just hanging on by a thread, almost literally.

As a side-note: Crestwood is a lot flatter than I remember ten years ago...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on April 15, 2021, 10:27:39 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 01:03:55 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 10:42:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 07:05:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 06:46:31 PM
In my Illinois example, I believe it's due to the curvy road.  I'm not aware of a red-light running problem, just a sight line problem.  There are also advance warning signs.

In most places with reduced sight lines, there's a Signal Ahead symbol sign and that's usually enough. I wonder what situations specifically necessitate a sign and a double red signal. Plus, I've seen curves with much worse sight lines that only had a sign (or even nothing at all).

Typically with reduced sightlines, you also want supplemental signals, either on the near-side or far-side, typically in the corners of intersections or overhead on the mast arm, facing away from the intersection.

Yes, but when do you need double red signals? They're right next to each other on the same signal head, there isn't much of a benefit unless you only have a few seconds to perceive and react to the current signal indication upon coming in view of it. And even then, the benefit is very small. I feel like the better option is to erect 1 or 2 advance signals, kind of like what some states do when the intersection is very large and the mast arm holding the main set is far from the stop line.

I was more replying to your comment that "signal ahead symbol signs" are "usually enough", which I would say is only half true and that you also want some "custom" signalization (i.e., supplemental signals). But I can see from the rest of your reply that you're already in agreement with me in that regard, so I'll just leave it there.

Got it, I was just trying to get an answer because I'm curious as to what the requirements are for a double red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 15, 2021, 10:31:23 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 15, 2021, 01:11:47 AM
When you reuse a left turn signal that's now a closed exit from a dead mall to a right turn signal for the opposite side... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5595798,-90.3742903,3a,33.3y,355.44h,83.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJLPUE0pq_fNGArVM0U4eEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

:-D

It takes 15 minutes max to open up each housing, turn the light to face the other direction, and reconnect the wiring for the red and green arrows (yellow wires would stay the same).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on April 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM
I agree with jakeroot on that signal. Looks like the signal simply fell/got knocked off its pole and is upside-down facing the opposite direction. I tried playing around in the Street View to see what color it is when the rest of that direction was green but couldn't come up with anything.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 15, 2021, 12:09:38 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/2NYTYrCeTXQuTuzw7  Looks okay here. However profile those right turn signals have strange visors. https://goo.gl/maps/ve9i5PuJa9KNLLpw8



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 15, 2021, 12:22:28 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 15, 2021, 10:31:23 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 15, 2021, 01:11:47 AM
When you reuse a left turn signal that's now a closed exit from a dead mall to a right turn signal for the opposite side... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5595798,-90.3742903,3a,33.3y,355.44h,83.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJLPUE0pq_fNGArVM0U4eEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

:-D

It takes 15 minutes max to open up each housing, turn the light to face the other direction, and reconnect the wiring for the red and green arrows (yellow wires would stay the same).
Or the wires snapped and the signal fell off since the GSV was taken in 2019  :). I need to check this signal out the next time I'm in St Louis to see if it's gone or replaced yet.

Though I find it interesting that this signal 'sat' on top of the pole, while the other 3 pole mounted ones in the intersection was mounted in front of it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 12:40:29 PM
There are at least two indications that it fell backwards: the visors are upside down, and the wiring is entering through a hole in the top that would normally be on the bottom and covered by the pole:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51117584778_ff3f6e6098_o.png)
Upside-down Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2kT5Z3A) by Jake Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on April 15, 2021, 05:38:11 PM
Hello, I own several signals if anyone wants to see.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:45:31 PM
If I recall correctly, flashing yellow arrow right turn signals either having a leading protected phase OR on recall transitioning from the protected phase to the permissive phase must have a steady yellow arrow phase before going to either a steady red or flashing yellow arrow, correct? After the steady yellow arrow transitioning into the permissive phase, does it matter if there is a red arrow for a few seconds, or can it go directly to flashing yellow arrow?

Quote from: Chapter 4D - MUTCD 2009 Edition - Figure 4D.19.05.CA steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW signal indication shall be displayed following the right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication.

This FYA right turn signal in Portsmouth NH (43.0778743, -70.7618545) has no steady yellow arrow clearance (on pedestrian recall) between the protected phase and permissive phase. For the record, if the pedestrian button was pressed before Maplewood Ave traffic has their green, there is an LPI during the walk phase, followed by the FYA during the DON'T WALK phase.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:51:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 12:40:29 PM
There are at least two indications that it fell backwards: the visors are upside down, and the wiring is entering through a hole in the top that would normally be on the bottom and covered by the pole:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51117584778_ff3f6e6098_o.png)
Upside-down Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2kT5Z3A) by Jake Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

I have a strong feeling that the configuration of the opposing leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598698,-90.3744807,3a,47.6y,153.15h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8MtF_k4a7ds3HWpXiTF65A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) mirrors the configuration of the open leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5596553,-90.3743302,3a,75y,340.92h,77.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh9ml_PsuJNG4PCvMtYtDrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), as the 4-section signal for the closed leg is still operating. EDIT: based on lane and signal configuration, operating in split phasing.

Aug 2018 Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598772,-90.3744595,3a,34.4y,162.58h,88.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5KR60O6UKdMyvWO8zhHj1w!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 16, 2021, 07:13:58 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:45:31 PM
If I recall correctly, flashing yellow arrow right turn signals either having a leading protected phase OR on recall transitioning from the protected phase to the permissive phase must have a steady yellow arrow phase before going to either a steady red or flashing yellow arrow, correct? After the steady yellow arrow transitioning into the permissive phase, does it matter if there is a red arrow for a few seconds, or can it go directly to flashing yellow arrow?

Quote from: Chapter 4D - MUTCD 2009 Edition - Figure 4D.19.05.CA steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW signal indication shall be displayed following the right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication.

This FYA right turn signal in Portsmouth NH (43.0778743, -70.7618545) has no steady yellow arrow clearance (on pedestrian recall) between the protected phase and permissive phase. For the record, if the pedestrian button was pressed before Maplewood Ave traffic has their green, there is an LPI during the walk phase, followed by the FYA during the DON'T WALK phase.


I think you are right that this is a violation of MUTCD.

It is definitely a good practice to transition from a more open phase to a more restrictive phase with a yellow.  This seems like a requirement of the MUTCD.  So (i) green-yellow-red, (ii) green arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow, (iii) green arrow-yellow arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and (iv) flashing yellow arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow would all be required transitions. 

Going from more restrictive to less restrictive does not require a transition (in this country), so you have red-green, red arrow-green arrow, red arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and flashing yellow arrow-green arrow.  Of course, some foreign countries do have the combined red-yellow phase as a warning that a green is coming.  This is disallowed here to discourage people from stepping on the gas as soon as the light turns green - but there may be some value to it, especially in the era of people using cell phones at red lights.

There are some cases where you'd see green arrow-yellow arrow-brief red arrow-flashing yellow arrow.  The brief red arrow phase is not required, to my knowledge, but is sometimes helpful for safety purposes to force drivers to assess the situation between the protected turn and the permissive turn.  There was no way of incorporating a brief red arrow on doghouse signals, but it does exist on many of the 4 aspect FYA signals.  It is especially helpful in places with lots of peds or other complicated situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 16, 2021, 08:17:41 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:51:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 12:40:29 PM
There are at least two indications that it fell backwards: the visors are upside down, and the wiring is entering through a hole in the top that would normally be on the bottom and covered by the pole:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51117584778_ff3f6e6098_o.png)
Upside-down Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2kT5Z3A) by Jake Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

I have a strong feeling that the configuration of the opposing leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598698,-90.3744807,3a,47.6y,153.15h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8MtF_k4a7ds3HWpXiTF65A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) mirrors the configuration of the open leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5596553,-90.3743302,3a,75y,340.92h,77.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh9ml_PsuJNG4PCvMtYtDrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), as the 4-section signal for the closed leg is still operating.

Aug 2018 Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598772,-90.3744595,3a,34.4y,162.58h,88.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5KR60O6UKdMyvWO8zhHj1w!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
It does, but because of the protected left signal on both sides, I doubt both sides turn green in the same phase. So the "upside down right turn signal"  would probably still be red when the other signals facing that side is green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 16, 2021, 11:33:33 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 16, 2021, 08:17:41 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:51:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 12:40:29 PM
There are at least two indications that it fell backwards: the visors are upside down, and the wiring is entering through a hole in the top that would normally be on the bottom and covered by the pole:

(img cut)
I have a strong feeling that the configuration of the opposing leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598698,-90.3744807,3a,47.6y,153.15h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8MtF_k4a7ds3HWpXiTF65A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) mirrors the configuration of the open leg (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5596553,-90.3743302,3a,75y,340.92h,77.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh9ml_PsuJNG4PCvMtYtDrA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), as the 4-section signal for the closed leg is still operating.

Aug 2018 Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598772,-90.3744595,3a,34.4y,162.58h,88.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5KR60O6UKdMyvWO8zhHj1w!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
It does, but because of the protected left signal on both sides, I doubt both sides turn green in the same phase. So the "upside down right turn signal"  would probably still be red when the other signals facing that side is green.

You're right, my bad, I forgot to mention the phasing would be split phased. The latest GSV's have faded pavement, but past ones indicate the left lane is a shared left/thru, and the right lane a dedicated right turn lane. No way to have concurrent phasing with that lane and signal configuration.

EDIT: If you look closely, the latest GSV's show the 4-section signal on the active leg having left and right green arrows in the bottom 2 faces, in that order. July 2016 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5598611,-90.3744845,3a,15y,14.8h,101.09t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sb7H7iThPV3hTFcPQw7ePkw!2e0!5s20160701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) shows that the left arrow in the latest GSV's used to point straight. The non-active leg, however,  also has right and left green arrows in the bottom 2 faces (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5597127,-90.3745485,3a,15y,145.16h,99.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGw3AzzlJxPJleSH1Z9YYSw!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192), in that order from as far back as 2009 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5596908,-90.3745175,3a,15y,146.87h,100.43t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5jXUlTKSAAaDYyTM83cDEw!2e0!5s20090901T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 16, 2021, 11:52:36 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 16, 2021, 07:13:58 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:45:31 PM
If I recall correctly, flashing yellow arrow right turn signals either having a leading protected phase OR on recall transitioning from the protected phase to the permissive phase must have a steady yellow arrow phase before going to either a steady red or flashing yellow arrow, correct? After the steady yellow arrow transitioning into the permissive phase, does it matter if there is a red arrow for a few seconds, or can it go directly to flashing yellow arrow?

Quote from: Chapter 4D - MUTCD 2009 Edition - Figure 4D.19.05.CA steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW signal indication shall be displayed following the right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication.

This FYA right turn signal in Portsmouth NH (43.0778743, -70.7618545) has no steady yellow arrow clearance (on pedestrian recall) between the protected phase and permissive phase. For the record, if the pedestrian button was pressed before Maplewood Ave traffic has their green, there is an LPI during the walk phase, followed by the FYA during the DON'T WALK phase.



I think you are right that this is a violation of MUTCD.

It is definitely a good practice to transition from a more open phase to a more restrictive phase with a yellow.  This seems like a requirement of the MUTCD.  So (i) green-yellow-red, (ii) green arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow, (iii) green arrow-yellow arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and (iv) flashing yellow arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow would all be required transitions. 

Going from more restrictive to less restrictive does not require a transition (in this country), so you have red-green, red arrow-green arrow, red arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and flashing yellow arrow-green arrow.  Of course, some foreign countries do have the combined red-yellow phase as a warning that a green is coming.  This is disallowed here to discourage people from stepping on the gas as soon as the light turns green - but there may be some value to it, especially in the era of people using cell phones at red lights.

There are some cases where you'd see green arrow-yellow arrow-brief red arrow-flashing yellow arrow.  The brief red arrow phase is not required, to my knowledge, but is sometimes helpful for safety purposes to force drivers to assess the situation between the protected turn and the permissive turn.  There was no way of incorporating a brief red arrow on doghouse signals, but it does exist on many of the 4 aspect FYA signals.  It is especially helpful in places with lots of peds or other complicated situations.

I quite like watching the video that was posted (reposted as this is a separate page for me). There is something quite ingenious about switching to the flashing yellow arrow phase mid-phase. Granted, around here, I think the signal would be permanently resting in the flashing yellow arrow phase -- especially if oncoming traffic had a flashing yellow arrow (I think there is a rule against permissive left turns against a right turn with a green arrow?) -- but I appreciate that they allow the signal to change over to a flashing yellow arrow rather than requiring e.g. the side road to go first or something silly.

As it relates to the brief red: I have seen studies that show the brief red to improve safety. However, I don't recall the exact situation in the video (switching to permissive mid-phase) having been studied. It would seem that all available literature would suggest that a brief red would help, regardless of the situation, but I think it could actually be dropped here, employing instead: green arrow > solid yellow arrow > flashing yellow arrow.

Hell, to be honest, there's something about green arrow > flashing yellow arrow in the exact setup shown in the video that doesn't bother me. I don't know why, as going from protected to permissive without a transition phase is definitely not allowed anymore. Nevertheless, for the purpose of providing a flashing yellow arrow to the crosswalk, the current setup seems like it would work fine in practice. Probably because I get tired of waiting for actuated signals to accept pedestrian inputs? Hard to say, but there was something satisfying about how quickly that walk signal popped up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 16, 2021, 04:41:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 16, 2021, 11:52:36 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 16, 2021, 07:13:58 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 15, 2021, 08:45:31 PM
If I recall correctly, flashing yellow arrow right turn signals either having a leading protected phase OR on recall transitioning from the protected phase to the permissive phase must have a steady yellow arrow phase before going to either a steady red or flashing yellow arrow, correct? After the steady yellow arrow transitioning into the permissive phase, does it matter if there is a red arrow for a few seconds, or can it go directly to flashing yellow arrow?

Quote from: Chapter 4D - MUTCD 2009 Edition - Figure 4D.19.05.CA steady right-turn YELLOW ARROW signal indication shall be displayed following the right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication.

This FYA right turn signal in Portsmouth NH (43.0778743, -70.7618545) has no steady yellow arrow clearance (on pedestrian recall) between the protected phase and permissive phase. For the record, if the pedestrian button was pressed before Maplewood Ave traffic has their green, there is an LPI during the walk phase, followed by the FYA during the DON'T WALK phase.



I think you are right that this is a violation of MUTCD.

It is definitely a good practice to transition from a more open phase to a more restrictive phase with a yellow.  This seems like a requirement of the MUTCD.  So (i) green-yellow-red, (ii) green arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow, (iii) green arrow-yellow arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and (iv) flashing yellow arrow-yellow arrow-red arrow would all be required transitions. 

Going from more restrictive to less restrictive does not require a transition (in this country), so you have red-green, red arrow-green arrow, red arrow-flashing yellow arrow, and flashing yellow arrow-green arrow.  Of course, some foreign countries do have the combined red-yellow phase as a warning that a green is coming.  This is disallowed here to discourage people from stepping on the gas as soon as the light turns green - but there may be some value to it, especially in the era of people using cell phones at red lights.

There are some cases where you'd see green arrow-yellow arrow-brief red arrow-flashing yellow arrow.  The brief red arrow phase is not required, to my knowledge, but is sometimes helpful for safety purposes to force drivers to assess the situation between the protected turn and the permissive turn.  There was no way of incorporating a brief red arrow on doghouse signals, but it does exist on many of the 4 aspect FYA signals.  It is especially helpful in places with lots of peds or other complicated situations.

I quite like watching the video that was posted (reposted as this is a separate page for me). There is something quite ingenious about switching to the flashing yellow arrow phase mid-phase. Granted, around here, I think the signal would be permanently resting in the flashing yellow arrow phase -- especially if oncoming traffic had a flashing yellow arrow (I think there is a rule against permissive left turns against a right turn with a green arrow?) -- but I appreciate that they allow the signal to change over to a flashing yellow arrow rather than requiring e.g. the side road to go first or something silly.

As it relates to the brief red: I have seen studies that show the brief red to improve safety. However, I don't recall the exact situation in the video (switching to permissive mid-phase) having been studied. It would seem that all available literature would suggest that a brief red would help, regardless of the situation, but I think it could actually be dropped here, employing instead: green arrow > solid yellow arrow > flashing yellow arrow.

Hell, to be honest, there's something about green arrow > flashing yellow arrow in the exact setup shown in the video that doesn't bother me. I don't know why, as going from protected to permissive without a transition phase is definitely not allowed anymore. Nevertheless, for the purpose of providing a flashing yellow arrow to the crosswalk, the current setup seems like it would work fine in practice. Probably because I get tired of waiting for actuated signals to accept pedestrian inputs? Hard to say, but there was something satisfying about how quickly that walk signal popped up.

I agree that a red arrow does not seem necessary in this context of going from protected to permitted on a right turn.

But I am uncomfortable with going from green arrow to FYA without a yellow arrow.  How would a car know that they would need to stop for a pedestrian?  The yellow arrow provides a minimal amount of reaction time to alert the driver that they may now have to yield to a pedestrian and their right is no longer fully protected.

I think the better approach would be to leave the signal resting on flashing yellow arrow, while adjacent thru has a green orb.  This way, for safety purposes, a right turning driver is always watching for peds.  There are only three criteria that I see for allowing a protected right turn phase: (i) concurrent with a complementary left turn - where thru traffic has a red orb and peds are prohibited from crossing anyway, (ii) If the ped crossing is heavy to allow dedicated time for right turns to have ROW to turn and peds are not allowed to cross during that timeframe, or (iii) if there is a bike path to the right, so it is important to totally separate right turning traffic from the bikes. 

It doesn't appear that the above intersection meets any of those criteria, so while the green orb is lit, the flashing yellow arrow should also be lit and if a ped pushes the button, the signal can provide an immediate pedestrian signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2021, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Big John on April 11, 2021, 11:41:16 PM
From the prior 2 examples, did the requirement of labeling bike signals go away?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210418/7f920d2224652dde8969f065a89d301a.jpg)
There was a bike signal sign, but it was removed. No idea why


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 18, 2021, 12:55:32 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on April 14, 2021, 02:51:16 PM
While we're on the topic of bike signals, does anyone know how long a bicycle yellow is?
3 seconds like for cars, but sometimes it is given earlier than car yellows.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on April 18, 2021, 10:28:52 PM
Interesting signals with two green bulbs near the LA state capitol in Baton Rouge:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Looks like a doghouse without the yellow arrow bulbs. I've never seen one like this before, but I assume there are probably others like this elsewhere?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on April 18, 2021, 11:01:30 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on April 18, 2021, 10:28:52 PM
Interesting signals with two green bulbs near the LA state capitol in Baton Rouge:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Looks like a doghouse without the yellow arrow bulbs. I've never seen one like this before, but I assume there are probably others like this elsewhere?
This was discussed not that long ago here, in February of this year. Link to it: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2576105#msg2576105
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 19, 2021, 02:45:11 PM
Question:

Is this allowed?  The overhead signal has a left turn arrow, but the left-side post-mounted signal does not.

https://goo.gl/maps/iE5WWtj8MUVvizUN9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 19, 2021, 03:03:15 PM
^^ Another example: https://goo.gl/maps/tdMQPBnCXszJsdWH6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 19, 2021, 05:35:35 PM
I think in the Wichita example the installing agency made a mistake and forgot to spec the left-turn arrows in the far-left head. You could contact them and ask about it.

In the Wisconsin example I'm not sure, but again you could inquire with the agency involved. I agree the far left head should have a left arrow, not a green ball.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 19, 2021, 08:19:52 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 18, 2021, 11:01:30 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on April 18, 2021, 10:28:52 PM
Interesting signals with two green bulbs near the LA state capitol in Baton Rouge:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Looks like a doghouse without the yellow arrow bulbs. I've never seen one like this before, but I assume there are probably others like this elsewhere?

This was discussed not that long ago here, in February of this year. Link to it: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2576105#msg2576105

I think he was pointing out there being two green orbs on both signal heads? Hard to tell as I can't find any GSV showing the signals as green. That would be quite unusual. The signal shape is common enough but only to display a green arrow and green orbs adjacent to each other, not two green orbs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on April 19, 2021, 10:59:27 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on April 18, 2021, 10:28:52 PM
Interesting signals with two green bulbs near the LA state capitol in Baton Rouge:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Looks like a doghouse without the yellow arrow bulbs. I've never seen one like this before, but I assume there are probably others like this elsewhere?

I see those a lot in Louisiana...or used to.
.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on April 19, 2021, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 19, 2021, 08:19:52 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 18, 2021, 11:01:30 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on April 18, 2021, 10:28:52 PM
Interesting signals with two green bulbs near the LA state capitol in Baton Rouge:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4561258,-91.1899521,3a,75y,294.65h,81.58t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDONOZF2UydnCXcoHh9Dr6w!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

Looks like a doghouse without the yellow arrow bulbs. I've never seen one like this before, but I assume there are probably others like this elsewhere?

This was discussed not that long ago here, in February of this year. Link to it: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2576105#msg2576105 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg2576105#msg2576105)

I think he was pointing out there being two green orbs on both signal heads? Hard to tell as I can't find any GSV showing the signals as green. That would be quite unusual. The signal shape is common enough but only to display a green arrow and green orbs adjacent to each other, not two green orbs.

I swapped the streetview to 2019, and I could see (in order): green left arrow, green ball, green ball, green right arrow.  Not a common setup in my experience, but I have seen this before in Arlington, VA: Sycamore St northbound at Washington Blvd (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8872877,-77.1562287,3a,15y,355.71h,91.38t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s-MvN8FBiNc7WBcgOnnYWMw!2e0!5s20190601T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D-MvN8FBiNc7WBcgOnnYWMw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D20.512238%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).  In that example, the green arrow and ball terminate at the same time.  If that also happens here, it would render the need for yellow arrows moot.  I'm also left wondering if the left green arrow is not lit when the ped signal is active.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:27:26 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 19, 2021, 02:45:11 PM
Question:

Is this allowed?  The overhead signal has a left turn arrow, but the left-side post-mounted signal does not.

https://goo.gl/maps/iE5WWtj8MUVvizUN9

Quote from: SignBridge on April 19, 2021, 05:35:35 PM
I think in the Wichita example the installing agency made a mistake and forgot to spec the left-turn arrows in the far-left head. You could contact them and ask about it.

I'm only going to contact them about it if it isn't allowed.  I'm not familiar with the stoplight setup part of the MUTCD.  So is it out of compliance, or is it OK?

(Until just a year or two ago, there was no left-turn signal there at all, which means an overhead three-aspect signal was recently replaced with an overhead five-aspect signal.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on April 20, 2021, 01:34:02 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 19, 2021, 02:45:11 PM
Question:

Is this allowed?  The overhead signal has a left turn arrow, but the left-side post-mounted signal does not.

https://goo.gl/maps/iE5WWtj8MUVvizUN9

Quote from: SignBridge on April 19, 2021, 05:35:35 PM
I think in the Wichita example the installing agency made a mistake and forgot to spec the left-turn arrows in the far-left head. You could contact them and ask about it.

Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:27:26 AM
I'm only going to contact them about it if it isn't allowed.  I'm not familiar with the stoplight setup part of the MUTCD.  So is it out of compliance, or is it OK?

(Until just a year or two ago, there was no left-turn signal there at all, which means an overhead three-aspect signal was recently replaced with an overhead five-aspect signal.)

In some municipalities here in the East, the traffic signal head mounted over the pedestrian signal is for the benefit of pedestrians (diffential between the countdown and the yellow phase).  The problem with this arrangement is that you have a yellow left arrow phase, so it looks like pedestrian signal might be timed after flipping a green arrow to yellow arrow to green ball.  For vehicles pushing through on a yellow left arrow, they might get "trapped" when pedestrians start to enter the street, but they are still looking at a green ball.  But that's probably not much different than a traffic signal with no protected left turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 20, 2021, 01:41:19 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 20, 2021, 09:27:26 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 19, 2021, 02:45:11 PM
Question:

Is this allowed?  The overhead signal has a left turn arrow, but the left-side post-mounted signal does not.

https://goo.gl/maps/iE5WWtj8MUVvizUN9

Quote from: SignBridge on April 19, 2021, 05:35:35 PM
I think in the Wichita example the installing agency made a mistake and forgot to spec the left-turn arrows in the far-left head. You could contact them and ask about it.

I'm only going to contact them about it if it isn't allowed.  I'm not familiar with the stoplight setup part of the MUTCD.  So is it out of compliance, or is it OK?

(Until just a year or two ago, there was no left-turn signal there at all, which means an overhead three-aspect signal was recently replaced with an overhead five-aspect signal.)

The opposing direction doesn't have a left turn arrow, so this direction will only show a green arrow when the rest of the signals are green anyway.  Is it the perfect setup?  It's ok.  Is it going to cause any confliction?  No.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 20, 2021, 07:59:44 PM
Quite a few signals in Colorado have the left turn arrows overhead only, but have a left-side supplemental signal for the RYG orbs. Good example here (https://goo.gl/maps/U3FEmevSxrbzMHmKA).

As far as I know: having left-side through signals is either a requirement in some jurisdictions (mostly out west and in the upper Midwest), or is done to improve visibility of the through signal. Repeating the turn arrows for a 4-/5-section signal is helpful, but I'm not aware of any requirement to do so.

This signal in Tacoma, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/bDbuRz9kN8xbHkKLA) has a near-side signal for the curve, but the 5-section right-turn signal is only on the far-side. It's annoying as hell, as it's a tight corner and vehicles in the through lanes block the overhead signals until almost the stop line. Which is not good when the right turn green arrow is lit but you can't see it until basically the stop line for the right turn. Grrrr...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 20, 2021, 08:18:09 PM
To answer kphoger's original question, I don't think there is any prohibition in the Federal Manual against having a green-ball to the left of a green left-turn arrow. However New York State, when they had their own Manual years ago, did have a rule prohibiting that practice. And I agree it's a bad configuration, just as in jakeroot's Tacoma example with the right-turn arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on April 21, 2021, 10:31:39 AM
Part of my response on this begs the question on who benefits from the left side post mounted signal.  And the answer may be different under different configurations and in different states.

Where there are only two signal faces and no overheads, the left side mount is a necessary signal and is just as important as the right sidemount (or overhead).  It is there to benefit all who can see it: pedestrians, left turners, thru, and even right turners [if the other signal is blocked or burned out].

Where there are three or more signal faces, the answer is more nuanced.  I have always felt that the left sidemount is meant for left turning traffic, especially for permitted left turns.  It is in the right location for a driver who is making a left turn to be able to see the signal face, opposing traffic, and even pedestrians on the left side all at the same time.  So on a very technical basis, it would be OK for a driver to use that signal face during the permitted left turn phase to keep track of opposing traffic and pedestrians while waiting for a gap to make the left turn.  And it would only be OK if the protected left is leading, not lagging.  This is because the permitted phase that follows a protected phase will go from green-yellow-red and those are the signals that are displayed on the left.  With a lagging left, a green arrow could follow the green orb, yet our driver is so focused on the signal that he is looking at, that he does not even realize that a green arrow has been displayed for his benefit.

It is unlikely that the sidemount is for thru traffic, since there are two other signal faces that are more directly in line with the driver.  They will not be looking at the far left corner.

In some cases, the sidemount is for the benefit of pedestrians.  But in these examples, it would be terrible if a pedestrian relies on them, because green orb and green arrow are at times lit at the same time and a pedestrian should not be crossing during the arrow phase.

So to conclude, the practice does not seem to be illegal, but it is not a good practice.  Yet, there may be some reasons to have it in order to give the permitted left turns another signal face, but IMO it is bad to do that if you don't also copy the left arrow aspects as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on April 26, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
Here's some Eagle Mark IV's with Chinese arrow lenses:

https://www.instagram.com/p/COEgxz8BO-o/?igshid=1dl4okqaazp66

Again, I'm using Instagram because I'm an idiot when it comes to this stuff.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on April 26, 2021, 04:46:23 PM
^^ Those were disallowed starting with the 1971 MUTCD.  Though you found an old one out in the wild.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on April 27, 2021, 09:23:58 AM
Eagle Mark IV's with Chinese Arrow lenses

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8972737,-73.9723427,3a,15y,131.99h,99.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjOj7BG2OJ2SjMMfgokBuFw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjOj7BG2OJ2SjMMfgokBuFw%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D11.836911%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=1
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 30, 2021, 11:05:02 AM
This one on EB Donald Ross Road on the Jupiter- Palm Beach Gardens Town Line in Palm Beach County, FL is actually a great idea.   The signal is not for the rail traffic, but for the intersection beyond it.

I would imagine that being the RR gantry is owned by FEC Railway, that the county or whichever municipality owns the signal had to go through a lot of red tape to get through the FEC brass, as they are one tough company to deal with.   They even prosecute pedestrians who get caught using their ROW as a short cut to show how vicious this company is.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51147809498_199750c2ae_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 30, 2021, 11:10:06 AM
Similar to 29th Street in Wichita (https://goo.gl/maps/GeKPkBeFarwwwAJdA).

Is there a signal at the actual intersection too?  There is in the Wichita example.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on April 30, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2021, 11:05:02 AM
This one on EB Donald Ross Road on the Jupiter- Palm Beach Gardens Town Line in Palm Beach County, FL is actually a great idea.   The signal is not for the rail traffic, but for the intersection beyond it.

I would imagine that being the RR gantry is owned by FEC Railway, that the county or whichever municipality owns the signal had to go through a lot of red tape to get through the FEC brass, as they are one tough company to deal with.   They even prosecute pedestrians who get caught using their ROW as a short cut to show how vicious this company is.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51147809498_199750c2ae_k.jpg)

Notice that the FEC placed its railroad flashing light signals over the center of each lane (at least on these two left lanes).  One of the big issues is that most DOTs required the placement of the traffic signal heads at the same location as the railroad flashing light signals, and it is usually difficult to get the highway department to back down.  So we usually push the traffic signals way back off the railroad right-of-way and let the inspectors do their jobs.  And when I was an inspector, I did have to write up a few traffic signals for being in violation of the visibility regulations.  Fortunately, I never had an issues with the traffic folks on those projects.

I'm not sure if this was ever addressed in the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on May 01, 2021, 11:43:50 PM
this intersection in Blue Ridge, GA has two 4-way traffic lights
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8635474,-84.324919,3a,75y,42.82h,86.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sU4vJcU4fO4pu8Wn7FBowaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 03, 2021, 09:30:50 AM
These are common in Lakeland, FL.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51155409090_c51e5b3dd1_k.jpg)

Signal heads swaying below the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 03, 2021, 03:43:11 PM
I've never been to Florida but that's the first time I've seen FL signals hanging from the mast arms like that. Most examples I know are from either the Northeast or the Mid Atlantic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on May 03, 2021, 03:54:34 PM
I've seen a couple like that in Ohio. Guess they still had the span wire mentality when installing certain mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on May 03, 2021, 07:15:37 PM
In Modesto, CA, there's a signal with a full-time green arrow, to denote that thru traffic does not need to stop, since there is no conflicting movement for thru traffic, only for left turners.  What is unique about these signals is that there is a ball signal above it.  I believe that it may allow for a flashing yellow orb during late night hours.

Even if the rest of the signal is on flash mode, why should the straight thru traffic not continue to have a steady green arrow?  There are no conflicts at all with that movement.

Another interesting thing about this intersection is the lane on the far left.  It allows for a left turn from 15th to Needham to L without conflicting with mainline Needham traffic.  From a google map, this movment is depicted as an alley, but it is actually just the far left side of the original street that is set apart with a narrow median and fence.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6458111,-120.9982368,3a,75y,278.14h,79.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slL4qE63vnseCt6oNFJ1uRA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.645629,-120.9973805,3a,75y,250.07h,72.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHvLgGFz5cmNkQtkCva360A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 03, 2021, 10:52:36 PM
Is it just me, or do the backplates on these signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.939439,-69.9749695,3a,17.7y,311.97h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIGQW1EGoXvhAaGGEf92BZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Topsham, ME look a bit ridiculously large... whole bunch of them on the 196 corridor from I-295 to US 1.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 03, 2021, 10:54:10 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 03, 2021, 10:52:36 PM
Is it just me, or do the backplates on these signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.939439,-69.9749695,3a,17.7y,311.97h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIGQW1EGoXvhAaGGEf92BZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Topsham, ME look a bit ridiculously large... whole bunch of them on the 196 corridor from I-295 to US 1.

No? They look totally normal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 03, 2021, 11:04:05 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 03, 2021, 10:54:10 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 03, 2021, 10:52:36 PM
Is it just me, or do the backplates on these signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.939439,-69.9749695,3a,17.7y,311.97h,91.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIGQW1EGoXvhAaGGEf92BZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Topsham, ME look a bit ridiculously large... whole bunch of them on the 196 corridor from I-295 to US 1.

No? They look totally normal?

If you look at an older GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.9395777,-69.9751855,3a,15y,306.57h,100.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slGf5L52mdcp0f_SFLRAeRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), the older backplates used to be smaller than what they are now (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.9395663,-69.9751875,3a,15y,309.97h,99.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQg-OUrJvShkdt0lwoG6cAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). At this intersection, not all of the approaches have consistant backplate sizes (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.9396021,-69.9759258,3a,21.6y,42.34h,97.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfcDBxXo8ThvNK95vJTioSw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Maybe it's just me, but that is what stood out to me when I was driving to Brunswick today...  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on May 03, 2021, 11:07:39 PM
^ They look slightly larger than the ones normally used in Illinois - I think it's the extra space for the retroreflective strip in addition to the louvers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 05, 2021, 09:08:24 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pMPkD27RGzwzn71w7
Always liked these to denote movements allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on May 05, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2021, 09:08:24 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pMPkD27RGzwzn71w7
Always liked these to denote movements allowed.
Interesting that the signal on the left is also a dual straight/right signal too. Considering the lane layout of Straight|Straight|Straight|Right, it makes more sense to me for the signal on the left as a straight only.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on May 05, 2021, 09:28:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2021, 09:08:24 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pMPkD27RGzwzn71w7
Always liked these to denote movements allowed.

I think that's kind of unnecessary though. Every time there's a left-turn signal for instance, in theory, you could use that setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 05, 2021, 03:22:16 PM
I don't mind redundant displays like that, but only when one is post-mounted and the other is overhead. Having both overhead looks more like it's telling drivers which lanes go which directions. And in the New Jersey example, you definitely don't want drivers thinking that "both" lanes can go straight and right!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 06, 2021, 09:06:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 05, 2021, 03:22:16 PM
I don't mind redundant displays like that, but only when one is post-mounted and the other is overhead. Having both overhead looks more like it's telling drivers which lanes go which directions. And in the New Jersey example, you definitely don't want drivers thinking that "both" lanes can go straight and right!


Good point. NJ used to have a straight and left arrow on two way streets to denote one way streets to the left until protected left turn signals came predominant.  It could also be argued that the left turn was protected due to the green arrows existence then, but it wasn't.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 08, 2021, 11:10:46 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 05, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 05, 2021, 09:08:24 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pMPkD27RGzwzn71w7
Always liked these to denote movements allowed.
Interesting that the signal on the left is also a dual straight/right signal too. Considering the lane layout of Straight|Straight|Straight|Right, it makes more sense to me for the signal on the left as a straight only.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51166250549_1b7f4c2f13_k.jpg)

I believe he meant this set up.  With only the left signal head using a green arrow and the rest using green balls.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 14, 2021, 11:54:49 AM
Knew we had atleast one of these: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4677518,-70.9097247,3a,15y,94.51h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saODy1Gx90o5bdsS32P7RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 14, 2021, 11:54:49 AM
Knew we had atleast one of these: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4677518,-70.9097247,3a,15y,94.51h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saODy1Gx90o5bdsS32P7RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

Is that a flashing green?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 14, 2021, 12:56:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 14, 2021, 11:54:49 AM
Knew we had atleast one of these: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4677518,-70.9097247,3a,15y,94.51h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saODy1Gx90o5bdsS32P7RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

Is that a flashing green?
Looking a bit closer, it may be a 3M "bimodal" signal, which displays a circular green until you get closer to the signal, which then turns into a (thru) arrow. 3M here (https://youtu.be/2Pdh6yk258A?t=147) explains this feature in this promo video from the 1990's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 01:32:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 14, 2021, 12:56:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 14, 2021, 11:54:49 AM
Knew we had atleast one of these: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4677518,-70.9097247,3a,15y,94.51h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saODy1Gx90o5bdsS32P7RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

Is that a flashing green?
Looking a bit closer, it may be a 3M "bimodal" signal, which displays a circular green until you get closer to the signal, which then turns into a (thru) arrow. 3M here (https://youtu.be/2Pdh6yk258A?t=147) explains this feature in this promo video from the 1990's.

Ahh, yes that appears to be exactly what it is.

Thank you for the video link. I have never heard of these before. I don't think any exist in WA, despite numerous 3M signals having been used throughout the 80s (maybe earlier, not much later apart from select scenarios).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 14, 2021, 03:37:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 01:32:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 14, 2021, 12:56:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 12:32:04 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 14, 2021, 11:54:49 AM
Knew we had atleast one of these: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4677518,-70.9097247,3a,15y,94.51h,92.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saODy1Gx90o5bdsS32P7RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3

Is that a flashing green?
Looking a bit closer, it may be a 3M "bimodal" signal, which displays a circular green until you get closer to the signal, which then turns into a (thru) arrow. 3M here (https://youtu.be/2Pdh6yk258A?t=147) explains this feature in this promo video from the 1990's.

Ahh, yes that appears to be exactly what it is.

Thank you for the video link. I have never heard of these before. I don't think any exist in WA, despite numerous 3M signals having been used throughout the 80s (maybe earlier, not much later apart from select scenarios).

Wow!! I've never seen those either despite having seen every other use of 3Ms mentioned in that video. I didn't even know they can do that! I wonder if the McClain models are capable of that?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 15, 2021, 09:41:56 AM
I don't think the McCains can. I'm going to try to fill that light soon


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on May 16, 2021, 12:34:43 AM
Not statewide, but I believe the somewhat major city of Charlottesville, VA still installs new four-section bimodel signals. I personally hate them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on May 16, 2021, 03:13:37 AM
How many intersections can there possibly be where a signal was downgraded all the way to an uncontrolled intersection?

A few years back, I posted about the weird abandoned signal equipment at 6th Ave NW and NW 47th St (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.662699,-122.3639877,3a,51.7y,332.2h,90.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4fHIJn-_NAoGz_TWb_8pVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) in Seattle, which seems to be a rather standard non-arterial intersection (apart from 6th Ave NW being a bit wider than normal) but which apparently had a signal at one point.

Now today, I stumbled on another one, at Carleton Ave S and S Willow St (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5411874,-122.321848,3a,31y,291.72h,80.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFkC2kdbjm1cIpofPGg3fHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en). Both of these streets are quite wide for a non-arterial (especially Carleton, which is wider than some arterials), so presumably they were once more important than they are now, but it still seems weird to think that it would ever have made sense to have a signal here!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 16, 2021, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

NYC occasionally installs them, so do municipalities on Long Island (mainly townships, the counties less so)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on May 16, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 16, 2021, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

NYC occasionally installs them, so do municipalities on Long Island (mainly townships, the counties less so)
The only place I've seen 4 section permissive signals is Ontario, which is why I associate with the province. Never seen them in the states before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ztonyg on May 16, 2021, 02:29:47 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 16, 2021, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

NYC occasionally installs them, so do municipalities on Long Island (mainly townships, the counties less so)

Scottsdale, Arizona uses them for most newer installations. ADOT (Arizona) also uses them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 16, 2021, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: jay8g on May 16, 2021, 03:13:37 AM
How many intersections can there possibly be where a signal was downgraded all the way to an uncontrolled intersection?

A few years back, I posted about the weird abandoned signal equipment at 6th Ave NW and NW 47th St (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.662699,-122.3639877,3a,51.7y,332.2h,90.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4fHIJn-_NAoGz_TWb_8pVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) in Seattle, which seems to be a rather standard non-arterial intersection (apart from 6th Ave NW being a bit wider than normal) but which apparently had a signal at one point.

Now today, I stumbled on another one, at Carleton Ave S and S Willow St (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5411874,-122.321848,3a,31y,291.72h,80.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFkC2kdbjm1cIpofPGg3fHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en). Both of these streets are quite wide for a non-arterial (especially Carleton, which is wider than some arterials), so presumably they were once more important than they are now, but it still seems weird to think that it would ever have made sense to have a signal here!

So clearly the first of those (6th Ave NW and NW 47th St) is a bit more obvious, but great eyes catching the loop detectors. I don't think that's 'regulation' for unsignalized intersections!

Wonder if maybe the plan was to have Carleton be a one-way northbound street, to connect to the I-5 on-ramp? Corson would have been southbound. Of course, there's no evidence of this ever having been the case. Perhaps it was related to the former Boeing Field entrance that used to be at the east end of Willow? I know the intersection with Ellis (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/47.54093658886319/-122.3195170112004/1969/18) was formerly signalized as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on May 16, 2021, 03:01:26 PM
I saw this earlier this morning in Salt Lake City, and I can't say I've ever seen anything like the signal on the left:

(https://i.imgur.com/2qahsQW.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on May 16, 2021, 06:34:28 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 16, 2021, 03:01:26 PM
I saw this earlier this morning in Salt Lake City, and I can't say I've ever seen anything like the signal on the left:

(https://i.imgur.com/2qahsQW.jpg)

I see what they were going for there, but that's probably not the most logical way to show that. I assume that there's a 90-degree right-turn lane, and then the left lane is all other movements. What would be clearer is a 3-section signal on the right solely for 90-degree right turns, and then because everything else is out of one lane, you would need to just use a red ball. You could also use a separate section with the 45-degree arrows, but I'm not sure if that's allowed per-say.

Do you have a GMSV link to that?

EDIT: Found it myself, but it's not updated.
https://goo.gl/maps/6LVBMWg1hJNLxwVT9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on May 16, 2021, 10:29:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 16, 2021, 02:50:08 PM
So clearly the first of those (6th Ave NW and NW 47th St) is a bit more obvious, but great eyes catching the loop detectors. I don't think that's 'regulation' for unsignalized intersections!

Wonder if maybe the plan was to have Carleton be a one-way northbound street, to connect to the I-5 on-ramp? Corson would have been southbound. Of course, there's no evidence of this ever having been the case. Perhaps it was related to the former Boeing Field entrance that used to be at the east end of Willow? I know the intersection with Ellis (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/47.54093658886319/-122.3195170112004/1969/18) was formerly signalized as well.
It would certainly make sense for Willow to have been signalized when it became a Boeing Field entrance -- I hadn't caught that looking through the aerials! Carleton as a major street probably dates back to before the I-5 ramp, though, since it led to the old 8th Ave S South Park Bridge (I can't figure out how to get a nice link like you had, but it's visible in the 1936 aerial image). Clearly, there was a real effort at some point to make Carleton not a through arterial, with all of the traffic circles and the turn restrictions at the I-5 ramp, so that's probably when the signals came out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:05:42 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

I believe it is standard for NHDOT and RIDOT to use 4-section bimodal signals for both left and right turn movements. NHDOT doesn't usually use this as a left turn signal unless it is split phased, as they have started to use FYA as a standard permissive/protected left turn signal head.

MaineDOT (and their contractors) usually install doghouse signal heads for both left and right turn movements, however, they will use the 4-section bimodal signals from time to time. From what I'm told, they use 4-section bimodal signal heads in Maine if load (on the mast arm) or height is an issue

I believe MassDOT is the same way as MaineDOT, but I'm not 100 % sure about that, as I've seen more doghouses than 4-section bimodal signals in MA on both older and newer installations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 17, 2021, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: jay8g on May 16, 2021, 10:29:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 16, 2021, 02:50:08 PM
So clearly the first of those (6th Ave NW and NW 47th St) is a bit more obvious, but great eyes catching the loop detectors. I don't think that's 'regulation' for unsignalized intersections!

Wonder if maybe the plan was to have Carleton be a one-way northbound street, to connect to the I-5 on-ramp? Corson would have been southbound. Of course, there's no evidence of this ever having been the case. Perhaps it was related to the former Boeing Field entrance that used to be at the east end of Willow? I know the intersection with Ellis (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/47.54093658886319/-122.3195170112004/1969/18) was formerly signalized as well.

It would certainly make sense for Willow to have been signalized when it became a Boeing Field entrance -- I hadn't caught that looking through the aerials! Carleton as a major street probably dates back to before the I-5 ramp, though, since it led to the old 8th Ave S South Park Bridge (I can't figure out how to get a nice link like you had, but it's visible in the 1936 aerial image). Clearly, there was a real effort at some point to make Carleton not a through arterial, with all of the traffic circles and the turn restrictions at the I-5 ramp, so that's probably when the signals came out.

For a nice link to Historic Aerials, hit the Twitter button, and copy the link that it generates. Seems to work for me, but make sure the year is correct in the link.

It is interesting that in both of your examples, calming circles are what replaced the signals. I guess I'd be curious to know if the calming circles replaced the signals immediately, or if the calming circles came later. I know they became really common in the '70s and '80s.

I'll sift through my newspaper archives this afternoon to see if I can figure out when those signals were removed. It's surprisingly common to see these things mentioned in newspaper articles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ztonyg on May 17, 2021, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:05:42 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

I believe it is standard for NHDOT and RIDOT to use 4-section bimodal signals for both left and right turn movements. NHDOT doesn't usually use this as a left turn signal unless it is split phased, as they have started to use FYA as a standard permissive/protected left turn signal head.

MaineDOT (and their contractors) usually install doghouse signal heads for both left and right turn movements, however, they will use the 4-section bimodal signals from time to time. From what I'm told, they use 4-section bimodal signal heads in Maine if load (on the mast arm) or height is an issue

I believe MassDOT is the same way as MaineDOT, but I'm not 100 % sure about that, as I've seen more doghouses than 4-section bimodal signals in MA on both older and newer installations.

4-section bimodals are very common in Kansas (especially the Kansas City suburbs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 21, 2021, 01:24:51 PM
Some rather interesting signals at this intersection in Roanoke, VA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/G6GdCd3q36czEvvf7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 21, 2021, 01:45:15 PM
Quote from: plain on May 21, 2021, 01:24:51 PM
Some rather interesting signals at this intersection in Roanoke, VA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/G6GdCd3q36czEvvf7

Reminds me of the signals I see around here in Tacoma. For years, the standard display was 8-8-8, but then 12-8-8; in both cases, arrows were almost always 12 inch. Several examples like yours here (https://goo.gl/maps/1oqdj5cQAoULuXSs5), here (https://goo.gl/maps/BVKLBv422X8F8ZXS9), here (https://goo.gl/maps/qi9447zXUu8voJuEA), and here (https://goo.gl/maps/ekSsahQaba957RUQ7).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 21, 2021, 02:04:48 PM
^^ 1971 MUTCD banned new installations of 8" arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 21, 2021, 03:19:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2021, 01:45:15 PM
Quote from: plain on May 21, 2021, 01:24:51 PM
Some rather interesting signals at this intersection in Roanoke, VA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/G6GdCd3q36czEvvf7

Reminds me of the signals I see around here in Tacoma. For years, the standard display was 8-8-8, but then 12-8-8; in both cases, arrows were almost always 12 inch. Several examples like yours here (https://goo.gl/maps/1oqdj5cQAoULuXSs5), here (https://goo.gl/maps/BVKLBv422X8F8ZXS9), here (https://goo.gl/maps/qi9447zXUu8voJuEA), and here (https://goo.gl/maps/ekSsahQaba957RUQ7).

Great examples. That closest 5-section in the last link is pretty ugly though X-(

There are still a few 12-8-8 and a couple 12-8-8-12 signals left around VA. 12-8-12, however, is very rare, especially after the king of such (Hampton) decided to eliminate all of theirs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Old Dominionite on May 26, 2021, 11:12:05 PM
Quote from: plain on May 21, 2021, 03:19:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 21, 2021, 01:45:15 PM
Quote from: plain on May 21, 2021, 01:24:51 PM
Some rather interesting signals at this intersection in Roanoke, VA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/G6GdCd3q36czEvvf7

Reminds me of the signals I see around here in Tacoma. For years, the standard display was 8-8-8, but then 12-8-8; in both cases, arrows were almost always 12 inch. Several examples like yours here (https://goo.gl/maps/1oqdj5cQAoULuXSs5), here (https://goo.gl/maps/BVKLBv422X8F8ZXS9), here (https://goo.gl/maps/qi9447zXUu8voJuEA), and here (https://goo.gl/maps/ekSsahQaba957RUQ7).

Great examples. That closest 5-section in the last link is pretty ugly though X-(

There are still a few 12-8-8 and a couple 12-8-8-12 signals left around VA. 12-8-12, however, is very rare, especially after the king of such (Hampton) decided to eliminate all of theirs.

Alexandria City had a few prominent 12-8-12 assemblies along Duke St in the West End that lasted until the late 2000s/early 2010s. The cities in Virginia are where you can still hope to find some traffic signal gems. The rest of the state is dominated by VDOT 12-12-12 monotony.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 28, 2021, 11:31:22 PM
Quote from: Big John on May 21, 2021, 02:04:48 PM
^^ 1971 MUTCD banned new installations of 8" arrows.

The traffic lights were completely redone in Downtown Renton in 1973, with 8" arrows. (https://goo.gl/maps/o6sv7Y4PRYjydf2E6)  The few remaining ones are endangered as they're replacing the lights again and making the streets two way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 28, 2021, 11:49:04 PM
Quote from: Big John on May 21, 2021, 02:04:48 PM
^^ 1971 MUTCD banned new installations of 8" arrows.

Nearly everything that has been banned over the years still finds a way into the field.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 29, 2021, 02:21:36 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:05:42 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2021, 11:21:30 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MvvU6VRMNepnJndW9
Noticed that NJ still uses the four section permissive left signal heads.  Are they the only state that uses these, as it seems that everywhere else I have been to uses either five sections or doghouse signal heads?

I believe it is standard for NHDOT and RIDOT to use 4-section bimodal signals for both left and right turn movements. NHDOT doesn't usually use this as a left turn signal unless it is split phased, as they have started to use FYA as a standard permissive/protected left turn signal head.

MaineDOT (and their contractors) usually install doghouse signal heads for both left and right turn movements, however, they will use the 4-section bimodal signals from time to time. From what I'm told, they use 4-section bimodal signal heads in Maine if load (on the mast arm) or height is an issue

I believe MassDOT is the same way as MaineDOT, but I'm not 100 % sure about that, as I've seen more doghouses than 4-section bimodal signals in MA on both older and newer installations.
MassDOT does not use 4 section bi model signals any more. If there is a left turn lane, 4 section FYAs will be used. If not, then a doghouse will be used. Doghouses are the default for right turn signals as well.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: EpicRoadways on June 01, 2021, 07:34:20 PM
Some VERY Missouri-Style traffic lights  (https://goo.gl/maps/Jsp21b9hXW4iXmKi6)in Missouri's neighbor to the north.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on June 06, 2021, 10:52:10 AM
Continuing the lead-lag phasing from the FYA thread to not derail that thread that much
Quote from: johndoe on June 06, 2021, 10:33:26 AM
@jeffandnicole: true, well said
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 06, 2021, 01:07:22 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 06, 2021, 12:44:41 AM
Lead-lag is pretty common with left turns I've seen in the St Louis area, both protected and protected/permissive. If you drive through an area frequently, it's easy to tell which side gets the leading left, and which side gets the lagging left, as it's generally consistent.
In some places near my hometown, like South Portland, also both with protected only and beginning with FYA, on some corridors during the weekday rush hour, the lead-lag alternates depending on the time of day. IIRC, the peak direction gets the leading left and the non-peak direction gets the lagging left, but not sure if that is true or flipped around. Not sure if this kind of time of day lead-lag is common in other cities.

From what I've seen it's more about ensuring the two mainroad straight movements get "green bands" through the whole corridor (don't have to stop of they keep going straight).  So based on the cycle length (which is based on overall volumes) the lefts are really an afterthought, dictated by those straight platoons.  Sometimes the busy left will lead, sometimes lag.  But generally leading one and lagging the other makes those straight movements stop the least (depending on space to next signal, speed limit, etc). So certain times of day it may make most sense for the same movement to lead and later in the day lag.
Kind of wondering, how common is it for SPUI interchanges to operate under a lead-lag configuration for the left turn on-ramps? I mentioned St Louis's as an example above, with a couple of them I've been on a lot when I lived in the area (I-170 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6740556,-90.3625475,3a,72.7y,72.2h,82.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szrEfdtBRsucRJD7IoVLHaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), I-270 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6721049,-90.4486812,3a,65.9y,276.56h,84.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2FvpYgtYdwY2VJEw3mbOjg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), I-70 and MO 94 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7765076,-90.5123707,3a,41.4y,47.23h,88.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szJXyiznOCzjoDwR3XCD-0A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) using lead-lag. If what is said about the straight movements getting more green light time, my examples would make sense, as MO 340 is a busy arterial with lots of through traffic. Though outside of these, along with probably some more in the St Louis area, I haven't seen a SPUI on-ramp left turn using a lead-lag configuration yet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on June 07, 2021, 04:03:40 PM
Lead-lag phasing for left turn on-ramps seems to be quite common, if not the norm, at Utah SPUIs in my experience.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on June 11, 2021, 11:51:18 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 06, 2021, 10:52:10 AM
Continuing the lead-lag phasing from the FYA thread to not derail that thread that much
Quote from: johndoe on June 06, 2021, 10:33:26 AM
@jeffandnicole: true, well said
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 06, 2021, 01:07:22 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 06, 2021, 12:44:41 AM
Lead-lag is pretty common with left turns I've seen in the St Louis area, both protected and protected/permissive. If you drive through an area frequently, it's easy to tell which side gets the leading left, and which side gets the lagging left, as it's generally consistent.
In some places near my hometown, like South Portland, also both with protected only and beginning with FYA, on some corridors during the weekday rush hour, the lead-lag alternates depending on the time of day. IIRC, the peak direction gets the leading left and the non-peak direction gets the lagging left, but not sure if that is true or flipped around. Not sure if this kind of time of day lead-lag is common in other cities.

From what I've seen it's more about ensuring the two mainroad straight movements get "green bands" through the whole corridor (don't have to stop of they keep going straight).  So based on the cycle length (which is based on overall volumes) the lefts are really an afterthought, dictated by those straight platoons.  Sometimes the busy left will lead, sometimes lag.  But generally leading one and lagging the other makes those straight movements stop the least (depending on space to next signal, speed limit, etc). So certain times of day it may make most sense for the same movement to lead and later in the day lag.
Kind of wondering, how common is it for SPUI interchanges to operate under a lead-lag configuration for the left turn on-ramps? I mentioned St Louis's as an example above, with a couple of them I've been on a lot when I lived in the area (I-170 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6740556,-90.3625475,3a,72.7y,72.2h,82.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szrEfdtBRsucRJD7IoVLHaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), I-270 and MO 340 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6721049,-90.4486812,3a,65.9y,276.56h,84.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2FvpYgtYdwY2VJEw3mbOjg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), I-70 and MO 94 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7765076,-90.5123707,3a,41.4y,47.23h,88.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szJXyiznOCzjoDwR3XCD-0A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) using lead-lag. If what is said about the straight movements getting more green light time, my examples would make sense, as MO 340 is a busy arterial with lots of through traffic. Though outside of these, along with probably some more in the St Louis area, I haven't seen a SPUI on-ramp left turn using a lead-lag configuration yet.

I think I've seen it a few times in the Las Vegas area.

When you think about it, it makes sense to have lead-lag at a SPUI if they're trying to get good signal progression through the arterial corridor. The SPUI will operate like any other signalized intersection with respect to phasing (just perhaps with longer yellow & red intervals due to intersection size). So if there's already lead-lag on the corridor, lead-lag at the SPUI is likely to provide the greatest progression overall.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 13, 2021, 11:49:57 PM
Absurdly long visors at a 5 way intersection

https://maps.app.goo.gl/tDBJBuatBrHKHRD67
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on June 14, 2021, 07:00:41 AM
See the visor on the right.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/TBEhEpnsVvP1VwqH6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 14, 2021, 08:07:04 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 13, 2021, 11:49:57 PM
Absurdly long visors at a 5 way intersection

https://maps.app.goo.gl/tDBJBuatBrHKHRD67

Those are angle visors used where roads converge at a fine angle. Their purpose is to prevent drivers on one road from seeing the signals for the other road. And yes they are exceptionally long.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 14, 2021, 08:26:39 PM
Seems like limited-visibility signals (3M? Formerly, Intelites as well) might be an easy way to prevent long visors like those.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 14, 2021, 08:31:24 PM
The visors are probably a lot less expensive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on June 14, 2021, 08:37:41 PM
There are a few others in Region 10 that have the angle visors as well. Louvers are more common though

Quote from: Rothman on June 14, 2021, 07:00:41 AM
See the visor on the right.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/TBEhEpnsVvP1VwqH6

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on June 14, 2021, 09:35:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 14, 2021, 07:00:41 AM
See the visor on the right.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/TBEhEpnsVvP1VwqH6

Good grief I get why they did that, but that is just comical.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 15, 2021, 01:38:42 PM
Saw this oldy driving around the other day
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6625023,-90.294584,3a,38.3y,342.42h,99.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTg0jexje5np_rFglwdGqBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on June 15, 2021, 01:46:55 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 15, 2021, 01:38:42 PM
Saw this oldy driving around the other day
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6625023,-90.294584,3a,38.3y,342.42h,99.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTg0jexje5np_rFglwdGqBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Kind of surprised that it has a red arrow considering its age. You think that it would be completely replaced if they wanted to add in the red arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on June 15, 2021, 05:10:00 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 15, 2021, 01:38:42 PM
Saw this oldy driving around the other day
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6625023,-90.294584,3a,38.3y,342.42h,99.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTg0jexje5np_rFglwdGqBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://goo.gl/maps/k5A1aYDzeFPsUBqb7
From a different view in April 2019, looks like the duct tape let go. Later on someone must have duct taped it back together again or rubberbanded it or something in June.... https://goo.gl/maps/6UX6tEYN2RvsLdddA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 18, 2021, 01:01:05 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8354491,-116.7665519,3a,34.5y,287h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKm_iT2i-3eVJWwERzgTrmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) an interesting light in Alpine, CA, near San Diego.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2021, 11:37:25 AM
All yellow backplates at this intersection in Moses Lake, WA:

https://goo.gl/maps/B9iAy96Tw9dCktjF9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 30, 2021, 09:02:07 PM
The 2009 Manual requires black backplates. However given that they now allow the yellow reflective strip, they might as well allow the backplate to be all yellow. Because if you have a yellow head and a black backplate with yellow trim, the only dark color you will see is a thin strip looking like a box around the head. So why bother?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on June 30, 2021, 09:14:26 PM
Over the past year, several lights in San Diego and Orange counties have gotten yellow reflectors on their backplates (examples here (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8446775,-117.0269538,3a,75y,18.77h,93.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGBsUSQRplkNrsW6VA0w8Dw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/), here (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5160398,-117.7570255,3a,75y,322.51h,90.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKSe4Ss3cGyjyedNHrO2lpw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/), and here (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5204469,-117.6166636,3a,75y,66.88h,92.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZP61U3nvL1t9A77CsRcMPQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/)). Before 2020, these reflectors were few and far between (this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7292191,-117.1909826,3a,75y,303.78h,83.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdyXyqBsa-OtdJhnP70ZNjw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US/) one was installed in 2016), but they've grown exponentially in the past year. I don't know if Caltrans or other agencies are responsible, but it's certainly nice to see them spreading.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on June 30, 2021, 09:30:01 PM
Put me in the minority here, but I don't like the look of yellow backplates, and prefer black ones or none at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 30, 2021, 09:52:16 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 18, 2021, 01:01:05 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8354491,-116.7665519,3a,34.5y,287h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKm_iT2i-3eVJWwERzgTrmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) an interesting light in Alpine, CA, near San Diego.

I totally get what they did there. Still rubs me the wrong way  :-/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on June 30, 2021, 09:56:16 PM
Quote from: plain on June 30, 2021, 09:52:16 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 18, 2021, 01:01:05 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8354491,-116.7665519,3a,34.5y,287h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKm_iT2i-3eVJWwERzgTrmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) an interesting light in Alpine, CA, near San Diego.

I totally get what they did there. Still rubs me the wrong way  :-/
Looks like to me they were too lazy to install a third signal for the slight left, and instead decided to place it on top of the full left turn to save space or resources.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2021, 10:06:41 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 30, 2021, 09:56:16 PM
Quote from: plain on June 30, 2021, 09:52:16 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 18, 2021, 01:01:05 PM
Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8354491,-116.7665519,3a,34.5y,287h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKm_iT2i-3eVJWwERzgTrmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) an interesting light in Alpine, CA, near San Diego.

I totally get what they did there. Still rubs me the wrong way  :-/
Looks like to me they were too lazy to install a third signal for the slight left, and instead decided to place it on top of the full left turn to save space or resources.

Not quite. The slight left and full left occur from the same lane, so only one signal would be permitted.

They are simply going above-and-beyond installing the extra slight-left arrows for both the red and green phase. Normally only the green phase has the extra arrows, similar to this signal in Burien, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/rozWrPgimjfCBEfE8), or this signal in Shorelines, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/nbmdtNaVfpeRBsz7A).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2021, 10:14:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 30, 2021, 09:02:07 PM
The 2009 Manual requires black backplates. However given that they now allow the yellow reflective strip, they might as well allow the backplate to be all yellow. Because if you have a yellow head and a black backplate with yellow trim, the only dark color you will see is a thin strip looking like a box around the head. So why bother?

I would have to agree. Maintaining the dull-black requirement seems contrary to the goal of improving signal recognition. All black signals certainly fit into the surrounding environment a bit better, but that's also the issue. Apparently.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 03, 2021, 02:32:49 AM
I may have found another example of an arrow facing the wrong way:

Pine St @ Clayton Rd, Concord, CA (https://goo.gl/maps/YioYcaJBKphDT9997)

The old signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JvaNbPQs2M6VKu2x6) for southbound Pine had three identical signals on the far side of the intersection (far left + overhead + far right) showing a green orb & green left arrow. This was recently replaced with a near-identical setup, apart from a right-facing green arrow for the far-right signal.

No big deal, right? Well, the right turn actually proceeds through a slip lane, with both a yield sign and yield markings (as seen in the GSV link). So the signal would be conflicting with that message. Even more evidence is that there is only a single right-facing green arrow; California requires at least two arrows for any turn movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on July 08, 2021, 11:37:32 PM
well... this is about traffic signals so here i go..

its about emergency vehicles pre-empting them. the intersection i work most frequently at has this mechanism as there is a fire station just down one of the streets. when the fire engine approaches, the light facing it will turn green, with a green left arrow. a short time later, when the preemption is cleared, the signal seems to go into an undefined state that i can't figure out. the light that was facing the fire engine will turn red, then the opposite side gets a green with arrow. then, the first side gets green and arrow again. meanwhile, people on the cross street (which is the main drag actually) get tiny hard poops from waiting for the preemption to un-mungle the light.
what's actually supposed to happen on these? i would have thought the light would return to whatever phase it was in when the preemption occurred, but it seems like this one resets to some default state or initial state.
for the locals, it's harmony and college in fort collins.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 09, 2021, 09:22:16 AM
I don't know what CO uses for controller type or cabinet type, but this explanation will assume NEMA TS1/2 controllers/cabinets, maybe a few ATC controllers/cabinets. Generally in a NEMA controller, once preemption ends... there is usually a preemption clearance in the form of exit phases before the controller resumes normal operation. However, some controllers may continue the last phase time in the background or resume whatever the last phase was. Here is an explanation from plans from the MaineDOT BUILD Grant...

Quote from: MaineDOT BUILD Grant, WIN 024301.00
IN RESPONSE TO A PRE-EMPTION SIGNAL RECEIVED AT AN INTERSECTION BY AN OPTICAL DETECTOR AND/OR RSU, THE CONTROLLER SHALL HOLD OR ADVANCE TO AND HOLD THE EMERGENCY ACTIVE PHASE GREEN FOR A MINIMUM OF 10 SECONDS OR UNTIL THE PRE-EMPTION SIGNAL CEASES. THE CONTROLLER SHALL THEN TIME PRE-EMPTION PHASE CLEARANCE (5.0 SECONDS YELLOW AND 2.5 SECONDS ALL RED) AND SERVICE SUBSEQUENT EMERGENCY ACTIVE PHASES AS NECESSARY. AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PRE-EMPTION CYCLE, THE CONTROLLER SHALL TIME THE PRE-EMPTION CLEARANCE AND RESUME NORMAL SIGNAL OPERATION.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 09, 2021, 01:04:54 PM
I spotted this in Gainesville (TX) last week.  Seems like a bad idea...

(https://i.imgur.com/6LNaEjG.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 09, 2021, 01:11:18 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 09, 2021, 01:04:54 PM
I spotted this in Gainesville (TX) last week.  Seems like a bad idea...

[img snipped]
There was one similar to that (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7914247,-90.5760173,3a,41.3y,279.54h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smRe-9-PAQ4G6UV370S_koA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in my old hometown of St Charles. Since the middle is an option lane, and there's a protected left turn signal, you have left turn cars block that lane, and people going straight have to change over to the right lane, which defeats the purpose of an option lane. Thankfully, it got replaced  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7914868,-90.5760074,3a,24.4y,267.89h,86.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqrB6VJLyz9FQih0ioEJeVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)after I moved out with two lanes for each direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 11, 2021, 09:32:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 09, 2021, 01:11:18 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 09, 2021, 01:04:54 PM
I spotted this in Gainesville (TX) last week.  Seems like a bad idea...

[img snipped]
There was one similar to that (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7914247,-90.5760173,3a,41.3y,279.54h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smRe-9-PAQ4G6UV370S_koA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in my old hometown of St Charles. Since the middle is an option lane, and there's a protected left turn signal, you have left turn cars block that lane, and people going straight have to change over to the right lane, which defeats the purpose of an option lane. Thankfully, it got replaced  (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7914868,-90.5760074,3a,24.4y,267.89h,86.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqrB6VJLyz9FQih0ioEJeVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)after I moved out with two lanes for each direction.

The option lane left turn with a protected only display is sometimes the only feasible option.  What do you do if you have both a heavy left turn movement and a heavy straight movement, where both movements deserve two lanes, but you only have three lanes total to work with?  The option lane may be your only feasible solution.  Traffic would back up too much if you have one left and two straight or two left and one straight.  And it is even worse when the left turn is busy in the morning rush and the straight is busier in the afternoon rush.  The middle lane can address both movements.

The question then becomes what is the best way to operate the signals governing the option lane?  The usual default is split phasing, but that usually causes considerable delay, so if it can be avoided -- the better.  The next choice is to allow permissive turning from both lanes.  This tends to work well only when there is a lagging left and opposing lefts are prohibited.  So then the final choice is to have what is presented above, protected only left in the option lane.  These are usually lagging lefts.

Is this always a bad move?  Not necessarily.  It is true that someone turing left from the middle lane will encourage traffic in the middle lane to shift over to the right, but when traffic is very heavy, someone would instaed just wait.  The guy in front wanting to turn left is blocking me, but when he gets a green arrow to go left, I can then continue behind him.  maybe waiting for the end of the signal phase would overall be less time then trying to squeeze into the right lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 11, 2021, 09:35:03 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 11, 2021, 09:32:19 PM
So then the final choice is to have what is presented above, protected only left in the option lane.  These are usually lagging lefts.
My example was a leading left if that changes anything.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tolbs17 on July 11, 2021, 10:14:45 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.418144,-77.9354909,3a,62.9y,216.86h,96.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGKowGsIEev5PLF9ldy_v6w!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Why is there no green arrow here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 11, 2021, 10:27:12 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on July 11, 2021, 10:14:45 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.418144,-77.9354909,3a,62.9y,216.86h,96.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGKowGsIEev5PLF9ldy_v6w!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Why is there no green arrow here.
Permissive only FYA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 11, 2021, 11:01:08 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 11, 2021, 10:27:12 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on July 11, 2021, 10:14:45 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.418144,-77.9354909,3a,62.9y,216.86h,96.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGKowGsIEev5PLF9ldy_v6w!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Why is there no green arrow here.
Permissive only FYA

I was thinking it was actually a bi-modal arrow (seen elsewhere in NC) but after taking a close look at it, it looks too skinny for that. I believe your correct.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: FreewayDan on July 11, 2021, 11:33:24 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 09, 2021, 01:04:54 PM
I spotted this in Gainesville (TX) last week.  Seems like a bad idea...

(https://i.imgur.com/6LNaEjG.jpg)

Another "bad idea" is along northbound Post Oak Boulevard at I-610 West Loop North in uptown Houston:
https://goo.gl/maps/G3k8uQUgUfpc9Yp1A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 12, 2021, 09:48:26 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 11, 2021, 09:35:03 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 11, 2021, 09:32:19 PM
So then the final choice is to have what is presented above, protected only left in the option lane.  These are usually lagging lefts.
My example was a leading left if that changes anything.

It would make it worse for straight drivers in the option lane, since they know that if a left turner is ahead, there is no way that they are going to go until the next full signal cycle.

This type of signalization is never a great option, but it may be the only feasible option because widening the street is impractical and both straight and left need two lanes to handle demand.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 12, 2021, 01:39:58 PM
One reasonable way to improve the intersection (Mexico at Jungermann, St Charles, MO) is a dynamic lane-use sign. The middle lane is either straight or left depending on the time of day. There would be four signals: one far left turn signal, an overhead left turn signal, and overhead through signal, and a right-side through signal.

During the straight-only time of day, you could even set the left turn to use permissive phasing. Then protected-only during the double-left time of day. During overnight hours, you might even be able to experiment with a permissive double left.

If the option lane is a must-keep, I would also advise lagging phasing. This would reduce the number of drivers trying to make sudden lane changes to pass a waiting vehicle, and might improve upon the possibly-risky setup they have here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 12, 2021, 01:43:05 PM
I looked at Hong Kong's traffic signals on GSV for the past few minutes, and combined with what I saw in person on various trips there, found ZERO overhead traffic signals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not with having side signals only, though it looks like that it's possible to miss a signal, combined with all the buildings around in a city like HK. On the flipside, there's no overhead clutter.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 12, 2021, 01:48:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 12, 2021, 01:39:58 PM
One reasonable way to improve the intersection (Mexico at Jungermann, St Charles, MO) is a dynamic lane-use sign. The middle lane is either straight or left depending on the time of day. There would be four signals: one far left turn signal, an overhead left turn signal, and overhead through signal, and a right-side through signal.

During the straight-only time of day, you could even set the left turn to use permissive phasing. Then protected-only during the double-left time of day. During overnight hours, you might even be able to experiment with a permissive double left.

If the option lane is a must-keep, I would also advise lagging phasing. This would reduce the number of drivers trying to make sudden lane changes to pass a waiting vehicle, and might improve upon the possibly-risky setup they have here.
It got improved (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7914868,-90.5760074,3a,46.4y,267.99h,80.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqrB6VJLyz9FQih0ioEJeVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) by widening the road to allow for 2 separate left turn and straight lanes each already, though what you have seem like a good solution if the option lane was still there. Another option I could think of is to have separate phases for each direction on Mexico Rd with lights for all directions green at the same time. This is done at the Muegge Rd and Mexico Rd intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7908482,-90.565655,3a,43.2y,5.58h,86.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgfKUfh7EHiYZT3EKcfG6jQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) just to the east already, which also have a option left/straight lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 12, 2021, 02:36:03 PM
For what it's worth, my Gainesville example had second-lane left turns added as an option.  The middle lane used to be straight-only.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on July 13, 2021, 10:40:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 12, 2021, 01:43:05 PM
I looked at Hong Kong's traffic signals on GSV for the past few minutes, and combined with what I saw in person on various trips there, found ZERO overhead traffic signals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not with having side signals only, though it looks like that it's possible to miss a signal, combined with all the buildings around in a city like HK. On the flipside, there's no overhead clutter.

Hong Kong follows UK practice and so mast arms are fairly uncommon. There are a few examples though. Here, for example...

Nathan Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/LxaVbu8SHF4i7MRg6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 13, 2021, 11:39:42 AM
I see San Francisco is installing straight mast arms along Van Ness Avenue instead of usual California curved arms as part of that busway project. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 13, 2021, 12:46:24 PM
Quote from: Mr Kite on July 13, 2021, 10:40:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 12, 2021, 01:43:05 PM
I looked at Hong Kong's traffic signals on GSV for the past few minutes, and combined with what I saw in person on various trips there, found ZERO overhead traffic signals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not with having side signals only, though it looks like that it's possible to miss a signal, combined with all the buildings around in a city like HK. On the flipside, there's no overhead clutter.

Hong Kong follows UK practice and so mast arms are fairly uncommon. There are a few examples though. Here, for example...

Nathan Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/LxaVbu8SHF4i7MRg6

I would also like to extend on the comment and highlight that mainland China is arguably worse in providing only overhead signals. Hong Kong-style has several post mounted signals at several different locations to the point where at least one is usually visible. Tall trucks and buses easily block the overhead signals on the mainland, as they do in many US states as well.

Ultimately, the best practice is likely that Nathan Rd example above: several signals at various corners of the intersection, and at least one overhead signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 13, 2021, 01:09:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2021, 12:46:24 PM
Quote from: Mr Kite on July 13, 2021, 10:40:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 12, 2021, 01:43:05 PM
I looked at Hong Kong's traffic signals on GSV for the past few minutes, and combined with what I saw in person on various trips there, found ZERO overhead traffic signals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not with having side signals only, though it looks like that it's possible to miss a signal, combined with all the buildings around in a city like HK. On the flipside, there's no overhead clutter.

Hong Kong follows UK practice and so mast arms are fairly uncommon. There are a few examples though. Here, for example...

Nathan Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/LxaVbu8SHF4i7MRg6

I would also like to extend on the comment and highlight that mainland China is arguably worse in providing only overhead signals. Hong Kong-style has several post mounted signals at several different locations to the point where at least one is usually visible. Tall trucks and buses easily block the overhead signals on the mainland, as they do in many US states as well.

Ultimately, the best practice is likely that Nathan Rd example above: several signals at various corners of the intersection, and at least one overhead signal.
That's an issue in a lot of US states that uses span wire signals too. Like here in Ohio, side signals are rare, especially in span wire installations.

And for China, although most cities don't do post mounted signals, something I'll give credit to Fuzhou for is installing traffic signals on the back side of mast arms (https://maps.baidu.com/@13287837.449999997,2989094.41,21z,87t,-22.36h#panoid=0900210012200828134141776HL&panotype=street&heading=122.09&pitch=1.27&l=21&tn=B_NORMAL_MAP&sc=0&newmap=1&shareurl=1&pid=0900210012200828134141776HL), so at least there's a second traffic signal for each direction in case the one in the front gets blocked by tall vehicles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on July 13, 2021, 03:14:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 13, 2021, 12:46:24 PMI would also like to extend on the comment and highlight that mainland China is arguably worse in providing only overhead signals. Hong Kong-style has several post mounted signals at several different locations to the point where at least one is usually visible. Tall trucks and buses easily block the overhead signals on the mainland, as they do in many US states as well.

Ultimately, the best practice is likely that Nathan Rd example above: several signals at various corners of the intersection, and at least one overhead signal.

I would say that California comes pretty close to best practice when there's a signal at the stop line. Sacramento is one municipality which always puts a signal at the line. Basically, a signal at the line, one on each far corner and one overhead on the far side.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:37:51 PM
I agree with Mr Kite. California's standard signal practices are the best. A reasonable combination of side-post mounts and overheads makes for good signal visibility all around.  I too like the practice of having a near-right corner supplemental head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 13, 2021, 09:49:29 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:37:51 PM
I agree with Mr Kite. California's standard signal practices are the best. A reasonable combination of side-post mounts and overheads makes for good signal visibility all around.  I too like the practice of having a near-right corner supplemental head.
Almost all Wisconsin's signals have those too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:54:06 PM
Big John, I know that was standard on Wisconsin's older signals. Is it still their standard in new installations?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 13, 2021, 09:59:36 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2021, 09:54:06 PM
Big John, I know that was standard on Wisconsin's older signals. Is it still their standard in new installations?
Newer installations have more overhead signals, but they mostly have the supplemental signals including the near right (except for Eau Claire).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 13, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
With side mount signals in other Asian countries, it's something that Japan lacks too. Signal visibility isn't the best here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6668091,139.7704633,3a,70.4y,141.09h,88.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq8eV_TC0-_5AeTKS9aCZ2w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) imo (side question, any reason why Japan crams all lane movements onto one traffic signal, instead of using multiple?)
Taiwan (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.0408737,121.5717182,3a,75y,87.33h,89.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-6NgY6RRfYfyEbF0WZ4VaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) have a similar issue as Japan, though they place the front overhead over the lanes that need them, instead of the opposite side unlike my Fuzhou example above and Japan. Also, is this one a protected or permissive left turn?
I think Singapore  (https://www.google.com/maps/@1.3615005,103.8927777,3a,62.9y,84.21h,86.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sonEroGV1Fck0Us--wiL69Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)have the best signal layout of the Asian countries I've been too, with qualities Jakeroot described above. No overhead in this SPUI interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@1.3227284,103.8912612,3a,75y,300.84h,84.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPamMUM7GmN9tg-AM1q2tSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2021, 12:40:39 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51314006384/in/photostream
What is the X for in front of the future signal head lenses?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 01:23:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2021, 12:40:39 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51314006384/in/photostream
What is the X for in front of the future signal head lenses?

It's just to indicate that it's not in service. It's an extra step above bagging the signals, which from a distance can sometimes make the signals appear as though they've just lost power. Only until you're close can you see the bags.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tolbs17 on July 17, 2021, 06:13:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 01:23:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2021, 12:40:39 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51314006384/in/photostream
What is the X for in front of the future signal head lenses?

It's just to indicate that it's not in service. It's an extra step above bagging the signals, which from a distance can sometimes make the signals appear as though they've just lost power. Only until you're close can you see the bags.
Never seen those here. I see the signals wrapped up normally or the pedestrian one saying "OUT OF SERVICE".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on July 17, 2021, 06:13:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 01:23:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2021, 12:40:39 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51314006384/in/photostream
What is the X for in front of the future signal head lenses?

It's just to indicate that it's not in service. It's an extra step above bagging the signals, which from a distance can sometimes make the signals appear as though they've just lost power. Only until you're close can you see the bags.

Never seen those here. I see the signals wrapped up normally or the pedestrian one saying "OUT OF SERVICE".

As I stated, it's an extra step. I've only seen it in California. Pretty much everywhere either gift wraps each signal face, or the entire signal head. The "X" design seems unique to California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 18, 2021, 07:34:27 AM
I like the little two sections for transit vehicles here that not only California does but other cities in other states.



https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51316663168_2fa6f82280_k.jpg (https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51316663168_2fa6f82280_k.jpg)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51316663168_2fa6f82280_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 18, 2021, 06:26:18 PM
Found a 4-section "green ball" protected-permissive signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0419779,-94.5825152,3a,20.1y,75.1h,91.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO4a6id9cnVCxluZJXIshrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in KC (check other views for the green ball). Not sure how common this is, as I've only seen doghouses (or 5-sections if placed on a vertical pole) in Missouri before. Also, which section would the yellow arrow use?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 18, 2021, 07:22:12 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 18, 2021, 06:26:18 PM
Found a 4-section "green ball" protected-permissive signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0419779,-94.5825152,3a,20.1y,75.1h,91.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO4a6id9cnVCxluZJXIshrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in KC (check other views for the green ball). Not sure how common this is, as I've only seen doghouses (or 5-sections if placed on a vertical pole) in Missouri before. Also, which section would the yellow arrow use?
Could it be a bi-modal arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on July 18, 2021, 07:30:55 PM
It doesn't seem to be. Moving about on Streetview shows the arrow turned off during the main green. The arrow shows during the red in a "back-to-back" left turn stage with the opposite flow. How it terminates the protected mode is not clear.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on July 19, 2021, 01:50:21 AM
What's this all about?..

1 N Providence Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/s59AJSnjsPTY3NZ97
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 19, 2021, 02:55:53 PM
Quote from: Mr Kite on July 19, 2021, 01:50:21 AM
What's this all about?..

1 N Providence Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/s59AJSnjsPTY3NZ97
Or this similar signal in De Pere WI: https://goo.gl/maps/y6csZwTD26Z3Ucem9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: HTM Duke on July 19, 2021, 09:39:13 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 18, 2021, 07:22:12 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 18, 2021, 06:26:18 PM
Found a 4-section "green ball" protected-permissive signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0419779,-94.5825152,3a,20.1y,75.1h,91.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO4a6id9cnVCxluZJXIshrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in KC (check other views for the green ball). Not sure how common this is, as I've only seen doghouses (or 5-sections if placed on a vertical pole) in Missouri before. Also, which section would the yellow arrow use?
Could it be a bi-modal arrow?
From what I saw on Streetview, it is.
https://goo.gl/maps/3urCFjBKpxnzDyBM8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 20, 2021, 09:36:11 AM
Quote from: Big John on July 19, 2021, 02:55:53 PM
Quote from: Mr Kite on July 19, 2021, 01:50:21 AM
What's this all about?..

1 N Providence Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/s59AJSnjsPTY3NZ97
Or this similar signal in De Pere WI: https://goo.gl/maps/y6csZwTD26Z3Ucem9

Straight arrows seem to be unnecessary in either instance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 20, 2021, 02:32:01 PM
How common is this little guy (https://goo.gl/maps/CDCuucbzLHbVoter6)?
(Lawrence @ Mannheim, near O'Hare)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on July 20, 2021, 02:42:10 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 20, 2021, 02:32:01 PM
How common is this little guy (https://goo.gl/maps/CDCuucbzLHbVoter6)?
(Lawrence @ Mannheim, near O'Hare)

There are a few like that in the area. Up on IL-176 near I-94 you have this intersection:
https://goo.gl/maps/6xQpmQiW7srxMkz46
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 20, 2021, 02:45:53 PM
^^ Eternal green lights thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17664.0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 20, 2021, 02:46:35 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 20, 2021, 02:32:01 PM
How common is this little guy (https://goo.gl/maps/CDCuucbzLHbVoter6)?
(Lawrence @ Mannheim, near O'Hare)
That type of right turn looks similar to one featured in Cra_shIt's videos.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 20, 2021, 06:20:50 PM
I came across this signal today with a strobe in the red light. (The left signal head has the strobe.)

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0687267,-77.5291318,3a,15y,271.92h,100.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr2nwLsRYkw2ldYlgrZNmZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

I didn't think they made those anymore.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 20, 2021, 06:38:50 PM
Quote from: steviep24 link=topic=5944.msg2639011#msg2639011 date=1626819650

I didn't think they made those anymore.
/quote] They don't after they were banned in MUTCD
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on July 20, 2021, 06:51:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on July 17, 2021, 06:13:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2021, 01:23:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2021, 12:40:39 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51314006384/in/photostream
What is the X for in front of the future signal head lenses?

It's just to indicate that it's not in service. It's an extra step above bagging the signals, which from a distance can sometimes make the signals appear as though they've just lost power. Only until you're close can you see the bags.

Never seen those here. I see the signals wrapped up normally or the pedestrian one saying "OUT OF SERVICE".

As I stated, it's an extra step. I've only seen it in California. Pretty much everywhere either gift wraps each signal face, or the entire signal head. The "X" design seems unique to California.

In OK, standard practice seems to be to turn the signals away from the roadway until they're ready for prime time. Usually they're just turned 45°, but I've also seen them pointed up in the air, down at the ground, etc.

Here's one that was both turned and bagged:
(https://i.imgur.com/siw6aa9.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 20, 2021, 09:08:23 PM
The Federal Manual does prohibit strobes in traffic signals. But New York State years ago (when they had their own Manual) had a provision specifically allowing strobe lights to be used in signal heads. At least one still exists near my house on NY-106 and I know of at least one Nassau County DPW installation that has them also.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 26, 2021, 01:08:36 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.725559,-74.3817718,3a,75y,30.58h,94.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVuZJUwS481n1DOJbUT2vwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I was noticing that Union County, NJ has a unique way of mounting the mast arm to its poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 26, 2021, 06:20:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2021, 01:08:36 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.725559,-74.3817718,3a,75y,30.58h,94.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVuZJUwS481n1DOJbUT2vwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I was noticing that Union County, NJ has a unique way of mounting the mast arm to its poles.

Kinda reminds me of a few signals along Parham Rd in Henrico County, VA. In this case it's the streetlight's arm and the arm is through the pole. I've always found these weird.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Uqj9c92TNKiQQg89
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 28, 2021, 09:44:49 AM
Quote from: plain on July 26, 2021, 06:20:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2021, 01:08:36 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.725559,-74.3817718,3a,75y,30.58h,94.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVuZJUwS481n1DOJbUT2vwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I was noticing that Union County, NJ has a unique way of mounting the mast arm to its poles.

Kinda reminds me of a few signals along Parham Rd in Henrico County, VA. In this case it's the streetlight's arm and the arm is through the pole. I've always found these weird.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Uqj9c92TNKiQQg89

It appears to be an aesthetic choice in both instances. The first is very unique in that the mast arm basically sits atop the pole, which I can't say I've ever seen something like that before.

The second, the streetlight's arm doesn't seem to go through the pole, but it's a unique attachment feature of the pole for the streetlight arm. You can see the streetlight slips on over a diagonal stub when you get really close up (https://goo.gl/maps/JrGhSXZCpAno3XgdA) on one of the streetlight arms, as well as view where it looks like the streetlight arm going through when looking at another mast at that same intersection without a streetlight on it (https://goo.gl/maps/5Hp9hwsZnS8FBbzm8).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on July 28, 2021, 10:27:56 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 20, 2021, 09:08:23 PM
The Federal Manual does prohibit strobes in traffic signals. But New York State years ago (when they had their own Manual) had a provision specifically allowing strobe lights to be used in signal heads. At least one still exists near my house on NY-106 and I know of at least one Nassau County DPW installation that has them also.

Suffolk County still uses them, even on modern, updated intersections with updated signals too. Specifically on Nicolls Rd
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on July 28, 2021, 12:25:22 PM
Horizontal supplemental signal on the mast arm in Point Comfort, TX:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6769421,-96.5528199,3a,17y,36.29h,94.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZXaN0yirNrrbd2qZCmL0zg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Recent imagery indicates this no longer exists.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 12:31:06 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on July 28, 2021, 12:25:22 PM
Horizontal supplemental signal on the mast arm in Point Comfort, TX:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6769421,-96.5528199,3a,17y,36.29h,94.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZXaN0yirNrrbd2qZCmL0zg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Recent imagery indicates this no longer exists.
I see horizontal pole-mounted transit signals in Los Angeles. Sort of weird seeing it like that, as I'm used to vertical signals on poles, even in places with horizontal overheads.

Speaking of transit signals in the US, any reason why the lines are all colored white, instead of like red for the horizontal line, yellow for the diagonal line, and green for the vertical line?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 28, 2021, 12:55:43 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 12:31:06 PM
Speaking of transit signals in the US, any reason why the lines are all colored white, instead of like red for the horizontal line, yellow for the diagonal line, and green for the vertical line?

Part of the reasons is because not every place uses three-face transit signals. Here in Washington, the norm is two faces. The bottom lens flashes before the top lens ("stop") goes solid.

The other reason, and likely the more common reason, is to completely eliminate any chance of confusion. On the flip side, they could have conceivably used reverse coloring, like railway signals. Still, it's probably not worth the confusion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 28, 2021, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 28, 2021, 12:55:43 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 12:31:06 PM
Speaking of transit signals in the US, any reason why the lines are all colored white, instead of like red for the horizontal line, yellow for the diagonal line, and green for the vertical line?

Part of the reasons is because not every place uses three-face transit signals. Here in Washington, the norm is two faces. The bottom lens flashes before the top lens ("stop") goes solid.

The other reason, and likely the more common reason, is to completely eliminate any chance of confusion. On the flip side, they could have conceivably used reverse coloring, like railway signals. Still, it's probably not worth the confusion.
Exactly what I was going to say. Primary reason is likely to eliminate potential confusion between transit signals and signals heads for regular motorists.

And I would hazard the guess that the transit signal symbols were used because those were reliable-enough symbols that were easily discernable based on older technology when those types of transit signals were first implimented. Nowadays, we have things like RYG bicycles symbols in bike-only signals, but I imagine it's still probably a challenge to fit a recognizable bus or light rail symbol within a rounded 12" signal face.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on July 29, 2021, 10:55:54 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 28, 2021, 12:31:06 PM
Speaking of transit signals in the US, any reason why the lines are all colored white, instead of like red for the horizontal line, yellow for the diagonal line, and green for the vertical line?

Quote from: jakeroot on July 28, 2021, 12:55:43 PM
Part of the reasons is because not every place uses three-face transit signals. Here in Washington, the norm is two faces. The bottom lens flashes before the top lens ("stop") goes solid.

The other reason, and likely the more common reason, is to completely eliminate any chance of confusion. On the flip side, they could have conceivably used reverse coloring, like railway signals. Still, it's probably not worth the confusion.

Quote from: jakeroot on July 28, 2021, 12:55:43 PM
The other reason, and likely the more common reason, is to completely eliminate any chance of confusion.

That is absolutely correct.  Since LRVs and streetcars are supposed to operate prepared to stop at highway traffic signals, the primary issue is to avoid confusion for automobile traffic.  There's also the issue about the focal length of the lenses when rail traffic can approach at certain speeds, but that is a lesser issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on July 30, 2021, 05:54:05 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 28, 2021, 09:44:49 AM
Quote from: plain on July 26, 2021, 06:20:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 26, 2021, 01:08:36 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.725559,-74.3817718,3a,75y,30.58h,94.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVuZJUwS481n1DOJbUT2vwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I was noticing that Union County, NJ has a unique way of mounting the mast arm to its poles.

Kinda reminds me of a few signals along Parham Rd in Henrico County, VA. In this case it's the streetlight's arm and the arm is through the pole. I've always found these weird.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Uqj9c92TNKiQQg89

It appears to be an aesthetic choice in both instances. The first is very unique in that the mast arm basically sits atop the pole, which I can't say I've ever seen something like that before.

The second, the streetlight's arm doesn't seem to go through the pole, but it's a unique attachment feature of the pole for the streetlight arm. You can see the streetlight slips on over a diagonal stub when you get really close up (https://goo.gl/maps/JrGhSXZCpAno3XgdA) on one of the streetlight arms, as well as view where it looks like the streetlight arm going through when looking at another mast at that same intersection without a streetlight on it (https://goo.gl/maps/5Hp9hwsZnS8FBbzm8).

Another example https://goo.gl/maps/W4kZAfWS76H8o2e7A (https://goo.gl/maps/W4kZAfWS76H8o2e7A)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 30, 2021, 07:23:35 PM
Curious what people know about this Econolite pedestrian signal I found in Seattle the other day.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWnx79t (there is a video in here showing operation including countdown timer)

I've never seen another one like it. It's very square with short visors around the edge.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342818465_47e774ff67_k.jpg)
Southwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdZnb2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342544439_e955c54978_k.jpg)
Northwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdXXHr) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on August 01, 2021, 02:24:52 AM
Yeah, those signals are certainly odd! It appears that they once had symbolic incandescent modules (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6339543,-122.3256532,3a,15y,203.55h,89.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1YvsV0nUAHRpSi6QQYiSWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), which are also quite unusual for Seattle (they typically used neon modules (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6322089,-122.3263282,3a,15y,82.45h,89.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_vAghKduOE9tLxSpmR9Cjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) until switching over to LEDs).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 01, 2021, 05:26:02 PM
Quote from: jay8g on August 01, 2021, 02:24:52 AM
Yeah, those signals are certainly odd! It appears that they once had symbolic incandescent modules (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6339543,-122.3256532,3a,15y,203.55h,89.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1YvsV0nUAHRpSi6QQYiSWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), which are also quite unusual for Seattle (they typically used neon modules (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6322089,-122.3263282,3a,15y,82.45h,89.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_vAghKduOE9tLxSpmR9Cjg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) until switching over to LEDs).

That's very interesting! I looked at the intersection on Street View to try and figure out when the signals were installed, but neglected to notice the original signal modules. Then again, I'm not good at spotting those things...yet.

It is interesting that the old indications were also symbols. That would tell me that these may have been installed in the 1990s? Or thereabouts. Not sure when symbolized pedestrian signals came into play.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 01, 2021, 07:58:30 PM
The dropped left turn signal head.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51351395263_721c665d2f_c.jpg)

Oregon has a lot of these where many states just keep them all aligned at one level. 

Am I to guess its done to distinguish it from the normal straight through signal heads?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 01, 2021, 08:04:18 PM
Just a guess, but because the mast-arm slants upward, if they mounted the left-turn head the same way, that might put it above the allowable height in the MUTCD. But I agree it looks dopey.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on August 01, 2021, 09:29:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 01, 2021, 07:58:30 PM
The dropped left turn signal head.

img snipped...

Oregon has a lot of these where many states just keep them all aligned at one level. 

Am I to guess its done to distinguish it from the normal straight through signal heads?
Texas used to do something like this on their older mast-arms except with horizontal signals:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7699436,-94.9776264,3a,24y,175.23h,93.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5OJv5hqPfwobVwiYkcN9LA!2e0!5s20130601T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on August 01, 2021, 09:54:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 01, 2021, 05:26:02 PM
That's very interesting! I looked at the intersection on Street View to try and figure out when the signals were installed, but neglected to notice the original signal modules. Then again, I'm not good at spotting those things...yet.

It is interesting that the old indications were also symbols. That would tell me that these may have been installed in the 1990s? Or thereabouts. Not sure when symbolized pedestrian signals came into play.

I believe Seattle started using those neon symbolic ped heads in the 80s (a bit before most places, though it sounds like symbolic pedestrian signals were introduced in the 70s). I have no clue whether these strange ones would have been before the neon ones, between the neon and LED eras, or just some weird one-off thing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 02, 2021, 07:40:04 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 01, 2021, 07:58:30 PM
The dropped left turn signal head.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51351395263_721c665d2f_c.jpg)

Oregon has a lot of these where many states just keep them all aligned at one level. 

Am I to guess its done to distinguish it from the normal straight through signal heads?

We had a thread on this not too long ago...

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29580.0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on August 11, 2021, 10:38:31 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 30, 2021, 07:23:35 PM
Curious what people know about this Econolite pedestrian signal I found in Seattle the other day.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWnx79t (there is a video in here showing operation including countdown timer)

I've never seen another one like it. It's very square with short visors around the edge.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342818465_47e774ff67_k.jpg)
Southwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdZnb2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342544439_e955c54978_k.jpg)
Northwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdXXHr) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Those are actually pretty rare, if my memory serves me right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on August 13, 2021, 05:58:42 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 30, 2021, 07:23:35 PM
Curious what people know about this Econolite pedestrian signal I found in Seattle the other day.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWnx79t (there is a video in here showing operation including countdown timer)

I've never seen another one like it. It's very square with short visors around the edge.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342818465_47e774ff67_k.jpg)
Southwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdZnb2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342544439_e955c54978_k.jpg)
Northwest corner (https://flic.kr/p/2mdXXHr) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

They've been gone for a few years now, but there used to be some very similar looking square pedestrian signals (no visor though), in Coquitlam (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.27267,-122.8040792,3a,38y,-3.95h,91.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slwEIm9ZuuIk45tIsJDMnLg!2e0!5s20150901T000000!7i13312!8i6656), BC.

I'm pretty sure there's another set of these in Surrey somewhere, but I'm not sure where.
Edit: Found some (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0528808,-122.8120563,3a,15.9y,7.63h,88.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIlmcGbJ_FF4tUVv0KDq2UA!2e0!5s20150901T000000!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 13, 2021, 10:11:27 PM
Quote from: Kasey on August 11, 2021, 10:38:31 PM
Those are actually pretty rare, if my memory serves me right.

Very cool. I know for sure they are rare around here. Like one of a kind.

Quote from: bcroadguy on August 13, 2021, 05:58:42 AM
They've been gone for a few years now, but there used to be some very similar looking square pedestrian signals (no visor though), in Coquitlam (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.27267,-122.8040792,3a,38y,-3.95h,91.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slwEIm9ZuuIk45tIsJDMnLg!2e0!5s20150901T000000!7i13312!8i6656), BC.

I'm pretty sure there's another set of these in Surrey somewhere, but I'm not sure where.
Edit: Found some (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0528808,-122.8120563,3a,15.9y,7.63h,88.52t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIlmcGbJ_FF4tUVv0KDq2UA!2e0!5s20150901T000000!7i16384!8i8192).

Woah, neat! I'm so used to intersections in parts of BC (outside of Vancouver, at least) using regular vehicular signals as pedestrian heads that I never would have thought to look north for any more examples.

I'll be back in Vancouver Sunday, so I'll make sure to grab a photo of that remaining example in Surrey.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Michael on August 15, 2021, 05:11:22 PM
While looking for the location of a Reddit post (https://old.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/p2xc1g/best_trucking/) from Lowell, MA this week, I came across this signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6320295,-71.3332873,3a,64.5y,340.48h,89.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb-Zjmdaq_ohXYIRQTtVNKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) just down the street.  I was trying to figure out where the signal heads were for this direction until I noticed the red signal on the far left corner.  From what I've seen on the forum, I know MA has some weird signals, but this is dangerous in my opinion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 15, 2021, 05:16:09 PM
Quote from: Michael on August 15, 2021, 05:11:22 PM
While looking for the location of a Reddit post (https://old.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/p2xc1g/best_trucking/) from Lowell, MA this week, I came across this signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6320295,-71.3332873,3a,64.5y,340.48h,89.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb-Zjmdaq_ohXYIRQTtVNKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) just down the street.  I was trying to figure out where the signal heads were for this direction until I noticed the red signal on the far left corner.  From what I've seen on the forum, I know MA has some weird signals, but this is dangerous in my opinion.
There's a signal in the far right corner too, except it's blocked by the utility pole until you get really close to it. But yea, the view is dangerous there, would be nice if there's a signal overhead facing that direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on August 16, 2021, 11:27:01 PM
Bakersfield is obssedd about drop left turn lights its a thing




Examples:
Near my location https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4411034,-119.0390073,3a,75y,105.58h,85.87t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1shxZJNKDTmFsJMR4sIQmoAg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DhxZJNKDTmFsJMR4sIQmoAg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D215.84656%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192




Another one  https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441167,-119.0480692,3a,31.2y,97.48h,93.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRF1gvBD6J3wAz4aYiJoSDQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DRF1gvBD6J3wAz4aYiJoSDQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D116.57876%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192


A few blocks up https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441256,-119.0520176,3a,47.5y,281.27h,87.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5ySXkEk24XidAizPOLrbMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

too much?   https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412846,-119.0724073,3a,15.7y,285.8h,93.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sasa7lv00yyTfTguxURFYfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Dj kalhed says another one  https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412778,-119.0740811,3a,15y,278.19h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx7zmezBXzG0igsj48iMcmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

And here comes the others https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412778,-119.0740811,3a,15y,278.19h,92.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx7zmezBXzG0igsj48iMcmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4414158,-119.0784324,3a,17y,275.65h,98.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6CovbMiJvRUgod9zIqZO8Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4413352,-119.082102,3a,15.3y,89.86h,93.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG0u0yXPxJafXj5aDU4Ow3Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412535,-119.0863487,3a,75y,268.68h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svMAVKoYFO8FrLHqv9NKoCQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4413,-119.0914538,3a,32.9y,280.15h,84.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQnzTqJkRYKKJyVak8IC6Bw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441285,-119.1095907,3a,36y,282.95h,91.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOkAlJlaL2Qg_aCG86NHrUA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4414393,-119.1191863,3a,15.9y,96h,93.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQyJvKWNvq2yLV9NqtvMAmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Last one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4415058,-119.1541269,3a,75y,292.73h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw5UDUgqUbWhGp1EP7l5jWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 22, 2021, 08:05:30 PM
I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.
(https://i.imgur.com/7ken4DN.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 23, 2021, 11:02:41 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 22, 2021, 08:05:30 PM
I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.
(https://i.imgur.com/7ken4DN.jpg)

An interesting choice, given that HAWKs are only supposed to be used at mid-block locations. They should have used a standard signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 23, 2021, 11:14:32 PM
I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

(https://i.imgur.com/cABSZeO.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 24, 2021, 08:45:47 AM
Quote from: roadfro on August 23, 2021, 11:02:41 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 22, 2021, 08:05:30 PM
I found this HAWK setup near my residence hall at Purdue. Interesting setup with the two HAWK signals for State St, and stop signs for MacArthur. I would've thought a standard traffic signal setup for both streets would be used, considering how many people I've seen use the crosswalks, and the traffic on both streets.
(https://i.imgur.com/7ken4DN.jpg)

An interesting choice, given that HAWKs are only supposed to be used at mid-block locations. They should have used a standard signal.

Agreed.  Unfortunately, HAWKs at regular intersections are unfortunately common in certain parts of the country.

Here's one in DC:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9842968,-77.036263,3a,75y,179.45h,90.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su4CKkuqMs8QDh1ZjpjCfpw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I can tell you, that my own observations of the way these work is that cars on the side streets will take advantage of the pedestrian crossing to go through the intersection or turn left while the main street traffic has either a solid or flashing red.  This could be somewhat dangerous as the cars on the main street are only required to yield to the pedestrians, not the side street traffic.  The only traffic control device that is supposed to regulate side street traffic is the stop sign.

Half-signals common in WA and OR have similar problems.

IMO, this signal (and others like it) should either be converted to a regular signal, or the crosswalk should move half a block down to a mid-block location.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 24, 2021, 11:20:14 AM
Quote from: mrsman on August 24, 2021, 08:45:47 AM
Agreed.  Unfortunately, HAWKs at regular intersections are unfortunately common in certain parts of the country.

This is really unfortunate, especially given the already ambiguous nature of a HAWK signal–why put more ambiguity by introducing an intersection to the mix?

I gotta imagine that agencies do this either (1) because a HAWK for just the main road and no control on the side street is cheaper to install/maintain, and/or (2) because the signal warrants for a signalized intersections based on pedestrian activity are different from (higher than) warrants to install a HAWK (if such warrants actually exist in the first place).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 24, 2021, 08:33:33 PM
The Manual doesn't seem to specifically prohibit a Hawk signal at an intersection but it discourages the practice in the Guidance. Sec. 4F.02.04 states "The pedestrian hybrid beacon should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs".

And as we know from experience, engineers will not necessarily follow the guidance in the Manual. That's especially true in cases where they feel that engineering judgement resulting in an installation that is contrary to the guidance will provide adequate service.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 24, 2021, 08:36:49 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 23, 2021, 11:14:32 PM
I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

(https://i.imgur.com/cABSZeO.jpg)

This is actually a decent installation except that the signals seem to be mounted a little too high on the poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 24, 2021, 08:41:15 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 23, 2021, 11:14:32 PM
I recently encountered what I believe is the only traffic signal in the state of Utah with zero mast arms of any kind. There are a handful of T intersections where the ending road just has a couple post mounted signals, but those all have mast arms on the through road signals. This one is at a pedestrian crossing on the Utah State campus in Logan:

(https://i.imgur.com/cABSZeO.jpg)

Thank you for sharing. Honestly, kind of a breath of fresh air. Not saying only post-mounted is better than only overhead (although I think in situations like this, it is), but I do wish Utah would use more post-mounted signals. Compared to literally every neighboring state, apart from Oregon, they are miserably behind.

Quote from: SignBridge on August 24, 2021, 08:36:49 PM
This is actually a decent installation except that the signals seem to be mounted a little too high on the poles.

Agreed, they could stand to come down.

The painted "STOP" is also a little alarming.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 24, 2021, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 24, 2021, 08:45:47 AM
I can tell you, that my own observations of the way these work is that cars on the side streets will take advantage of the pedestrian crossing to go through the intersection or turn left while the main street traffic has either a solid or flashing red.  This could be somewhat dangerous as the cars on the main street are only required to yield to the pedestrians, not the side street traffic.  The only traffic control device that is supposed to regulate side street traffic is the stop sign.

Half-signals common in WA and OR have similar problems.

Also British Columbia (the infamous flashing green orb). In BC, half signals are never used at mid-block crossings; if you see a flashing green, it's guaranteed that there's a side-street. Mid-block crossings are regular "yield" conditions with flashing yellow signals (including RRFBs).

Visibility of the "walk" or FDW signal is basically unwritten permission to ignore the stop condition, yielding only to pedestrians as necessary.

One thing not noted is that half-signals (what we are describing, HAWK or not) at intersections are almost always (if not always) designed so that traffic stops outside the intersection, so everyone and everything can pass through the intersection without conflicting with traffic stopped by a red light. When the light turns green, practice is to yield to everyone already in the intersection and then proceed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on August 25, 2021, 12:47:36 AM
When walking along busy BC 1A near New Westminster, a motorist on a side street asked me to activate the pedestrian signal so she could get a break in traffic, and I obliged.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on August 25, 2021, 01:26:49 AM
IMHO, ideally (and of course this is fairly unrealistic), HAWK signals midblock/in areas where there's no conflicting traffic, should be converted to normal, RYG signals. HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting. They'd go yellow then red when the pedestrian light is activated. Then, on the side road(s), have small VMS's display instructions on what to do (i.e "NO LEFT TURN" across crosswalk, "RIGHT/STRAIGHT OK AFTER STOP"). Then, after the pedestrian phase, have the main road on solid green for maybe 10 seconds to clear out the traffic jam before returning to flashing green. VMS could then display "DO NOT PROCEED" or "WAIT" or something.

Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on August 25, 2021, 06:48:46 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on August 25, 2021, 01:26:49 AM
HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting.

All flashing greens with conflicting traffic in Massachusetts have flashing red on the cross street. Is this what you want?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 25, 2021, 09:36:19 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 24, 2021, 08:41:15 PM
The painted "STOP" is also a little alarming.

I wonder if that light used to be just a dedicated stop sign for that crosswalk, and that painted STOP is just a holdover from then. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to check that as I don't remember exactly where it was and a lot of that road's configuration has been changed a bit since GSV went through last...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 25, 2021, 10:18:44 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on August 25, 2021, 01:26:49 AM
IMHO, ideally (and of course this is fairly unrealistic), HAWK signals midblock/in areas where there's no conflicting traffic, should be converted to normal, RYG signals.

Agreed.  I probably mentioned earlier in this thread, or a thread that was specific to signals dealing with peds, what Los Angeles does in mid-block ped crossings in Downtown and along certain other corridors like Fairfax Ave:

RYG signal, but the red is a flashing red.  This means that traffic can proceed after coming to a full stop if there are no peds present.  This is especially useful for situations where the one ped who may push the button crosses the street a lot faster than 3.5 ft/sec, so that there are no longer any peds crossing even though drivers still have a red signal. 

here is an example location, Olive between 5th and 6th across from Pershing Square.  If you follow the GSV, it appears that the camera took pictures while the red was flashing since the signal was off.  It also appears to show the GSV vehicle crossing through on red - that's OK since it was a flashing red.

Unfortunately, I don't know where to link to a movie to actually show the signal in operation.  Even more unfortuantely, new installs of mid-block crossings are utilizing HAWKs, which in my opinion is a major step backward.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0486509,-118.2536791,3a,75y,25.84h,76.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s03OYFK914Hey9V0gmI1ySg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D03OYFK914Hey9V0gmI1ySg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D294.83127%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192


I would personally vary this only slightly by having a solid red at the beginning of the pedestrian phase, so that cars stop and wait initially for a few seconds.  I would say, generally, that when peds have the WALK signal, drivers should have a solid red, and when peds have FDW, drivers should have a flashing red.

But the important point is that the RYG signals are common and easily understood and we are only making a slight change to it by intorducing the flashing red for the later half of the pedestrain phase, when we assume that most pedestrians (unless they walk slow) are probably out of the way.

Quote

HAWKs in areas where there IS conflicting traffic should be converted to flashing green to indicate to drivers that vehicles may be entering or exiting. They'd go yellow then red when the pedestrian light is activated. Then, on the side road(s), have small VMS's display instructions on what to do (i.e "NO LEFT TURN" across crosswalk, "RIGHT/STRAIGHT OK AFTER STOP"). Then, after the pedestrian phase, have the main road on solid green for maybe 10 seconds to clear out the traffic jam before returning to flashing green. VMS could then display "DO NOT PROCEED" or "WAIT" or something.

Montgomery county Maryland does something similar to this.  They use a modified firehouse signal (12-12-8 RYY) for the main street and a red signal for the side street.  Main street will have a flashing yellow during normal times and sides street gets a flashing red and a stop sign.  After the button is pushed, main street flashing yellow goes faster to warn of the upcoming change.  Then solid yellow, then solid red.  During the solid red, peds may cross: WALK, FDW, solid DW.  Meanwhile while main street gets red, side street also gets red, thereby prohibiting side street traffic from turning left or going straight, even though main street traffic is stopped.  At the end of the ped phase, it reverts to flahsing yellow for main and flashing red for side street.

I understand that these are implemented in places where there is a need for a ped crossing, but the county does not want to induce more traffic on the side streets.  (When a new signal begins operation, the side street with the signal will likely get more traffic than parallel streets, as drivers will know that the side street with the signal is easier to cross or make a left on the main street.)  So this operation basically (legally) provides no advantage to a regular side street with a stop sign, since you aren't allowed to turn left or go straight during the WALK time.  [Many do anyway, so yes traffic is induced to the side street, leaving them in an unsafe situation to turn left.]  Further, there is no sensors for side street traffic, so the signal will never change unless a ped pushes the button.  I don't like this at all.  IMO, the signal should either be converted to a regular signal or the ped signal should be moved half a block away to allow for a mid-block crossing.

University and Reedie in Silver Spring, MD. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0398739,-77.0428639,3a,75y,288.22h,74.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shr9MGP5YGfLHDqcsN1knAw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Quote
Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.

Interesting.  So if we are at an intersection of a major and a minor street and no cars are detected on the minor street, but a ped pushes the button to cross the major street, then the signal should be activated in a similar manner to what I described earlier as my modification to the L.A. mid-block crossing.  The only difference is that vehicles on the side street (likely none unless someone came late or the sensors are broken) will still see a red signal.  So it's a regular interesection, but only actuated for the benefit of side-street peds and therefore should operate as a ped signal.  Interesting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on August 25, 2021, 08:22:58 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 25, 2021, 10:18:44 AM


Quote
Another mini-fantasy I've had is on traffic lights solely for pedestrian control (ie no conflicting car movement--like the Utah example we've been discussing), have them turn from solid to flashing red after the equivalent time of the FDW phase has been completed. For example, if a crosswalk has a 20-second FDW phase, the main road should turn to flashing red 20 seconds after the WALK signal appears. This prevents traffic from having to wait longer than necessary if just one pedestrian triggered the light, which happens often from my experience. Again, unlikely and unreasonable to ever happen, but if I were president, that's what would happen.

Interesting.  So if we are at an intersection of a major and a minor street and no cars are detected on the minor street, but a ped pushes the button to cross the major street, then the signal should be activated in a similar manner to what I described earlier as my modification to the L.A. mid-block crossing.  The only difference is that vehicles on the side street (likely none unless someone came late or the sensors are broken) will still see a red signal.  So it's a regular interesection, but only actuated for the benefit of side-street peds and therefore should operate as a ped signal.  Interesting.

Not necessarily what I had in mind...basically what you described for the LA example is exactly what I was thinking, no cross street needed. I believe that if a side street has an opportunity to be green during a pedestrian phase, it should be, because why not. This would allow any car that shows up during the pedestrian phase to conveniently and safely go. This system would solely be implemented in areas where the ONLY signalized movement across the "main" street or lane is for pedestrians. So basically, any HAWK or non-intersection crosswalk traffic light, and I suppose the half-intersections common in the PNW as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 25, 2021, 08:34:57 PM
FYA signal for a parking garage entrance (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4298016,-86.9125039,3a,63.4y,112.56h,88.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOvUWu6VCcrlhZJi-L5jqg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 26, 2021, 12:19:59 AM
Came across a pair of intersections that use the rare inteli light PV signals (the ones with the giant heat sinks on the back) in NY. Not sure if it's a town or county installation

https://maps.app.goo.gl/jCib75gynxF3bxbc7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 26, 2021, 11:43:31 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 26, 2021, 12:19:59 AM
Came across a pair of intersections that use the rare inteli light PV signals (the ones with the giant heat sinks on the back) in NY. Not sure if it's a town or county installation

https://maps.app.goo.gl/jCib75gynxF3bxbc7

Nice! Somehow, these are already rare. Many of the ones in Southwest Washington (state) were replaced after they became waterlogged due to either a manufacturing defect or design defect (not sure which). I only know of a handful in the Seattle region now.

I'm not sure I have seen an Intelight ESB painted yellow like that. The only ones I've seen have been black. Not sure I've seen any on wire-span either. Cool!!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 26, 2021, 12:13:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 26, 2021, 11:43:31 AM
I'm not sure I have seen an Intelight ESB painted yellow like that. The only ones I've seen have been black.

There is a yellow pair of this signal type on a ramp meter on I-15 in Salt Lake City:

https://goo.gl/maps/FcNXodBuPSHmayMs9

Seems hanging one on a wire span would defeat the whole PV purpose as they might blow around in the wind... though I have to note that from what I've seen, the PV aspect of those signals does not seem to work on that Utah ramp meter.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on August 26, 2021, 08:23:17 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 26, 2021, 12:19:59 AM
Came across a pair of intersections that use the rare inteli light PV signals (the ones with the giant heat sinks on the back) in NY. Not sure if it's a town or county installation

https://maps.app.goo.gl/jCib75gynxF3bxbc7

Town. This isn't the dominant type of PV signal in New York, but there are a decent amount of them scattered around.

Quote from: US 89 on August 26, 2021, 12:13:28 PM
Seems hanging one on a wire span would defeat the whole PV purpose as they might blow around in the wind... though I have to note that from what I've seen, the PV aspect of those signals does not seem to work on that Utah ramp meter.

NY has a decent amount of PV signals on span wire, mostly local installs. Though NY span wire tends to have tether wires, so there is minimal blowing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 27, 2021, 08:46:23 AM
Usually for visibility limits NY uses McCains or louvers, with some old 3M holdouts.

The only other installation I've seen use intelilight is one in Riverhead, which is a state one. Even then it is only a pole mounted signal. The other visibility limited signals are louvers.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/sBFKQ71XkPfN7Lmz5
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on August 27, 2021, 11:47:17 AM
Quote from: Michael on August 15, 2021, 05:11:22 PM
While looking for the location of a Reddit post (https://old.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/p2xc1g/best_trucking/) from Lowell, MA this week, I came across this signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6320295,-71.3332873,3a,64.5y,340.48h,89.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb-Zjmdaq_ohXYIRQTtVNKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) just down the street.  I was trying to figure out where the signal heads were for this direction until I noticed the red signal on the far left corner.  From what I've seen on the forum, I know MA has some weird signals, but this is dangerous in my opinion.
MA likes pole signals.
There's several intersections in Longmeadow that are pole-only.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 27, 2021, 05:31:10 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 25, 2021, 08:34:57 PM
FYA signal for a parking garage entrance (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4298016,-86.9125039,3a,63.4y,112.56h,88.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOvUWu6VCcrlhZJi-L5jqg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Had some classes in the area, so went over there and took two photos:

(https://i.imgur.com/WWKasas.jpg)
The pedestrian crossing is large (total of 12 pedestrian signals!), but nothing is marked on the pavement that it's a pedestrian crossing.

(https://i.imgur.com/Vyg9Iht.jpg)
Protected green to the parking garage entrance at the same time as the pedestrian crossings.

This is a good example of a location for a HAWK signal, not at the location of my photo from a week ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on August 29, 2021, 03:48:14 PM
I've never been a fan of HAWK signals, and the whole "should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs" thing is one of the reasons for that. Except in limited situations, such as trail crossings or building/business entrances, mid-block crosswalks tend to push pedestrians out of their desired path of travel, since people tend to walk along streets, not through random bits of private property. Granted, this isn't unique to HAWK signals -- Oregon installs a lot of mid-block RRFBs that would make much more sense at an actual intersection -- but it's still a frustrating design tendency.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 29, 2021, 08:02:18 PM
Quote from: jay8g on August 29, 2021, 03:48:14 PM
I've never been a fan of HAWK signals, and the whole "should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs" thing is one of the reasons for that. Except in limited situations, such as trail crossings or building/business entrances, mid-block crosswalks tend to push pedestrians out of their desired path of travel, since people tend to walk along streets, not through random bits of private property. Granted, this isn't unique to HAWK signals -- Oregon installs a lot of mid-block RRFBs that would make much more sense at an actual intersection -- but it's still a frustrating design tendency.

Totally agreed. Mid-block crossings are far better when they connect to some kind of cycle path or trail. Good example of a HAWK for that situation here (https://goo.gl/maps/CBCj3L9gfwmNFrGX8) along WA-181 in Kent, connecting the Interurban Trail with the Puget Power Trail. Less useful HAWK here (https://goo.gl/maps/aCxMVTRSGGGbyNn48) in Mill Creek, which doesn't seem to align with any sort of path apart from a parking lot crosswalk (I would have personally placed that HAWK at the intersection with 137th Pl SE, MUTCD be-damned).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 29, 2021, 08:40:38 PM
In Iselin, New Jersey, there is a HAWK protected crosswalk on NJ Rt. 27 at the Metropark train station and said crosswalk is only about 15 feet from a stop-sign controlled intersection. So much for that guidance in the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on September 02, 2021, 12:55:10 AM
Left turn yield on green?

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2083077,-71.1198731,3a,29.8y,77.45h,97.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDi6SFlI0B0fM7Yy-V3NowA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on September 02, 2021, 05:35:07 AM
Quote from: jay8g on August 29, 2021, 03:48:14 PM
I've never been a fan of HAWK signals, and the whole "should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs" thing is one of the reasons for that. Except in limited situations, such as trail crossings or building/business entrances, mid-block crosswalks tend to push pedestrians out of their desired path of travel, since people tend to walk along streets, not through random bits of private property. Granted, this isn't unique to HAWK signals -- Oregon installs a lot of mid-block RRFBs that would make much more sense at an actual intersection -- but it's still a frustrating design tendency.

In the UK, our pelican crossings (analogous to hawks) have zig-zag lines on the approach which highlight the control area of the crossing and allow them to be used near unsignalised sideroads.

As an outsider who is nonetheless familiar with the "hybrid method" that hawks are trying implement, I'm also no convinced about their application. For a start, flashing alternating red lights instinctively suggests to me that you must stop and not go through under any circumstances. This is because, here at least, flashing double reds mean emergency services can't go through, even with their lights on - most commonly used at railway level crossings. So using it for "proceed when clear" seems counterintuitive to me.

Also, we're phasing out our pelican crossings here. No new ones are allowed, although existing ones can remain for the duration of their serviceable life. This is because they've been superseded by a crossing which uses detection technology so that the lights change quickly as soon as the crosswalk is clear. An advantage of this is that the standard traffic signal sequence seen at intersections is used, as the inbetween "flashing" stage is made redundant. So it's kinda weird that the US is going down this route 50 years after we first did and after it was already made obsolete here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 02, 2021, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on September 02, 2021, 12:55:10 AM
Left turn yield on green?

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2083077,-71.1198731,3a,29.8y,77.45h,97.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDi6SFlI0B0fM7Yy-V3NowA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That's a weird one.  I can't find a single GSV shot that shows it with any indication other than a red arrow.  I suppose, theoretically, it could have a green ball as the lowest aspect.  But I doubt it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 02, 2021, 11:02:05 AM
Quote from: kphoger on September 02, 2021, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on September 02, 2021, 12:55:10 AM
Left turn yield on green?

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2083077,-71.1198731,3a,29.8y,77.45h,97.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDi6SFlI0B0fM7Yy-V3NowA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That's a weird one.  I can't find a single GSV shot that shows it with any indication other than a red arrow.  I suppose, theoretically, it could have a green ball as the lowest aspect.  But I doubt it.

(https://i.ibb.co/x3RwvHm/IMG-2905-copy.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hCtr5fX)

Similar situation at NH 108 at Back River Rd. Ever since they changed the signal from a 4-section bimodal to a FYA in 2012, the R10-12 (Left Turn Yield on Green) sign still remains...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 02, 2021, 11:05:57 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 02, 2021, 11:02:05 AM
Quote from: kphoger on September 02, 2021, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on September 02, 2021, 12:55:10 AM
Left turn yield on green?

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2083077,-71.1198731,3a,29.8y,77.45h,97.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDi6SFlI0B0fM7Yy-V3NowA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That's a weird one.  I can't find a single GSV shot that shows it with any indication other than a red arrow.  I suppose, theoretically, it could have a green ball as the lowest aspect.  But I doubt it.

(https://i.ibb.co/x3RwvHm/IMG-2905-copy.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hCtr5fX)

Similar situation at NH 108 at Back River Rd. Ever since they changed the signal from a 4-section bimodal to a FYA in 2012, the R10-12 (Left Turn Yield on Green) sign still remains...

At least there, I can understand how there may be some confusion since the left turns still get to yield (they just grabbed the wrong sign from the yard, I suppose). With the Canton example, the left turn is, and has always been, fully protected. Every left turn at that intersection is fully protected for that matter. No left turns ever get to yield.

I thought maybe it was a flashing yellow arrow that was retrofitted and had the wrong sign installed (incredibly unlikely, but doesn't hurt to consider), but this GSV shot (https://goo.gl/maps/DjZtp5Z3N7wnhMEWA) confirms it is fully-protected.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 03, 2021, 11:22:21 AM
I see an unusual signal back that I have never scene before.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51422373590_277178c512_q.jpg)

Combination of flat back and domed back.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2021, 11:39:56 AM
Fixed to make it a bit more visible:

Quote from: roadman65 on September 03, 2021, 11:22:21 AM
I see an unusual signal back that I have never scene before.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51422373590_075c371dce_o.jpg)

Combination of flat back and domed back.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 03, 2021, 08:05:40 PM
Check out those gas prices. I know they're always higher in Calif. than New York.  How recent is this photo?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: sprjus4 on September 03, 2021, 11:00:07 PM
$4+ seems to becoming the norm in many parts of the state, nowadays.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 03, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Same here in Washington too. Didn't catch me off-guard when I found the original photo on his Flickr. Under $4/gal is pretty rare except for diesel.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?
(https://i.imgur.com/KlpniA9.jpg?2)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 04, 2021, 12:18:47 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?

Definitely no such rule. Though many places that formerly did not use backplates or used only black backplates have since adopted the backplate with retroreflective yellow border, many places do not use backplates.

Around me, places like British Columbia, as well as Spokane and Renton (WA) largely only use backplates overhead, with all post-mounted or mast-mounted signals not having backplates (with some exceptions). Kent, WA does not use backplates at all, although they used to.

Elsewhere, Illinois seems quite conservative with their backplate usage as well. Particularly Chicago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 04, 2021, 09:22:55 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 03, 2021, 08:05:40 PM
Check out those gas prices. I know they're always higher in Calif. than New York.  How recent is this photo?


July 7, 2021.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on September 04, 2021, 02:04:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 04, 2021, 12:18:47 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?

Definitely no such rule. Though many places that formerly did not use backplates or used only black backplates have since adopted the backplate with retroreflective yellow border, many places do not use backplates.

Around me, places like British Columbia, as well as Spokane and Renton (WA) largely only use backplates overhead, with all post-mounted or mast-mounted signals not having backplates (with some exceptions). Kent, WA does not use backplates at all, although they used to.

Elsewhere, Illinois seems quite conservative with their backplate usage as well. Particularly Chicago.

Loosely related, but I will say that the parts of Illinois that aren't in Chicagoland are a lot more open to using backplates. I've seen it go both ways, even between different parts of Kankakee.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on September 04, 2021, 04:48:43 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 25, 2021, 12:47:36 AM
When walking along busy BC 1A near New Westminster, a motorist on a side street asked me to activate the pedestrian signal so she could get a break in traffic, and I obliged.

I was waiting to turn onto a busy street with one of those last night... and I got out of the car, hit the button, and ran back to my car.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 04, 2021, 09:28:13 PM
New York City and Nassau County DPW on Long Island do not use backplates at all. New York State DOT Region-10 seems to be using them with reflective borders on virtually all new installations last few years and some have disappeared already just like they did thirty years ago when they tried it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on September 04, 2021, 09:44:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Same here in Washington too. Didn't catch me off-guard when I found the original photo on his Flickr. Under $4/gal is pretty rare except for diesel.

$3.50-3.60 seems to be around the average for cheaper gas in the Seattle metro, even in places like the Eastside.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 04, 2021, 09:52:40 PM
Quote from: Bruce on September 04, 2021, 09:44:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Same here in Washington too. Didn't catch me off-guard when I found the original photo on his Flickr. Under $4/gal is pretty rare except for diesel.

$3.50-3.60 seems to be around the average for cheaper gas in the Seattle metro, even in places like the Eastside.

I haven't seen anything that low for a while. I'm not suggesting below-$3/gal is unheard of, but it does seem like most stations are either right-around $4/gal, or way above it (I see some stations on the Eastside at $4.40+/gal), from GasBuddy).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 04, 2021, 10:29:37 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?

No.  In NJ there's been some signals installed with the reflective backplates, but it almost seems like certain engineers add them; others don't.  It's very random where they've been added.

An intersection near me on a county road was slightly modified and the signals retrofitted with the reflectorized backplates; it's the first intersection in my county I can think of with them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 05, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: Mr Kite on September 02, 2021, 05:35:07 AM
Quote from: jay8g on August 29, 2021, 03:48:14 PM
I've never been a fan of HAWK signals, and the whole "should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs" thing is one of the reasons for that. Except in limited situations, such as trail crossings or building/business entrances, mid-block crosswalks tend to push pedestrians out of their desired path of travel, since people tend to walk along streets, not through random bits of private property. Granted, this isn't unique to HAWK signals -- Oregon installs a lot of mid-block RRFBs that would make much more sense at an actual intersection -- but it's still a frustrating design tendency.

In the UK, our pelican crossings (analogous to hawks) have zig-zag lines on the approach which highlight the control area of the crossing and allow them to be used near unsignalised sideroads.

As an outsider who is nonetheless familiar with the "hybrid method" that hawks are trying implement, I'm also no convinced about their application. For a start, flashing alternating red lights instinctively suggests to me that you must stop and not go through under any circumstances. This is because, here at least, flashing double reds mean emergency services can't go through, even with their lights on - most commonly used at railway level crossings. So using it for "proceed when clear" seems counterintuitive to me.

Also, we're phasing out our pelican crossings here. No new ones are allowed, although existing ones can remain for the duration of their serviceable life. This is because they've been superseded by a crossing which uses detection technology so that the lights change quickly as soon as the crosswalk is clear. An advantage of this is that the standard traffic signal sequence seen at intersections is used, as the inbetween "flashing" stage is made redundant. So it's kinda weird that the US is going down this route 50 years after we first did and after it was already made obsolete here.

I really didn't understand why we reinvented the wheel with the HAWK signals, when the UK had the same idea with the much more intuitive Pelican Crossing 50+ years ago. While I would like to see mid-block crossings (and even crossing signals at regular intersections, tbh) in the US deploy some of the pedestrian detection technology you mention to make things more seamless for all road users, I would even be happy if we could just swap out the HAWK for the Pelican.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 05, 2021, 06:43:32 PM
If the pelican crossings are the ones that flash a yellow light during the pedestrian countdown phase, I would love to see those in the US. There is even precedent for that here with regular yellow flashing beacons at some ped crossings without a full signal.

As far as I can tell, it has exactly the same functionality as a HAWK but with far less ambiguity on what the various signal indications mean.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on September 05, 2021, 09:09:53 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 05, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
I really didn't understand why we reinvented the wheel with the HAWK signals, when the UK had the same idea with the much more intuitive Pelican Crossing 50+ years ago. While I would like to see mid-block crossings (and even crossing signals at regular intersections, tbh) in the US deploy some of the pedestrian detection technology you mention to make things more seamless for all road users, I would even be happy if we could just swap out the HAWK for the Pelican.
I think it's a case of NIH syndrome. The FHWA was too stubborn to change its signal warrant criteria for pedestrian crossings, so instead they had to basically come up with a loophole by claiming that HAWKs are beacons, even though by legally forcing drivers to stop they function as signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on September 06, 2021, 11:52:06 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 05, 2021, 06:43:32 PM
If the pelican crossings are the ones that flash a yellow light during the pedestrian countdown phase, I would love to see those in the US. There is even precedent for that here with regular yellow flashing beacons at some ped crossings without a full signal.

As far as I can tell, it has exactly the same functionality as a HAWK but with far less ambiguity on what the various signal indications mean.

Yes, a UK standard pelican crossing looks like this...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CT0R_BQGI6E

Australia has them too but with a flashing red man instead of green (which you can't really see in the video). They also have a sign informing the motorist about the flashing period, which seems to be shorter than in the UK, with the red light being longer...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YMZL9wkwHhU

The UK didn't get it right first time and there were several experiments in the 1960s leading up to the launch of the finalized design in 1969. The first incarnation was known as the panda crossing and had a fair few counterintuitive issues not totally dissimilar to hawks. This article pretty much tells the whole story...

https://www.roads.org.uk/articles/pedestrian-crossings
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on September 07, 2021, 01:45:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?
Image Clipped

Many places (Maryland, Alabama, DC, West Virginia, North Carolina come to mind) still routinely install signals without backplates. I personally hate them, but they're still out there
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on September 07, 2021, 04:10:51 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on September 07, 2021, 01:45:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?
Image Clipped

Many places (Maryland, Alabama, DC, West Virginia, North Carolina come to mind) still routinely install signals without backplates. I personally hate them, but they're still out there
And the shall only applies to 45mph or higher plus certain intersections for lighting situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 11, 2021, 08:57:38 AM
These very long mast arms were recently installed at the intersection of NY 252 and Hylan Dr. in Rochester, NY. Being a NYSDOT install I'm surprised they didn't use a box span setup like they have recently done at some other large intersections.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0870344,-77.629207,3a,75y,233.82h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW7Qv3oaOCuWuyOBZvY0NmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

This intersection previously had a cross span wire setup as seen here.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0870658,-77.6292257,3a,75y,233.82h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4agVsNd0cK0XdcBKedvqIw!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on September 11, 2021, 12:33:12 PM
That looks 100 times better.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 11, 2021, 06:33:36 PM
Something about those mast arms seems off to me. It's either that it's very horizontal (as opposed to slightly ascending away from the mast), or the lack of mast lighting. Or both. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/q4owA3yApT3EVzHM7) of what I'm used to seeing and what looks more normal to me.

The mast arm is definitely very thick, so it could be that too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 11, 2021, 07:28:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 11, 2021, 06:33:36 PM
Something about those mast arms seems off to me. It's either that it's very horizontal (as opposed to slightly ascending away from the mast), or the lack of mast lighting. Or both. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/q4owA3yApT3EVzHM7) of what I'm used to seeing and what looks more normal to me.

The mast arm is definitely very thick, so it could be that too.
The mast arms here are the longest ones I have seen for any NYSDOT installation. It seems the contractor who installed these messed up with the heights so that could be a reason they look weird. NYSDOT used to be a mainly span wire agency but recently are installing a lot of mast arms. They seem to prefer to center the signals on the arm but for some reason two of the mast arms are installed too low resulting in the signal heads being mounted from the bottom which looks really strange to me. I've seen this issue on other NYSDOT mast arm signals as well.

Monroe County is the local agency that also installs signals in this area. All signals they install are on mast arms and they've been all mast arm since the 1990's. They are usually better looking installs than what NYSDOT does and their signals are mounted from the top so they look like they hang from the mast arm. They do have a lot of old span wire signals they maintain though.

Here is an example of a typical Monroe Co. signal installation. This one is around the corner from the other signal I posted. NOTE: The mast arms are from the 1980's with updated signal heads. Arrows are bi-modal. The back plates were just recently installed.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.085611,-77.6296055,3a,75y,208.87h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3YsfFrSbYepp0V_mwEihGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 13, 2021, 10:36:17 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on September 11, 2021, 08:57:38 AM
These very long mast arms were recently installed at the intersection of NY 252 and Hylan Dr. in Rochester, NY. Being a NYSDOT install I'm surprised they didn't use a box span setup like they have recently done at some other large intersections.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0870344,-77.629207,3a,75y,233.82h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW7Qv3oaOCuWuyOBZvY0NmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

Quote from: jakeroot on September 11, 2021, 06:33:36 PM
Something about those mast arms seems off to me. It's either that it's very horizontal (as opposed to slightly ascending away from the mast), or the lack of mast lighting. Or both. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/q4owA3yApT3EVzHM7) of what I'm used to seeing and what looks more normal to me.

The mast arm is definitely very thick, so it could be that too.

I was thinking the same thing, as I am used to seeing something similar to Jake since that is Nevada's standard (as seen here (https://goo.gl/maps/mF5pNbLvseYvGbqQA)). I think it's the very horizontal mast arms.

Interesting that they installed masts and arms, but the street light luminaires for the intersection remain on wood posts (several connected via overhead wire). Should've done the tall masts and moved the street lights to make the overall intersection a little cleaner.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 13, 2021, 08:48:29 PM
The street lights were probably installed by a different agency than NYS DOT. Most likely the local Town. NYS DOT does not usually provide lighting on state highways, though there are some exceptions especially on Long Island.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 13, 2021, 09:23:20 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 13, 2021, 08:48:29 PM
The street lights were probably installed by a different agency than NYS DOT. Most likely the local Town. NYS DOT does not usually provide lighting on state highways, though there are some exceptions especially on Long Island.
Interestingly the old span wire setup there had street lights on the strain poles.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 14, 2021, 06:14:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).
I think they are weights to stabilize the mast arm. So they don't sway too much in high winds. Those are the only mast arms I know of in my area that have them but they are also the longest.

On another note if those signals were installed just a year ago or two NYSDOT would have used a box span setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on September 14, 2021, 06:31:44 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).

Quote from: steviep24 on September 14, 2021, 06:14:40 PM
I think they are weights to stabilize the mast arm. So they don't sway too much in high winds. Those are the only mast arms I know of in my area that have them but they are also the longest.

I believe those are referred to as "traffic signal preemption devices", which are infrared detectors designed to receive preempt signals sent from emergency vehicles.  Some of the old ones looked like whistles mounted on a tube on the end of the masts.  There's a priority system given to the type of preempt signals, as many traffic engineers are unaware that railroad crossing preempt circuits have priority over emergency vehicles. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MCRoads on September 14, 2021, 07:18:57 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on September 14, 2021, 06:31:44 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).

Quote from: steviep24 on September 14, 2021, 06:14:40 PM
I think they are weights to stabilize the mast arm. So they don't sway too much in high winds. Those are the only mast arms I know of in my area that have them but they are also the longest.

I believe those are referred to as "traffic signal preemption devices", which are infrared detectors designed to receive preempt signals sent from emergency vehicles.  Some of the old ones looked like whistles mounted on a tube on the end of the masts.  There's a priority system given to the type of preempt signals, as many traffic engineers are unaware that railroad crossing preempt circuits have priority over emergency vehicles.

What? How do they not know that!! Do they expect the train to stop on a dime for the ambulance??
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 07:30:01 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on September 14, 2021, 06:31:44 PM
I believe those are referred to as "traffic signal preemption devices", which are infrared detectors designed to receive preempt signals sent from emergency vehicles.  Some of the old ones looked like whistles mounted on a tube on the end of the masts.  There's a priority system given to the type of preempt signals, as many traffic engineers are unaware that railroad crossing preempt circuits have priority over emergency vehicles.

Thank you. I wasn't sure what it could be, but that seems like a reasonable explanation. It's interesting how much larger these newer preemption devices are compared to older examples. The "whistle" design is the one I am most familiar with. These new ones must be a lot better!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 14, 2021, 07:54:48 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on September 14, 2021, 06:31:44 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).

Quote from: steviep24 on September 14, 2021, 06:14:40 PM
I think they are weights to stabilize the mast arm. So they don't sway too much in high winds. Those are the only mast arms I know of in my area that have them but they are also the longest.

I believe those are referred to as "traffic signal preemption devices", which are infrared detectors designed to receive preempt signals sent from emergency vehicles.  Some of the old ones looked like whistles mounted on a tube on the end of the masts.  There's a priority system given to the type of preempt signals, as many traffic engineers are unaware that railroad crossing preempt circuits have priority over emergency vehicles.
If you are referring to this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0871669,-77.6297755,3a,15y,15.34h,103.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spwvLl8YNmrm0Xw2BCTd0KQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0) then no. The town (Henrietta) where this signal is located does not use emergency vehicle preemption devices. The City of Rochester and Town of Greece do use them and they look like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2168719,-77.7327008,3a,15y,50.29h,110.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s18ATrO8k7mi4EBQCscXNiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 18, 2021, 11:14:59 PM
I was noticing that Hutchinson, KS has a temporary traffic signal that operates only when the KS State Fair is happening in Mid September.  Unlike most event signals, the City of Hutchinson removes the signal heads during the 355 days the Fair is not happening instead of flashing the signal like the FL State Fair on US 301 is during non fair days or many other event signals across the nation.

During the rest of the year, an empty span wire sits diagonally across the intersections of Main & 20th and Main & 23rd.  In fact if you check out GSV, you will see a new span wire assembly is been added since 2016, as previously there was only two signal outlets on the span wires, unlike now with at total of eight on the 23rd Street signal and six on the 20th signal.  Currently there are individual heads on the span wires with two overheads each way and side mounts for the 20th Avenue side signals.  I am guessing that previously they used two four way signal heads before the latest, that would have made those two intersections the only in Kansas to have four way signals as the Sunflower uses normally one way heads due to their use of mast arms.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51483781372/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on September 19, 2021, 02:43:49 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).
Those are dampers to reduce movement in windy conditions. Here's the manufacturer's page on them (https://www.valmontstructures.com/products-solutions/product-catalog/us/accessories/mitigator-tr1-traffic-damper).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 19, 2021, 02:38:11 PM
Quote from: jay8g on September 19, 2021, 02:43:49 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 14, 2021, 03:53:54 PM
Kind of off-topic: could someone remind me again what those vertical metal bars are on the end of the mast arm? I see them a lot these days (including that NYS intersection we are talking about).
Those are dampers to reduce movement in windy conditions. Here's the manufacturer's page on them (https://www.valmontstructures.com/products-solutions/product-catalog/us/accessories/mitigator-tr1-traffic-damper).

Thank you! That's a very impressive technological development. No wonder I see them all the time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 27, 2021, 11:57:02 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/5sYpG2CJjB9wjrNz5

Interesting visors on this one piece four way signal head. Kentucky invades New York.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 29, 2021, 12:24:02 PM
This is the way one way left signals should be mounted, unlike NJ that does every one of the left and straight.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51532602390_d67744ef45_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 29, 2021, 01:03:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 29, 2021, 12:24:02 PM
This is the way one way left signals should be mounted, unlike NJ that does every one of the left and straight.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51532602390_d67744ef45_k.jpg)

Where is this? I see an Oklahoma plate but this doesn't look like signals I've seen there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 29, 2021, 10:33:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 29, 2021, 01:03:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 29, 2021, 12:24:02 PM
This is the way one way left signals should be mounted, unlike NJ that does every one of the left and straight.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51532602390_d67744ef45_k.jpg)

Where is this? I see an Oklahoma plate but this doesn't look like signals I've seen there.

Based on that "abunchoftextyoudonthavetimetoread PROHIBITED" sign on the ramp in the background, probably somewhere in Kansas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 29, 2021, 11:47:37 PM
Quote from: US 89 on September 29, 2021, 10:33:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 29, 2021, 01:03:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 29, 2021, 12:24:02 PM
This is the way one way left signals should be mounted, unlike NJ that does every one of the left and straight.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51532602390_d67744ef45_k.jpg)

Where is this? I see an Oklahoma plate but this doesn't look like signals I've seen there.

Based on that "abunchoftextyoudonthavetimetoread PROHIBITED" sign on the ramp in the background, probably somewhere in Kansas.

Good catch! You are correct: https://goo.gl/maps/Rhi7XApYweGko5xJ9

That sign really is wordy. Yikes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 03, 2021, 08:12:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 04, 2021, 10:29:37 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?

No.  In NJ there's been some signals installed with the reflective backplates, but it almost seems like certain engineers add them; others don't.  It's very random where they've been added.

An intersection near me on a county road was slightly modified and the signals retrofitted with the reflectorized backplates; it's the first intersection in my county I can think of with them.
Exaclty. I've heard from some engineers they don't think they're needed unless the limit is 45+ MPH. so much so they will remove the reflective tape from their signals when they're installed


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 04, 2021, 09:53:59 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Khfq8sLiJTbqvgGL7
Violation of MUTCD using green arrows to indicate a one way is coming and either must turn left or right. As a left green is reserved for protection again other vehicles, this one has oncoming cars when light is green with the two arrows.

Plus rare use of 8 inch arrows lenses as NJ phased them out with Bell Bottoms when the Vietnam War was going on.


Plus here is a yellow beacon light used with a Yield sign, that is unusual.
https://goo.gl/maps/vQ7AUBCWvUL8BfSz9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on October 04, 2021, 12:14:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 04, 2021, 09:53:59 AM
Plus here is a yellow beacon light used with a Yield sign, that is unusual.
Thats also 3 stops and a yield, which doesn't seem quite correct, who do you need to yield to if everyone else has to stop?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on October 04, 2021, 01:02:53 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on October 03, 2021, 08:12:12 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 04, 2021, 10:29:37 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 03, 2021, 11:49:33 PM
A bike signal at my college started operating a couple days ago. Though I'm wondering, aren't all newly installed signals required to have a backplate in 2021?

No.  In NJ there's been some signals installed with the reflective backplates, but it almost seems like certain engineers add them; others don't.  It's very random where they've been added.

An intersection near me on a county road was slightly modified and the signals retrofitted with the reflectorized backplates; it's the first intersection in my county I can think of with them.
Exaclty. I've heard from some engineers they don't think they're needed unless the limit is 45+ MPH. so much so they will remove the reflective tape from their signals when they're installed
iPhone

NJ as a rule doesn't use backplates at all. 

When backplates have been added recently, they've been reflectorized. And in regards to the intersection I mentioned, the main road is 35 mph; the cross street is 25 mph.  There were no backplates prior to the mod.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 01:41:56 AM
Everything here (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8579222,-94.5470328,3a,48.7y,42.12h,95.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRwHRSgLFjZkSdwWXUNkMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) suggests that it's a left turn... except the actual traffic signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on October 07, 2021, 02:55:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 01:41:56 AM
Everything here (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8579222,-94.5470328,3a,48.7y,42.12h,95.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRwHRSgLFjZkSdwWXUNkMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) suggests that it's a left turn... except the actual traffic signals.
I mean, the stop bars are on an angle. It really isn't a full left turn and Missouri may not orient arrows on an angle, I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 07:19:47 AM
Quote from: signalman on October 07, 2021, 02:55:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 01:41:56 AM
Everything here (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8579222,-94.5470328,3a,48.7y,42.12h,95.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRwHRSgLFjZkSdwWXUNkMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) suggests that it's a left turn... except the actual traffic signals.
I mean, the stop bars are on an angle. It really isn't a full left turn and Missouri may not orient arrows on an angle, I'm not sure.
This is the first one I've seen MO use straight arrows for DDI off ramp left turns. The ones I've been on (in the St Louis area) all use left arrows.

- I-270 exit 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7148223,-90.4480337,3a,48.9y,143.14h,91.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4VHHyVUb0rfeNYhkgmPe6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
- I-70 exit 229 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7691772,-90.4937913,3a,39.5y,246.66h,84.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMsra1TacCEw6MWboAJDizw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
- I-70 exit 222 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8002813,-90.6199516,3a,52.5y,216.44h,90.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7bdepCiVCs-F8R4oSehq-w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 08:41:00 AM
I found this in another DDI (in another state). How common are red "straight" arrows in the US? I've always seen green straight arrows used with a red ball, even with left or right red arrows.
(https://i.imgur.com/8xs8clE.png?1)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on October 07, 2021, 10:08:35 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 04, 2021, 09:53:59 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Khfq8sLiJTbqvgGL7
Violation of MUTCD using green arrows to indicate a one way is coming and either must turn left or right. As a left green is reserved for protection again other vehicles, this one has oncoming cars when light is green with the two arrows.

Plus rare use of 8 inch arrows lenses as NJ phased them out with Bell Bottoms when the Vietnam War was going on.


Plus here is a yellow beacon light used with a Yield sign, that is unusual.
https://goo.gl/maps/vQ7AUBCWvUL8BfSz9

I remeber finding these, honestly it's pretty cool with the old Marbelite 19408's.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on October 07, 2021, 01:15:41 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 08:41:00 AM
I found this in another DDI (in another state). How common are red "straight" arrows in the US? I've always seen green straight arrows used with a red ball, even with left or right red arrows.
(https://i.imgur.com/8xs8clE.png?1)
Vertical red arrows are an MUTCD violation, but some can be found around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 07, 2021, 04:07:17 PM
Quote from: signalman on October 07, 2021, 02:55:17 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 01:41:56 AM
Everything here (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8579222,-94.5470328,3a,48.7y,42.12h,95.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxRwHRSgLFjZkSdwWXUNkMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) suggests that it's a left turn... except the actual traffic signals.
I mean, the stop bars are on an angle. It really isn't a full left turn and Missouri may not orient arrows on an angle, I'm not sure.

Now let me get this straight........The authorities in Missouri are smart enough to use a diverging diamond interchange, but not smart enough to orient and angle the signal arrows correctly?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on October 07, 2021, 06:13:10 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 08:41:00 AM
I found this in another DDI (in another state). How common are red "straight" arrows in the US? I've always seen green straight arrows used with a red ball, even with left or right red arrows.
(https://i.imgur.com/8xs8clE.png?1)

Jack Horkheimer signals: Keep Looking Up ;)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 08, 2021, 02:39:32 PM
Las Vegas has straight red arrows at some intersections
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 09, 2021, 02:22:42 PM
Seen on a trip to Oregon yesterday:

Longview: Textual, and very dim pedestrian signals. (https://goo.gl/maps/tsmCxAAfcV53DGux8)

St. Hellens: Single light housing over an intersection. (https://goo.gl/maps/3DEvr2vb1Bc1FHPk6)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 10, 2021, 05:02:20 PM
Quote from: signalman on October 07, 2021, 01:15:41 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 08:41:00 AM
I found this in another DDI (in another state). How common are red "straight" arrows in the US? I've always seen green straight arrows used with a red ball, even with left or right red arrows.
(https://i.imgur.com/8xs8clE.png?1)
Vertical red arrows are an MUTCD violation, but some can be found around.

Nevada tends to use vertical/straight red arrows at DDI crossovers, despite them being disallowed by MUTCD. There's also a few straight red arrows scattered around the Reno area on a few arterial roads that are meant to reinforce no right turn onto a freeway off ramp.

Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 08, 2021, 02:39:32 PM
Las Vegas has straight red arrows at some intersections

Do you have an example? I can't recall having seen one, other than the DDI at I-11/US 93/US 95 and Horizon Drive in Henderson.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 11, 2021, 12:30:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 10, 2021, 05:02:20 PM
Do you have an example? I can't recall having seen one, other than the DDI at I-11/US 93/US 95 and Horizon Drive in Henderson.

Harmon Ave at Las Vegas blvd

https://maps.app.goo.gl/N7LGgRmU5Fr1P1oY7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on October 13, 2021, 06:59:14 PM
This is one setup it seems was made more confusing when it was redone. It's a diamond interchange with right turn cut-outs. The main road is 4 lanes with protected/permissive left turn signals. There are no dedicated left turn lanes, only an option left/straight lane. Without completely rebuilding the I-91 overpasses, there is no room for dedicated left turn lanes without removing through lanes.

Previously, the right turn cut-outs had yield signs. With the addition of the ped signals, there were traffic lights added to control the right turn lanes. The signal is red for the ped crossing and also when during the protected portion of the left turns. As installed (and shown in the image), green lights were used otherwise, which to me created a chance for conflict. The green light means you have the right of way and doesn't count for the merge slightly after where there were no real controls and traffic is still making left turns undoing the permissible portion as well.

After a while, these right turn signals were switched for flashing yellow arrows. Only red - yellow - flashing yellow version. Maybe it's only me, but this still leaves I think confusion to most people indicating that I can proceed and neglecting some of the potential for conflict.

If there was room for dedicated protected only left turn lanes that would remove some of the issue, although maybe not all of it from the right turn lane off the I-91 south exit ramp.

https://goo.gl/maps/b6ebhJvkkRjY3PqR6

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 14, 2021, 11:13:36 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on October 11, 2021, 12:30:10 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 10, 2021, 05:02:20 PM
Do you have an example? I can't recall having seen one, other than the DDI at I-11/US 93/US 95 and Horizon Drive in Henderson.

Harmon Ave at Las Vegas blvd

https://maps.app.goo.gl/N7LGgRmU5Fr1P1oY7

Well, I'll be damned. I've looked at that intersection a couple times in Street View before, but never remembered seeing that. It's probably due to the odd angle of the intersection, but still incredibly unusual application of straight red arrows for Nevada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 14, 2021, 11:25:53 AM
Quote from: DrSmith on October 13, 2021, 06:59:14 PM
This is one setup it seems was made more confusing when it was redone. It's a diamond interchange with right turn cut-outs. The main road is 4 lanes with protected/permissive left turn signals. There are no dedicated left turn lanes, only an option left/straight lane. Without completely rebuilding the I-91 overpasses, there is no room for dedicated left turn lanes without removing through lanes.

Previously, the right turn cut-outs had yield signs. With the addition of the ped signals, there were traffic lights added to control the right turn lanes. The signal is red for the ped crossing and also when during the protected portion of the left turns. As installed (and shown in the image), green lights were used otherwise, which to me created a chance for conflict. The green light means you have the right of way and doesn't count for the merge slightly after where there were no real controls and traffic is still making left turns undoing the permissible portion as well.

After a while, these right turn signals were switched for flashing yellow arrows. Only red - yellow - flashing yellow version. Maybe it's only me, but this still leaves I think confusion to most people indicating that I can proceed and neglecting some of the potential for conflict.

If there was room for dedicated protected only left turn lanes that would remove some of the issue, although maybe not all of it from the right turn lane off the I-91 south exit ramp.

https://goo.gl/maps/b6ebhJvkkRjY3PqR6

There's totally room for a left turn lane there without complete rebuild of the overpass. If they used a straight abutment wall on both sides of the overpass, they could get enough space to squeeze in a turn lane–it would only be enough for a turn lane to extend from the signal to the midpoint of the freeway for both sides, but that would've been better than nothing and seems like it would be mostly adequate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 15, 2021, 11:09:40 PM
This has gotta be the dumbest signal placement I've ever seen.

Port Orchard, WA: https://goo.gl/maps/bz42qAuWqtjZJDRo8

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51594578069_6f7deb4da2_o.png)
Bizarre signal placement (https://flic.kr/p/2mBeGwR) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on October 15, 2021, 11:12:36 PM
^ When the sign showing the cross street is in a better placement than the traffic signal... Normally, it's the inverse from what I've seen  :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on October 16, 2021, 02:38:27 AM
Everything about that intersection is fucked up. Usually I'm not a fan of wire spans but in this case they definitely should've went that route. Or they could've ground mounted a couple a signals there. But that island needs to go.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 16, 2021, 01:01:00 PM
Those signal heads are way out of the MUTCD cone of vision. My god did they do that signal on the cheap.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 16, 2021, 04:48:43 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 07, 2021, 08:41:00 AM
I found this in another DDI (in another state). How common are red "straight" arrows in the US? I've always seen green straight arrows used with a red ball, even with left or right red arrows.
(https://i.imgur.com/8xs8clE.png?1)
They're something id like to be adopted. Here's an example in my town: (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211016/a9df9407d355c1a6a0c07ef5e3f40a6a.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 16, 2021, 05:03:08 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 16, 2021, 01:01:00 PM
Those signal heads are way out of the MUTCD cone of vision. My god did they do that signal on the cheap.
Quote from: plain on October 16, 2021, 02:38:27 AM
Everything about that intersection is fucked up. Usually I'm not a fan of wire spans but in this case they definitely should've went that route. Or they could've ground mounted a couple a signals there. But that island needs to go.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 15, 2021, 11:12:36 PM
^ When the sign showing the cross street is in a better placement than the traffic signal... Normally, it's the inverse from what I've seen  :-D

I was informed by a local engineer that it's being converted to a roundabout shortly, so it'll be history soon enough anyways.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 16, 2021, 06:48:34 PM
Question, for a (single lane) right turn, if you have both a circular red signal on one signal and a red right turn arrow on another signal at the same time, would the RTOR apply (if the circular signal trumps the arrow), or would if be NTOR (if the arrow trumps the circular signal)? This is under the assumption the state prohibits all turns on red arrows.

In that situation I've always treated that situation as NTOR even with the conflicting signals. Two examples that are like this:

Augusta ME, this has been like this for 10+ years. BUILD GRANT isn't even fixing this configuration... (one circular signal and one all arrow signal) (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.315595,-69.8057085,3a,15y,110.35h,91.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-YkMuGLpZCV_z_XyeMrgXg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

St Helena CA, former condition until it was fixed. The PD there stated that two circular signals would overrule one arrow, even though a right on red is legal here anyway... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5028935,-122.4667674,3a,34.7y,60.69h,90.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6h4maVvCcz7vs0sXu9reqg!2e0!5s20170501T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 16, 2021, 09:48:34 PM
I would say if the state in question prohibits right-on-red arrow, then if a red arrow is displayed, the turn on red is prohibited regardless of other factors, unless a posted sign specifically allows the turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 16, 2021, 10:52:35 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 16, 2021, 06:48:34 PM
Question, for a (single lane) right turn, if you have both a circular red signal on one signal and a red right turn arrow on another signal at the same time, would the RTOR apply (if the circular signal trumps the arrow), or would if be NTOR (if the arrow trumps the circular signal)? This is under the assumption the state prohibits all turns on red arrows.

In that situation I've always treated that situation as NTOR even with the conflicting signals. Two examples that are like this:

Augusta ME, this has been like this for 10+ years. BUILD GRANT isn't even fixing this configuration... (one circular signal and one all arrow signal) (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.315595,-69.8057085,3a,15y,110.35h,91.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-YkMuGLpZCV_z_XyeMrgXg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

St Helena CA, former condition until it was fixed. The PD there stated that two circular signals would overrule one arrow, even though a right on red is legal here anyway... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5028935,-122.4667674,3a,34.7y,60.69h,90.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6h4maVvCcz7vs0sXu9reqg!2e0!5s20170501T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

I thought this intersection looked familiar.  It is home to an unmarked this light never turns green. (https://goo.gl/maps/vCy9EBhFhW9YA2HF9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 17, 2021, 10:49:33 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/HLkJmFxo8tSmJvtcA
Common use of a signal using a power pole especially in parts of Florida and the Carolinas. 

Don't the owner of the signal in all cases have to pay rent to the power company to install a mast arm or span wire to it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on October 17, 2021, 11:58:45 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 17, 2021, 10:49:33 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/HLkJmFxo8tSmJvtcA
Common use of a signal using a power pole especially in parts of Florida and the Carolinas. 

Don't the owner of the signal in all cases have to pay rent to the power company to install a mast arm or span wire to it.

There's actually a thread for this somewhere, I gotta look for it (you reminded me of something I meant to add to it).

As for the question, I wouldn't think so.

EDIT: I found the thread.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25571.25
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on October 17, 2021, 12:16:41 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 16, 2021, 01:01:00 PM
Those signal heads are way out of the MUTCD cone of vision. My god did they do that signal on the cheap.

Yep, looks like they were set on using only one mast to mount all the signals on.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 20, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
 A welcoming traffic signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51298482107_d0e1a94882_k.jpg)

Signal heads suspended from sign gantry.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on October 20, 2021, 11:19:47 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 21, 2020, 02:05:12 PM
Quote from: plain on December 20, 2020, 02:19:49 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 20, 2020, 01:52:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 20, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/7dckF5mNUU2pRwfC7

Found a 12-8-8 signal on GSV in Newport News at VA 351's Western terminus.

The other day here we were discussing VA signals so someone mentioned most gone but one other in Western VA still left.

That was me lol, and great find! Assuming this is a state install, that makes two!

(Also super minor, but Sandston is an eastern suburb of Richmond, not at all Western VA).

Not a state install, this was done by the city.

Rats. Makes only one existing VDOT install then. I know there was another one at Burke and Old Burke Lake in Burke until the mid-2000s, but that one's long gone.

Bumping this because I saw another old VDOT 12-8-8 earlier (not sure why I didn't think of it before, been a while since I've previously drove this stretch)

It's on US 1/301 in Chesterfield County

https://maps.app.goo.gl/2wSh9XDGD3o74jPX6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: snowc on November 02, 2021, 07:42:45 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 16, 2021, 06:48:34 PM
Question, for a (single lane) right turn, if you have both a circular red signal on one signal and a red right turn arrow on another signal at the same time, would the RTOR apply (if the circular signal trumps the arrow), or would if be NTOR (if the arrow trumps the circular signal)? This is under the assumption the state prohibits all turns on red arrows.

In that situation I've always treated that situation as NTOR even with the conflicting signals. Two examples that are like this:

Augusta ME, this has been like this for 10+ years. BUILD GRANT isn't even fixing this configuration... (one circular signal and one all arrow signal) (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.315595,-69.8057085,3a,15y,110.35h,91.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-YkMuGLpZCV_z_XyeMrgXg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

St Helena CA, former condition until it was fixed. The PD there stated that two circular signals would overrule one arrow, even though a right on red is legal here anyway... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5028935,-122.4667674,3a,34.7y,60.69h,90.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6h4maVvCcz7vs0sXu9reqg!2e0!5s20170501T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3368542,-78.6760949,3a,15y,136.04h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBw36vaBSHIltESendKzvmA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3368542,-78.6760949,3a,15y,136.04h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBw36vaBSHIltESendKzvmA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Looks similar to this one, where the light is green right arrow and red solid.  :banghead:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 03, 2021, 01:43:53 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/QDUCyxeZZzBXNtaKA
Like the control box here. New Jersey used to use them, but sit them on top of a cabinet as NJ don't like the electric meters exposed. The slim cabinet still used long side the large controllers house the meter where the meter man has a key to open the bottom or side cabinets to read the kilowatt hours.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 04, 2021, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: snowc on November 02, 2021, 07:42:45 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 16, 2021, 06:48:34 PM
Question, for a (single lane) right turn, if you have both a circular red signal on one signal and a red right turn arrow on another signal at the same time, would the RTOR apply (if the circular signal trumps the arrow), or would if be NTOR (if the arrow trumps the circular signal)? This is under the assumption the state prohibits all turns on red arrows.

In that situation I've always treated that situation as NTOR even with the conflicting signals. Two examples that are like this:

Augusta ME, this has been like this for 10+ years. BUILD GRANT isn't even fixing this configuration... (one circular signal and one all arrow signal) (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.315595,-69.8057085,3a,15y,110.35h,91.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-YkMuGLpZCV_z_XyeMrgXg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

St Helena CA, former condition until it was fixed. The PD there stated that two circular signals would overrule one arrow, even though a right on red is legal here anyway... (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5028935,-122.4667674,3a,34.7y,60.69h,90.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6h4maVvCcz7vs0sXu9reqg!2e0!5s20170501T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3368542,-78.6760949,3a,15y,136.04h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBw36vaBSHIltESendKzvmA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3368542,-78.6760949,3a,15y,136.04h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBw36vaBSHIltESendKzvmA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Looks similar to this one, where the light is green right arrow and red solid.  :banghead:

And that second one with the green right arrow could be conflicting with pedestrians if there were any in the area, given there are no ped signals at that intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mark68 on November 05, 2021, 11:20:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 20, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
A welcoming traffic signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51298482107_d0e1a94882_k.jpg)

Signal heads suspended from sign gantry.


Yeah, Wyoming LOVES to suspend the signals from sign gantries. Here is an example from the end (or beginning?) of the infamous I-180 at Lincolnway: https://goo.gl/maps/dWUhR5uwnwEXsMvbA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 09, 2021, 12:30:01 AM
Quote from: Mark68 on November 05, 2021, 11:20:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 20, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
A welcoming traffic signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51298482107_d0e1a94882_k.jpg)

Signal heads suspended from sign gantry.


Yeah, Wyoming LOVES to suspend the signals from sign gantries. Here is an example from the end (or beginning?) of the infamous I-180 at Lincolnway: https://goo.gl/maps/dWUhR5uwnwEXsMvbA

https://goo.gl/maps/Y8VqeaooaeW2Hbfs7 So does the PANYNJ in Jersey City, NJ along another at grade interstate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on November 09, 2021, 08:07:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 09, 2021, 12:30:01 AM
Quote from: Mark68 on November 05, 2021, 11:20:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 20, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
A welcoming traffic signal.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51298482107_d0e1a94882_k.jpg)

Signal heads suspended from sign gantry.


Yeah, Wyoming LOVES to suspend the signals from sign gantries. Here is an example from the end (or beginning?) of the infamous I-180 at Lincolnway: https://goo.gl/maps/dWUhR5uwnwEXsMvbA

https://goo.gl/maps/Y8VqeaooaeW2Hbfs7 So does the PANYNJ in Jersey City, NJ along another at grade interstate.

That PANYNJ has a whole collection.... attached to old gantry structure, more modern city style, and wire span
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on November 09, 2021, 08:34:23 PM
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 10, 2021, 11:15:07 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 09, 2021, 12:30:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Y8VqeaooaeW2Hbfs7 So does the PANYNJ in Jersey City, NJ along another at grade interstate.

Side note for this one: Notice there are three different styles of overhead traffic signal mounting at that one intersection: Suspended from the sign bridge, span wire, and square modular masts. Somewhat bizarre...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on November 10, 2021, 12:01:00 PM
Here's an interesting one along Sunset Blvd in the Brentwood section of L.A.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0701357,-118.469442,3a,15y,222.16h,92.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgmP5CXfgyQWdN0nRySa8_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

A two section 3M signal high up on the mast and a 5 section signal on the lower part of the mast.  Sunset is 2 lanes in each direction with a left turn lane.  At this intersection, there is a slight widening to allow for a right turn only lane into the gated community as well as a bus stop.  The 3M signal serves as a queue jumper for the buses, if a bus is stopped there, the bus will get a slight priority over other traffic along Sunset.  The buses will get a green, while adjacent car traffic is stopped.  When buses get the green, right turners will also get a green arrow so that any driver that's turning right would not block any buses that may be behind it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on November 16, 2021, 02:25:37 PM
Found some old 8" arrows still alive in Connecticut

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3515922,-72.0973559,3a,53.7y,175.5h,90.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSARI04Q7CNVzbqHWoPTTkQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on November 23, 2021, 10:36:10 AM
Quote from: Mark68 on November 05, 2021, 11:20:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 20, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
A welcoming traffic signal.

[there was an image here]

Yeah, Wyoming LOVES to suspend the signals from sign gantries. Here is an example from the end (or beginning?) of the infamous I-180 at Lincolnway: https://goo.gl/maps/dWUhR5uwnwEXsMvbA

they're rejiggered that assembly. it used to have various 'city' names on it, and my thought at the time was 'too many capital letters'

fwiw, the big viaduct is a wonderful place from which to watch trains, if you're so inclined.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on November 30, 2021, 12:02:21 AM
I found a diagram for transit signals:
(https://i.imgur.com/csnkvub.png)
Kind of wondering, what is even the point of the "yellow" triangle phase of the 3 section signal. Unlike cars, most light rail signals I've seen are timed to turn to the vertical line when a train arrives, so most trains don't even see the triangle phase of the signal, or it turning to the horizontal line, which would make the 2 section signal adequate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 30, 2021, 01:36:03 AM
The TRAX light rail in Salt Lake uses that type of signal, though there is never a "prepare to stop" triangle. Instead, the "go" vertical bar will flash a few times to indicate the coming change to the "stop" horizontal bar. As far as light timing... yeah, the lights do know when a train is coming and absolutely factor that into cycle length and such, but the train doesn't completely preempt the lights. Trains have to stop at lights all the time out there.

There are also a few of these (https://goo.gl/maps/AGENztKA3JSYqXAS8) on that system. I imagine they are some kind of switch signal, but I have no idea even what colors/symbols are included, much less how to read them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on November 30, 2021, 08:10:21 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 30, 2021, 12:02:21 AM
I found a diagram for transit signals:
(https://i.imgur.com/csnkvub.png)
Kind of wondering, what is even the point of the "yellow" triangle phase of the 3 section signal. Unlike cars, most light rail signals I've seen are timed to turn to the vertical line when a train arrives, so most trains don't even see the triangle phase of the signal, or it turning to the horizontal line, which would make the 2 section signal adequate.
Bus priority signals in NY look like this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on November 30, 2021, 12:27:53 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on November 30, 2021, 12:02:21 AM
I found a diagram for transit signals:
(https://i.imgur.com/csnkvub.png)
Kind of wondering, what is even the point of the "yellow" triangle phase of the 3 section signal. Unlike cars, most light rail signals I've seen are timed to turn to the vertical line when a train arrives, so most trains don't even see the triangle phase of the signal, or it turning to the horizontal line, which would make the 2 section signal adequate.

The triangle phase is needed on systems where there is not preemption for the LRT/streetcar system.  That triangle phase can also be deleted with certain types of traffic signal phasing set when the LRT/streetcar station stop is near the intersection.

Quote from: US 89 on November 30, 2021, 01:36:03 AM
The TRAX light rail in Salt Lake uses that type of signal, though there is never a "prepare to stop" triangle. Instead, the "go" vertical bar will flash a few times to indicate the coming change to the "stop" horizontal bar. As far as light timing... yeah, the lights do know when a train is coming and absolutely factor that into cycle length and such, but the train doesn't completely preempt the lights. Trains have to stop at lights all the time out there.

There are also a few of these (https://goo.gl/maps/AGENztKA3JSYqXAS8) on that system. I imagine they are some kind of switch signal, but I have no idea even what colors/symbols are included, much less how to read them.

I'm not familiar with the specifics of TRAX signalling, but the diagram above includes all of the aspects needed for switch.  But it looks like the fresnel lenses are indeed red/yellow and perhaps green, rather than the standard white.  The main reason to avoid red/yellow/green in LRT/streetcar signalling is, of course, to avoid confusing roadway traffic.  When the switch is located away from the street running portion of the system, the LRT signals can indeed be other colors.  However, this one is in the middle of the street where it could be confused with a mid-block crosswalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 30, 2021, 12:53:15 PM
RDIC uses them in Disney World for the bus lanes.  I saw the flashing triangle that is equal to the amber phase of standard signals on Buena Vista Drive.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on November 30, 2021, 11:23:48 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on November 30, 2021, 12:27:53 PM

Quote from: US 89 on November 30, 2021, 01:36:03 AM
The TRAX light rail in Salt Lake uses that type of signal, though there is never a "prepare to stop" triangle. Instead, the "go" vertical bar will flash a few times to indicate the coming change to the "stop" horizontal bar. As far as light timing... yeah, the lights do know when a train is coming and absolutely factor that into cycle length and such, but the train doesn't completely preempt the lights. Trains have to stop at lights all the time out there.

There are also a few of these (https://goo.gl/maps/AGENztKA3JSYqXAS8) on that system. I imagine they are some kind of switch signal, but I have no idea even what colors/symbols are included, much less how to read them.

I'm not familiar with the specifics of TRAX signalling, but the diagram above includes all of the aspects needed for switch.  But it looks like the fresnel lenses are indeed red/yellow and perhaps green, rather than the standard white.  The main reason to avoid red/yellow/green in LRT/streetcar signalling is, of course, to avoid confusing roadway traffic.  When the switch is located away from the street running portion of the system, the LRT signals can indeed be other colors.  However, this one is in the middle of the street where it could be confused with a mid-block crosswalk.

The thing though is that every example I can find of those round signals is before a switch, either a crossover from one track to another or a junction with another light rail line. The signals associated with the traffic lights are the square white ones that match up with the table posted upthread.

Here's another example (https://goo.gl/maps/8hEPvpA4rUsECFfo7) on another approach to the same junction. The two square white signals control the two possible train movements at the switch ahead, straight on Main or left on 400 South (it helps that the left one is labeled "UNIV" and the right one "SANDY" - the original destinations of those lines). Although they aren't stacked or aligned the same way as the ones in the table SkyPesos posted, the indications match up.

The fact that these 3-section (or 2-section in some cases) round colored signals are provided in addition to the standard square white ones suggests to me that they mean something beyond just stop or go. These ones are unhelpfully labeled "M8" and "M10".

EDIT: I found an example of one of those round signals showing something other than a red horizontal bar in the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/FZt4dp6LfCSe9vMF6). My guess is the round signals have to do with the track switch itself, as opposed to the square ones which have to do with traffic lights and car/pedestrian movements that may be going on at the same time. I'd be curious to know what's in the middle, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on December 01, 2021, 10:49:18 AM
Quote from: US 89 on November 30, 2021, 11:23:48 PM
The thing though is that every example I can find of those round signals is before a switch, either a crossover from one track to another or a junction with another light rail line. The signals associated with the traffic lights are the square white ones that match up with the table posted upthread.

Here's another example (https://goo.gl/maps/8hEPvpA4rUsECFfo7) on another approach to the same junction. The two square white signals control the two possible train movements at the switch ahead, straight on Main or left on 400 South (it helps that the left one is labeled "UNIV" and the right one "SANDY" - the original destinations of those lines). Although they aren't stacked or aligned the same way as the ones in the table SkyPesos posted, the indications match up.

The fact that these 3-section (or 2-section in some cases) round colored signals are provided in addition to the standard square white ones suggests to me that they mean something beyond just stop or go. These ones are unhelpfully labeled "M8" and "M10".

EDIT: I found an example of one of those round signals showing something other than a red horizontal bar in the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/FZt4dp6LfCSe9vMF6). My guess is the round signals have to do with the track switch itself, as opposed to the square ones which have to do with traffic lights and car/pedestrian movements that may be going on at the same time. I'd be curious to know what's in the middle, though.

Just in case I wasn't clear, you are correct that LRT signals (that are not for street running) are associated with the railway switches.  The middle aspect on that signal is probably an "amber" fresnel lens with a diagonal slot (angled in the direction of the "reverse" move through the switch, given that the "tangent" (straight) move also has an "amber" lens.  Those appear to be just like the ones we use on the railroad, which are a bit different than the "yellow" lenses used for traffic signals.  But I have seen where some properties have improvised using red/yellow/green layout, it's just that those signals cannot be used anywhere near a traffic intersection (because they don't meet MUTCD requirements).

For the record, I would not have approved the use of these signals at this location because they don't meet MUTCD requirements (which were certainly in the contract requirements).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on December 05, 2021, 03:04:01 AM
Seattle uses those LRT-style signal heads extensively for bus signals. However, the original streetcar line includes this weird signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6219995,-122.3372044,3a,15y,352.98h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1_oq9jYg40Eea74TEMNwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en), with a hollow yellow triangle for the "go" indication.

And speaking of weird rail signals, I've always found the ones at the Westlake monorail station (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6124905,-122.3373083,3a,36.1y,146.38h,110.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdh6sgw-iihj_J9Dwsx7JfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) to be interesting. I'm not entirely sure what the point of those signals is, seeing as if two trains were at that station at the same time, there would be much larger problems (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Center_Monorail#Accidents_and_incidents)!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2021, 05:40:32 PM
Quote from: jay8g on December 05, 2021, 03:04:01 AM
Seattle uses those LRT-style signal heads extensively for bus signals. However, the original streetcar line includes this weird signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6219995,-122.3372044,3a,15y,352.98h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1_oq9jYg40Eea74TEMNwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en), with a hollow yellow triangle for the "go" indication.

And that one's not MUTCD-compliant, either.  At least it seems like the LRT/streetcar folks are avoiding the use of green lenses.  But they are supposed to be white aspects when street-running.


Quote from: jay8g on December 05, 2021, 03:04:01 AM
And speaking of weird rail signals, I've always found the ones at the Westlake monorail station (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6124905,-122.3373083,3a,36.1y,146.38h,110.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdh6sgw-iihj_J9Dwsx7JfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) to be interesting. I'm not entirely sure what the point of those signals is, seeing as if two trains were at that station at the same time, there would be much larger problems (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Center_Monorail#Accidents_and_incidents)!

Never seen that type before.  On the Seattle Center Monorail system, there is only one train on each guideway but there is this one area where the guideways get too close to each other and the trains need to stay separated.  The placement of these signals is odd, since the operators (drivers) might not be able to see the signals under the monobeam in certain situations.  And I hate to say it, but the placement of green and yellow signal aspects some 20 feet over the street is still not compliant with MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 05, 2021, 11:13:36 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2021, 05:40:32 PM
Quote from: jay8g on December 05, 2021, 03:04:01 AM
Seattle uses those LRT-style signal heads extensively for bus signals. However, the original streetcar line includes this weird signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6219995,-122.3372044,3a,15y,352.98h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1_oq9jYg40Eea74TEMNwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en), with a hollow yellow triangle for the "go" indication.

And that one's not MUTCD-compliant, either.  At least it seems like the LRT/streetcar folks are avoiding the use of green lenses.  But they are supposed to be white aspects when street-running.

That's interesting. The Tacoma Link streetcar uses amber stop symbols, although the 'go' symbol is white: https://goo.gl/maps/TZEPU8WFR9xGu7UQ7

The new extension uses all-white displays; this earlier stretch opened in 2003. Did the rule change?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on December 06, 2021, 09:34:11 AM
Quote from: jay8g on December 05, 2021, 03:04:01 AM
Seattle uses those LRT-style signal heads extensively for bus signals. However, the original streetcar line includes this weird signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6219995,-122.3372044,3a,15y,352.98h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg1_oq9jYg40Eea74TEMNwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en), with a hollow yellow triangle for the "go" indication.

Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 05, 2021, 05:40:32 PM
And that one's not MUTCD-compliant, either.  At least it seems like the LRT/streetcar folks are avoiding the use of green lenses.  But they are supposed to be white aspects when street-running.

Quote from: jakeroot on December 05, 2021, 11:13:36 PM
That's interesting. The Tacoma Link streetcar uses amber stop symbols, although the 'go' symbol is white: https://goo.gl/maps/TZEPU8WFR9xGu7UQ7

The new extension uses all-white displays; this earlier stretch opened in 2003. Did the rule change?

The oldest MUTCD that I have handy is from 2000, and that has the same signal chart requiring white aspects.  My first street-running LRT project was back in 1992, but I'm not sure if the white aspect rule was in the MUTCD back in those days.  I dig around some more at a later date.

For the record, I'll have to admit that I'm one of the few rail transit guys that is a stickler for all of MUTCD rules on traffic signals (that's because I morphed over from signalling into safety certification).  Many of the engineers in the LRT world either came from the old streetcar world or somewhere else (think subways and railroading, but I know some that came from other areas as well).  Old habits are hard to break.  It is not unsafe to use yellow aspects for streetrunning, because a confused driver or LRT operator should interpret the signal as "prepare to stop at this signal".  But in railroading and subways, the simple yellow aspect means "prepare to stop at next signal".  Therefore, yellow aspects are not to be used in street-running applications.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on December 06, 2021, 10:50:44 AM
^ Indeed, there is no reference to LRT/streetcar signals in the 1988 version of the MUTCD.  The "white aspect rule" would have only been required by contract specification for projects started prior to the inclusion of the 2000 version of the MUTCD.  And some later projects might not have remembered to include MUTCD for street-running LRT signalling rules.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 06, 2021, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 06, 2021, 10:50:44 AM
^ Indeed, there is no reference to LRT/streetcar signals in the 1988 version of the MUTCD.  The "white aspect rule" would have only been required by contract specification for projects started prior to the inclusion of the 2000 version of the MUTCD.  And some later projects might not have remembered to include MUTCD for street-running LRT signalling rules.

Planning for the Tacoma Link streetcar (again, opened 2003) would have certainly begun in the late 1990s, possibly before that white aspect rule came into place. I don't suppose the 2000 MUTCD was adopted soon enough for them to have enough time to change to all-white aspects. Or, the signals were designed prior to the 2000 MUTCD adoption and thus were not required to have been all-white.

More confusing, the South Lake Union Trolley (SLUT) was opened in 2007, well after that MUTCD was adopted, but also uses amber aspects; I suppose it could have had its signals designed prior to the 2000 MUTCD adoption, but it seems far less likely. The Broadway streetcar in Seattle uses all-white displays, however.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 08, 2021, 12:23:42 PM
Here's an inquiry for roadfro, if he sees it:

In Reno, NV, I noticed the double right turn from Neil Rd to southbound 395/580 freeway (https://goo.gl/maps/ngqGGmrnvsRq8pVm6) is a "yield". Not too weird, but after checking out historic street view, I noticed that there were plans to signalize this movement. Note in this image (https://goo.gl/maps/xgU6SGmCuu1ZgWiq7) from July 2011, there is an inactive vehicular signal on the far side of the intersection, and two pedestrian signals on either side of the crosswalk. One month later (https://goo.gl/maps/8zn8Ejd2MzGNGuvE7), the pedestrian signals remain but the vehicular signals have been removed. At some point thereafter, the pedestrian signals in the island were modified to only have two brackets and the extra pedestrian signal removed, and the far side of the crosswalk had its pedestrian signal removed although there is physical evidence (https://goo.gl/maps/EdaKKxmPxztmQw3W8) of its existence. All the while, the stop line (instead of sharks teeth) remains across the slip lane, as though there were a signal or stop condition for this movement.

So, as to the point: any idea why they decided against signalizing this movement? I can usually understand not wanting a signalized double right turn via a slip lane opposite a permissive left turn, but the left turn onto the on-ramp is protected-only. In addition, to the best of my knowledge, Nevada doesn't use double right turn yields often, if much at all (perhaps very rare?), so this seems like an odd setup.

Some pictures for reference:

The double right turn as it appears today:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734315210_958bb5df7a_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- March 2021 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPzTvU) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

As it appeared in the summer of 2011:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734073589_3f054fa7b6_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- July 2011 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPyDG2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on December 09, 2021, 12:00:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2021, 12:23:42 PM
Here's an inquiry for roadfro, if he sees it:

In Reno, NV, I noticed the double right turn from Neil Rd to southbound 395/580 freeway (https://goo.gl/maps/ngqGGmrnvsRq8pVm6) is a "yield". Not too weird, but after checking out historic street view, I noticed that there were plans to signalize this movement. Note in this image (https://goo.gl/maps/xgU6SGmCuu1ZgWiq7) from July 2011, there is an inactive vehicular signal on the far side of the intersection, and two pedestrian signals on either side of the crosswalk. One month later (https://goo.gl/maps/8zn8Ejd2MzGNGuvE7), the pedestrian signals remain but the vehicular signals have been removed. At some point thereafter, the pedestrian signals in the island were modified to only have two brackets and the extra pedestrian signal removed, and the far side of the crosswalk had its pedestrian signal removed although there is physical evidence (https://goo.gl/maps/EdaKKxmPxztmQw3W8) of its existence. All the while, the stop line (instead of sharks teeth) remains across the slip lane, as though there were a signal or stop condition for this movement.

So, as to the point: any idea why they decided against signalizing this movement? I can usually understand not wanting a signalized double right turn via a slip lane opposite a permissive left turn, but the left turn onto the on-ramp is protected-only. In addition, to the best of my knowledge, Nevada doesn't use double right turn yields often, if much at all (perhaps very rare?), so this seems like an odd setup.

Some pictures for reference:

The double right turn as it appears today:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734315210_958bb5df7a_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- March 2021 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPzTvU) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

As it appeared in the summer of 2011:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734073589_3f054fa7b6_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- July 2011 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPyDG2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

Interesting. I looked at the 2007 GSV from 580 and it seems to indicate that the inactive right-turn signal which was removed in 2011 was there four years before (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4678028,-119.7882796,3a,33.1y,229.27h,90.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNBYx6wFkEeLr69T6BAOpmA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664/).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 12, 2021, 04:20:33 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 09, 2021, 12:00:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2021, 12:23:42 PM
Here's an inquiry for roadfro, if he sees it:

In Reno, NV, I noticed the double right turn from Neil Rd to southbound 395/580 freeway (https://goo.gl/maps/ngqGGmrnvsRq8pVm6) is a "yield". Not too weird, but after checking out historic street view, I noticed that there were plans to signalize this movement. Note in this image (https://goo.gl/maps/xgU6SGmCuu1ZgWiq7) from July 2011, there is an inactive vehicular signal on the far side of the intersection, and two pedestrian signals on either side of the crosswalk. One month later (https://goo.gl/maps/8zn8Ejd2MzGNGuvE7), the pedestrian signals remain but the vehicular signals have been removed. At some point thereafter, the pedestrian signals in the island were modified to only have two brackets and the extra pedestrian signal removed, and the far side of the crosswalk had its pedestrian signal removed although there is physical evidence (https://goo.gl/maps/EdaKKxmPxztmQw3W8) of its existence. All the while, the stop line (instead of sharks teeth) remains across the slip lane, as though there were a signal or stop condition for this movement.

So, as to the point: any idea why they decided against signalizing this movement? I can usually understand not wanting a signalized double right turn via a slip lane opposite a permissive left turn, but the left turn onto the on-ramp is protected-only. In addition, to the best of my knowledge, Nevada doesn't use double right turn yields often, if much at all (perhaps very rare?), so this seems like an odd setup.

Some pictures for reference:

The double right turn as it appears today:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734315210_958bb5df7a_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- March 2021 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPzTvU) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

As it appeared in the summer of 2011:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734073589_3f054fa7b6_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- July 2011 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPyDG2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

Interesting. I looked at the 2007 GSV from 580 and it seems to indicate that the inactive right-turn signal which was removed in 2011 was there four years before (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4678028,-119.7882796,3a,33.1y,229.27h,90.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNBYx6wFkEeLr69T6BAOpmA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664/).

I'm not entirely certain... But I think I have an explanation given other contextual factors.

First some context. The area around the US 395/Neil Road interchange has long been one of the biggest and busiest commercial business districts of the Reno area. Meadowood Mall was constructed in the late 1970s as development in Reno was moving further south from downtown. Note that Virginia Street in the area is the original US 395 highway, and the freeway construction reached the half interchange at Virginia St (what's now exit 31) in 1981. A lot of the shopping centers in the area started getting developed after that, with much of it coming in the mid-late 1990s (especially all of it along Kietzke Lane, which itself was extended south from Virginia Street during the 80s. As this area built up as the main commercial shopping area of the region and a lot of new housing was being built further south, one lacking mobility element was that the half-interchange didn't allow for freeway entry to the south, so the nearest place for all of this shopping traffic to head back to the south meadows region was the interchange at Neil Road (formerly Del Monte Lane).

When I came to Reno for college in 2001, the intersection of Kietzke Lane and Neil Road was a 4-way stop. This all-way stop would often have long back-ups on Kietzke for those coming from retail areas to the north trying to access US 395 south. By Historic Aerials imagery, the intersection was converted to a roundabout somewhere between 2006 and 2010 (based on the StreetView STLmapboy found, the roundabout was likely completed in 2007). Part of the reason for the roundabout construction was to make the southbound left turn from Kietzke to eastbound Neil the predominant movement, and the dual right turn lane from Neil Road to US 395 south was constructed simultaneously with the roundabout. I can't recall for sure (I've always lived in northern Reno, so never had much occasion to use this movement), but I'm fairly certain that the dual right turn was fully signalized as a protected right turn when it was initially constructed.

Keep in mind during all this time, what is now Meadowood Mall Way did not exist beyond the Best Buy. In the 2000s, the Washoe County RTC had begun planning to punch Meadowood Mall Way through under US 395 to Kietzke Lane and create a new interchange. The eventual design is what we have today–Niel Road was converted from a full diamond to a split diamond with Meadowood Mall Way, providing new circulation in the area and a more direct means for some of the retail traffic to access US 395 southbound (as well as providing some relief to the existing half diamond at Virginia). Much of Washoe County's ARRA stimulus funding went in to making this project happen, which started (I believe) in late 2009 and completed sometime in 2012–panning left from the July 2011 street view jakeroot linked, you can see construction on the southbound off ramp and its conversion to frontage road in the distance. 

So with that context, my assumption is that the Meadowood Mall interchange and new southbound frontage road linking to Neil Road was expected to cause traffic patterns to shift considerably, resulting in less demand for this movement to US 395 south. Given the reduced demand for this movement, I would assume they thought it prudent to remove the signalization for this turn, but didn't think it would be a big deal to leave the striping unchanged. It does result in one of the few dual right turn lane situations in Nevada that I'm aware of that is not signalized.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on December 14, 2021, 05:58:09 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3708172,-157.9315724,3a,22.2y,273.04h,91.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2VbhlaYLw7SpjYG2EIXXLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Very old arrow signal in Hawaii.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 14, 2021, 07:00:53 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on December 14, 2021, 05:58:09 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3708172,-157.9315724,3a,22.2y,273.04h,91.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2VbhlaYLw7SpjYG2EIXXLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Very old arrow signal in Hawaii.

Nice find! Definitely don't see many of those old arrows now.

HI seems to have a lot of wild stuff going on. Here's an intersection I meant to post a while back but forgot. Two typical Hawaii 3M PV left turn signals side mounted on the left, plus a standard signal even further left with a red arrow. Under the all arrow signal is a sign that says "LEFT TURN ON LEFT ARROW ONLY"  :crazy:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/SqpUMFBdo4BJ5bRj6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 06:46:39 PM
Aren't these signals supposed to be pointing on an angle to the left and not directly to the left? Just a flaw for me. I think VDOT needs to learn how to use signals on the diverging diamond interchanges.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197624,-77.4221029,3a,31.3y,332.37h,96.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHMz8dV2JvbgvUc3AIpBgJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, you have a solid green light as opposed to a straight arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197643,-77.42117,3a,20y,281.76h,91.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sleEqInLghqOaoD0nSwjiHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on December 16, 2021, 06:50:28 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 06:46:39 PM
Aren't these signals supposed to be pointing on an angle to the left and not directly to the left? Just a flaw for me. I think VDOT needs to learn how to use signals on the diverging diamond interchanges.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197624,-77.4221029,3a,31.3y,332.37h,96.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHMz8dV2JvbgvUc3AIpBgJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, you have a solid green light as opposed to a straight arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197643,-77.42117,3a,20y,281.76h,91.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sleEqInLghqOaoD0nSwjiHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
I don't think it really matters. I've seen both examples both ways.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 06:53:24 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 16, 2021, 06:50:28 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 06:46:39 PM
Aren't these signals supposed to be pointing on an angle to the left and not directly to the left? Just a flaw for me. I think VDOT needs to learn how to use signals on the diverging diamond interchanges.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197624,-77.4221029,3a,31.3y,332.37h,96.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHMz8dV2JvbgvUc3AIpBgJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, you have a solid green light as opposed to a straight arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197643,-77.42117,3a,20y,281.76h,91.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sleEqInLghqOaoD0nSwjiHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
I don't think it really matters. I've seen both examples both ways.
Alright, just something that I noticed different and is why I asked.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 16, 2021, 08:57:01 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 06:46:39 PM
Aren't these signals supposed to be pointing on an angle to the left and not directly to the left? Just a flaw for me. I think VDOT needs to learn how to use signals on the diverging diamond interchanges.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197624,-77.4221029,3a,31.3y,332.37h,96.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHMz8dV2JvbgvUc3AIpBgJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here, you have a solid green light as opposed to a straight arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4197643,-77.42117,3a,20y,281.76h,91.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sleEqInLghqOaoD0nSwjiHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looks fine to me.

Here's what the signal on the other side of the interstate looks like.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pnW3DBUptyZXWLpV9

I wouldn't slant the signals too much as the motorists in SR 630's lanes might mistake them for their movement.



The VDOT districts, while all the same agency, sometimes have minor differences with certain things. Traffic signals is one of them. For example, NOVA almost always use cap visors while the rest of the state for the most part uses tunnel visors.

Compare that Stafford DDI with the one on I-66 at US 15

https://maps.app.goo.gl/gQeDqEvM7k1nmscu8


And I-64, also at US 15

https://maps.app.goo.gl/fjFaZU5rHtYJq9Jx8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 16, 2021, 08:57:51 PM
I agree that's a sloppy installation. The arrows should mimic the approx. angle of the roadway. I'm not sure if that's in the Manual but it certainly would be good practice.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 19, 2021, 01:42:05 PM
I see nothing wrong with using either a 90° left arrow or a diagonal arrow for these DDI off-ramps. Ultimately, it's a left turn, so to me it makes more sense for the hard left arrow despite that the turn might be a bit more sweeping.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 22, 2021, 02:45:02 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 12, 2021, 04:20:33 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on December 09, 2021, 12:00:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 08, 2021, 12:23:42 PM
Here's an inquiry for roadfro, if he sees it:

In Reno, NV, I noticed the double right turn from Neil Rd to southbound 395/580 freeway (https://goo.gl/maps/ngqGGmrnvsRq8pVm6) is a "yield". Not too weird, but after checking out historic street view, I noticed that there were plans to signalize this movement. Note in this image (https://goo.gl/maps/xgU6SGmCuu1ZgWiq7) from July 2011, there is an inactive vehicular signal on the far side of the intersection, and two pedestrian signals on either side of the crosswalk. One month later (https://goo.gl/maps/8zn8Ejd2MzGNGuvE7), the pedestrian signals remain but the vehicular signals have been removed. At some point thereafter, the pedestrian signals in the island were modified to only have two brackets and the extra pedestrian signal removed, and the far side of the crosswalk had its pedestrian signal removed although there is physical evidence (https://goo.gl/maps/EdaKKxmPxztmQw3W8) of its existence. All the while, the stop line (instead of sharks teeth) remains across the slip lane, as though there were a signal or stop condition for this movement.

So, as to the point: any idea why they decided against signalizing this movement? I can usually understand not wanting a signalized double right turn via a slip lane opposite a permissive left turn, but the left turn onto the on-ramp is protected-only. In addition, to the best of my knowledge, Nevada doesn't use double right turn yields often, if much at all (perhaps very rare?), so this seems like an odd setup.

Some pictures for reference:

The double right turn as it appears today:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734315210_958bb5df7a_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- March 2021 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPzTvU) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

As it appeared in the summer of 2011:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51734073589_3f054fa7b6_o.png)
Neil Rd at 395/580 Fwy -- July 2011 (https://flic.kr/p/2mPyDG2) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

Interesting. I looked at the 2007 GSV from 580 and it seems to indicate that the inactive right-turn signal which was removed in 2011 was there four years before (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4678028,-119.7882796,3a,33.1y,229.27h,90.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNBYx6wFkEeLr69T6BAOpmA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664/).

I'm not entirely certain... But I think I have an explanation given other contextual factors.

First some context. The area around the US 395/Neil Road interchange has long been one of the biggest and busiest commercial business districts of the Reno area. Meadowood Mall was constructed in the late 1970s as development in Reno was moving further south from downtown. Note that Virginia Street in the area is the original US 395 highway, and the freeway construction reached the half interchange at Virginia St (what's now exit 31) in 1981. A lot of the shopping centers in the area started getting developed after that, with much of it coming in the mid-late 1990s (especially all of it along Kietzke Lane, which itself was extended south from Virginia Street during the 80s. As this area built up as the main commercial shopping area of the region and a lot of new housing was being built further south, one lacking mobility element was that the half-interchange didn't allow for freeway entry to the south, so the nearest place for all of this shopping traffic to head back to the south meadows region was the interchange at Neil Road (formerly Del Monte Lane).

When I came to Reno for college in 2001, the intersection of Kietzke Lane and Neil Road was a 4-way stop. This all-way stop would often have long back-ups on Kietzke for those coming from retail areas to the north trying to access US 395 south. By Historic Aerials imagery, the intersection was converted to a roundabout somewhere between 2006 and 2010 (based on the StreetView STLmapboy found, the roundabout was likely completed in 2007). Part of the reason for the roundabout construction was to make the southbound left turn from Kietzke to eastbound Neil the predominant movement, and the dual right turn lane from Neil Road to US 395 south was constructed simultaneously with the roundabout. I can't recall for sure (I've always lived in northern Reno, so never had much occasion to use this movement), but I'm fairly certain that the dual right turn was fully signalized as a protected right turn when it was initially constructed.

Keep in mind during all this time, what is now Meadowood Mall Way did not exist beyond the Best Buy. In the 2000s, the Washoe County RTC had begun planning to punch Meadowood Mall Way through under US 395 to Kietzke Lane and create a new interchange. The eventual design is what we have today–Niel Road was converted from a full diamond to a split diamond with Meadowood Mall Way, providing new circulation in the area and a more direct means for some of the retail traffic to access US 395 southbound (as well as providing some relief to the existing half diamond at Virginia). Much of Washoe County's ARRA stimulus funding went in to making this project happen, which started (I believe) in late 2009 and completed sometime in 2012–panning left from the July 2011 street view jakeroot linked, you can see construction on the southbound off ramp and its conversion to frontage road in the distance. 

So with that context, my assumption is that the Meadowood Mall interchange and new southbound frontage road linking to Neil Road was expected to cause traffic patterns to shift considerably, resulting in less demand for this movement to US 395 south. Given the reduced demand for this movement, I would assume they thought it prudent to remove the signalization for this turn, but didn't think it would be a big deal to leave the striping unchanged. It does result in one of the few dual right turn lane situations in Nevada that I'm aware of that is not signalized.

Thank you for that thorough explanation!

I would add, that IMO, the primary reason to signalize this right turn would be pedestrian safety.  If there are sufficient numbers of pedestrians that would walk along the Neil Rd sidewalk and would continue walking under 580, a dedicated pedestrian phase would increase pedestrian safety.  It would seem though, that there aren't many walking here, so the dedicated signal was discarded.

I think that the roundabout also comes into play here.  You certainly wouldn't want a long red for this right turn movement that would likely cause back ups in the roundabout.  So unless the pedestrian safety issue is prominent, a restricted right turn would cause backups, and that should be avoided.

If NDOT decides to revisit signalization here, I believe they should consider a 4-aspect FYA right turn signal.  Green arrow for protected movements, generally when Neil Rd EB has the green signal indication.  Red arrow when right turn would not be allowed (generally for pedestrian crossing).  Flashing yellow arrow for the general yield movement, when westbound lefts from Neil or traffic from the service road have the right of way (and no pedestrians are crossing). 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 04, 2022, 10:12:43 AM
A FLYA I found with no green arrow section.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51798191271_313137a262_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on January 04, 2022, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 04, 2022, 10:12:43 AM
A FLYA I found with no green arrow section.

[img snipped[/img]
Seen a lot of those in the St Louis area. I don't think they're that uncommon.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on January 04, 2022, 11:06:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 04, 2022, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 04, 2022, 10:12:43 AM
A FLYA I found with no green arrow section.

[img snipped[/img]
Seen a lot of those in the St Louis area. I don’t think they’re that uncommon.

They aren't. I have seen plenty of them in the greater Atlanta area. Sometimes the bottom section is a bimodal green/FYA, but other times there is no capacity for any sort of green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on January 04, 2022, 08:19:30 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 04, 2022, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 04, 2022, 10:12:43 AM
A FLYA I found with no green arrow section.

[img snipped[/img]
Seen a lot of those in the St Louis area. I don't think they're that uncommon.

They're fairly common in the Milwaukee area, especially where one direction of a street has a flashing yellow arrow that has a green arrow section, but the other doesn't have a protected left turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 06, 2022, 10:49:33 AM
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51803891354_0e77ba5979_k.jpg

Here is one SC uses a lot.  Two flashers that flash vertically which seems to be the norm in SC, from what I heard here and have seen driving the state.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51803891354_0e77ba5979_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on January 09, 2022, 09:16:59 PM
Here's something you don't see every day: Brand-new 8" arrows! This signal is most likely temporary, being part of the temporary access to the ferry terminal during construction, but it's still quite a strange sight. Plus, the visors are installed sideways, which I'm sure is an attempt at limiting the field of view (though not a particularly common way of doing so around here).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51811601344_389a31d5f7_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mWpZZs)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51810298322_e48fd468d4_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mWijDy)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 10, 2022, 04:06:10 PM
Quote from: jay8g on January 09, 2022, 09:16:59 PM
Here's something you don't see every day: Brand-new 8" arrows! This signal is most likely temporary, being part of the temporary access to the ferry terminal during construction, but it's still quite a strange sight. Plus, the visors are installed sideways, which I'm sure is an attempt at limiting the field of view (though not a particularly common way of doing so around here).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51811601344_389a31d5f7_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mWpZZs)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51810298322_e48fd468d4_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mWijDy)
Wow this is unique ! I think the signal plans for this project are public online somewhere, I remember reading them. We'll see if it stays


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mr Kite on January 10, 2022, 04:34:05 PM
Looks "continental".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on January 12, 2022, 11:34:08 PM
I think the engineers put this reflective backplate on...backwards?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3009891,-76.8170258,3a,38.4y,280h,91.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svkl9KAg_j0Vk4fy4bFUCQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 13, 2022, 12:03:31 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 12, 2022, 11:34:08 PM
I think the engineers put this reflective backplate on...backwards?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3009891,-76.8170258,3a,38.4y,280h,91.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svkl9KAg_j0Vk4fy4bFUCQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Reminds me of King County, WA, and a few cities within it, where the backside of backplates are very often solid yellow (in addition to the yellow signal housings):

https://goo.gl/maps/96XDZ9JfuPudPRoy8
https://goo.gl/maps/c9r9ZvqbJrPE7L2j9 (HAWK)
https://goo.gl/maps/stsnuEaQfw4zDP32A
https://goo.gl/maps/ejyeWrMM9a2dYwTB8 (Frankensignal)
https://goo.gl/maps/8ZjL4tcc29hoFqRN7

Not sure I have seen one with a reflective backside though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 13, 2022, 08:08:02 PM
That HAWK signal has yellow backplates which are not MUTCD compliant. Though the requirement for black backplates is almost irrelevant today with the yellow reflective edge lines.

Also how anyone could have installed those backplates backwards in Caps81943's post is beyond belief.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 15, 2022, 12:55:47 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2022, 08:08:02 PM
That HAWK signal has yellow backplates which are not MUTCD compliant. Though the requirement for black backplates is almost irrelevant today with the yellow reflective edge lines.

It's at least the second signal in Renton with all-yellow backplates. The other is downtown on 3rd and Burnett: https://goo.gl/maps/mxkkkUKccKvmR5gg8

I'm 99% sure there is another somewhere; erminenotyours (resident Renton expert) may know where it is.

Totally agreed though, the dull black requirement seems pretty pointless, especially with some municipalities installing very thick retroreflective yellow borders (thinner borders are more common around here).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 15, 2022, 01:03:29 PM
^^ MUTCD allows 1" to 3" yellow reflective tape thickness.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 15, 2022, 08:39:01 PM
I wonder if the next edition of the Manual will eliminate the requirement for black backplates given the new reality.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on January 15, 2022, 09:50:34 PM
Thought you signal people might be interested in these signals at this intersection...not that I can tell what's interesting or not...

699 Washington Ave
https://maps.app.goo.gl/upBiN1uwvhc7CSK16
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on January 15, 2022, 10:36:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 13, 2022, 08:08:02 PM
That HAWK signal has yellow backplates which are not MUTCD compliant.

I do not see anything in the national MUTCD prohibiting reflective backplates on hybrid beacons.  Illinois however specifically prohibits reflective backplates on hybrid beacons in the state MUTCD supplement.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on January 16, 2022, 05:42:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2022, 09:50:34 PM
Thought you signal people might be interested in these signals at this intersection...not that I can tell what's interesting or not...

699 Washington Ave
https://maps.app.goo.gl/upBiN1uwvhc7CSK16

Looks like a pretty interesting intersection to me. Lots of old equipment in use, though I don't know the names of them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on January 16, 2022, 07:53:54 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 16, 2022, 05:42:43 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2022, 09:50:34 PM
Thought you signal people might be interested in these signals at this intersection...not that I can tell what's interesting or not...

699 Washington Ave
https://maps.app.goo.gl/upBiN1uwvhc7CSK16

Looks like a pretty interesting intersection to me. Lots of old equipment in use, though I don't know the names of them.

The "round" lights are 1950's era Streamline signals made by General Electric.  Personally, those were my favorite since they were not made too long and they had an unusual look to them vis a vis other signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 16, 2022, 10:28:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 13, 2022, 12:03:31 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 12, 2022, 11:34:08 PM
I think the engineers put this reflective backplate on...backwards?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3009891,-76.8170258,3a,38.4y,280h,91.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svkl9KAg_j0Vk4fy4bFUCQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Reminds me of King County, WA, and a few cities within it, where the backside of backplates are very often solid yellow (in addition to the yellow signal housings):

https://goo.gl/maps/96XDZ9JfuPudPRoy8
https://goo.gl/maps/c9r9ZvqbJrPE7L2j9 (HAWK)
https://goo.gl/maps/stsnuEaQfw4zDP32A
https://goo.gl/maps/ejyeWrMM9a2dYwTB8 (Frankensignal)
https://goo.gl/maps/8ZjL4tcc29hoFqRN7

Not sure I have seen one with a reflective backside though.
I love the look of the double yellow. Portland uses them on bike signals, we may switch to that too.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 17, 2022, 01:09:13 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 16, 2022, 10:28:05 PM
I love the look of the double yellow. Portland uses them on bike signals, we may switch to that too.

Yeah, me too. It's very Canadian.

I've seen similar all-yellow bike signals here too, here's an example (https://goo.gl/maps/wwrnn5MADT9mB1Bo9) in Redmond.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 17, 2022, 06:03:21 PM
^^Odd 12-8-8 bike signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 17, 2022, 06:30:43 PM
Quote from: Big John on January 17, 2022, 06:03:21 PM
^^Odd 12-8-8 bike signals.

Good point, not sure I've seen 12-8-8 bike signals before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Kasey on January 18, 2022, 09:54:29 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2022, 09:50:34 PM
Thought you signal people might be interested in these signals at this intersection...not that I can tell what's interesting or not...

699 Washington Ave
https://maps.app.goo.gl/upBiN1uwvhc7CSK16
Those are GE Streamlines. I actually live near these and could get photos if anyone wants.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.

Edit: another signal assembly up the same road from previous location shows the removal of opposing side mast arm from median to comply with the latest MUTCD.
https://goo.gl/maps/CLqiuaN9cyqmUFDQ7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.

NJ would often have 6 mast arms at a typical four way intersection. On highways it was a neat feature to have.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 18, 2022, 08:50:27 PM
It is good (for all the aforementioned reasons) to have supplemental signal heads on the left side of the road or the near right corner. While the current MUTCD does encourage the two required heads to be over the thru traffic lanes, it does NOT prohibit having any of those traditional left-side supplemental heads, including the traditional New Jersey style overhead mount.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on January 20, 2022, 05:52:51 PM
Has ADOT (here in Arizona) quietly changed their style of traffic signals? This is at Loop 303 and Jomax Pkwy in Peoria. I have seen new installations in the Phoenix area and in Tucson.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220120/3d4b9b0fc18517b061c939ef081d26e5.jpg)

SM-G998U1

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mapman1071 on January 22, 2022, 11:16:04 PM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on January 20, 2022, 05:52:51 PM
Has ADOT (here in Arizona) quietly changed their style of traffic signals? This is at Loop 303 and Jomax Pkwy in Peoria. I have seen new installations in the Phoenix area and in Tucson.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220120/3d4b9b0fc18517b061c939ef081d26e5.jpg)

SM-G998U1


City of Peoria Install
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on January 27, 2022, 02:48:39 PM
I have seen other examples at Loop 202 and Lindsay Rd in Gilbert, AZ 87 and Gilbert Rd just south of Chandler, and the new I-10 and Houghton Rd interchange in Tucson

SM-G998U1

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 04, 2022, 10:20:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pdNVKqEoJU3qUMKH9

Find it odd that a straight through signal head is on both sides of a left turn signal.

I do like the fact, though, that this intersection still has green signal heads that still haven't gotten switched out yet. I grew up on green signal heads as they were pretty common in the seventies for NJ.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 04, 2022, 08:41:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2022, 10:20:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pdNVKqEoJU3qUMKH9

Find it odd that a straight through signal head is on both sides of a left turn signal.

I do like the fact, though, that this intersection still has green signal heads that still haven't gotten switched out yet. I grew up on green signal heads as they were pretty common in the seventies for NJ.

A circular green to the left of a left-turn arrow is common in New Jersey (and California). New York State has a specific rule prohibiting that practice. I have mixed feelings about this issue as you can make a reasonable case for either policy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on February 05, 2022, 09:31:37 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 04, 2022, 08:41:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2022, 10:20:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/pdNVKqEoJU3qUMKH9

Find it odd that a straight through signal head is on both sides of a left turn signal.

I do like the fact, though, that this intersection still has green signal heads that still haven't gotten switched out yet. I grew up on green signal heads as they were pretty common in the seventies for NJ.

A circular green to the left of a left-turn arrow is common in New Jersey (and California). New York State has a specific rule prohibiting that practice. I have mixed feelings about this issue as you can make a reasonable case for either policy.

The opposite side does not have it. In this case it may also be for visibility as there is a S-curve before the signal. From a distance the signal on the left side appears more over the lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 05, 2022, 10:15:54 AM
I was thinking that as where S Curves are before the signals that they have one to be seen before the curve as we had one in Clark on Raritan Road at Central Avenue but once the curve is reached that particular signal head is out of sight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 05, 2022, 08:52:38 PM
That overhead near-left side supplemental signal is standard in most New Jersey installations regardless of whether the approach is straight or curved. And I consider it a good feature. It enables you to see the signal, even when the heads directly over your traffic lanes might be blocked by a tall vehicle.

Agreed there is an issue about having a supplemental green-ball to the left of a left-turn arrow, but it's a matter of opinion whether this actually creates a problem. One answer might be instead to use a (Wisconsin style) near-right corner post-mounted head when there is a left-turn signal. This is common in California too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 14, 2022, 07:53:05 PM
Very quiet here lately. LOL Is everybody hibernating for the winter?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 15, 2022, 01:45:47 AM
Anybody have any idea what these are sitting on top of these pedestrian signals? I saw them a few minutes ago and got out of the car to take a pic. I was about to hit the ped button to see what's up but a couple of cops was looking at me like wtf is he doing so I jumped back in the car and left lmao

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220215/cca664a20524bca71eceeec04fdaa6f5.jpg)

moto g(7) optimo (XT1952DL)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on February 15, 2022, 03:25:25 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2022, 01:45:47 AM
Anybody have any idea what these are sitting on top of these pedestrian signals? I saw them a few minutes ago and got out of the car to take a pic. I was about to hit the ped button to see what's up but a couple of cops was looking at me like wtf is he doing so I jumped back in the car and left lmao

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220215/cca664a20524bca71eceeec04fdaa6f5.jpg)

Could those be speakers? They might beep to help blind people cross safely.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 15, 2022, 09:34:24 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 15, 2022, 03:25:25 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2022, 01:45:47 AM
Anybody have any idea what these are sitting on top of these pedestrian signals? I saw them a few minutes ago and got out of the car to take a pic. I was about to hit the ped button to see what's up but a couple of cops was looking at me like wtf is he doing so I jumped back in the car and left lmao

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220215/cca664a20524bca71eceeec04fdaa6f5.jpg)

Could those be speakers? They might beep to help blind people cross safely.
Yes they are beepers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 15, 2022, 05:49:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 15, 2022, 09:34:24 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on February 15, 2022, 03:25:25 AM
Quote from: plain on February 15, 2022, 01:45:47 AM
Anybody have any idea what these are sitting on top of these pedestrian signals? I saw them a few minutes ago and got out of the car to take a pic. I was about to hit the ped button to see what's up but a couple of cops was looking at me like wtf is he doing so I jumped back in the car and left lmao

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220215/cca664a20524bca71eceeec04fdaa6f5.jpg)

Could those be speakers? They might beep to help blind people cross safely.
Yes they are beepers.

I believe these could be Novax DS3000 Series APS units, as shown below. Used to be common around some municipalities around NH-Maine before they moved to APS buttons.

https://novax.com/product/ds3000-series-aps/
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 15, 2022, 06:05:36 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 19, 2020, 04:35:29 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 18, 2020, 10:30:18 AM
On my way to a basketball playoff game on 6-7 March 2020, I noticed this intersection with some strange phasing:

US 2 near Delta Hotels by Marriott - phasing dosen't show on Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.4684875,-73.1786978,3a,65.7y,104.56h,91.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWpA8ko2YhGlAEseV5ZDQ1w!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

This intersection has no left turn lanes, only shared left/thru in both directions. However, at one point I noticed that the signal operated with a dual leading left (green left arrow in both directions + red ball for thru/right turns). Is this phasing legal in the MUTCD? Legal or not, I fail to see how this phasing would work with the lane configuration, especially if there is a car intending to go straight in the left-hand lane blocking left-turning drivers from proceeding when the dual left occurs...

Closer to home, I've noticed this phasing at this intersection as well... (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5282334,-70.42667,3a,75y,352.46h,91.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sm_aLuQghOkp2tzh7drMEpg!2e0!5s20180701T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

Yeah, pretty sure that's not really MUTCD-kosher...

Finally got a video of such phasing in South Burlington on 2022-01-28 when we came back for a game at UVM. Sometimes it goes to dual lead even if there is a car in the left lane only in one direction, and sometimes it goes to single lead in the same scenario as last time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4RAFIqkVrY
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on February 18, 2022, 11:23:29 PM
What are these white things in traffic lights i can only find em in cali
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2961756,-119.0833111,3a,50.4y,360.53h,103.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D206.58623%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 18, 2022, 11:36:11 PM
^^ Coverings as that approach is not yet finished.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on February 18, 2022, 11:38:07 PM
A traffic light mounted behind a mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6446616,-90.2744655,3a,20y,325.09h,97.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2FHA8IGcp7fuVoxMke9c_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). First time seeing this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2022, 11:38:46 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on February 18, 2022, 11:23:29 PM
What are these white things in traffic lights i can only find em in cali
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2961756,-119.0833111,3a,50.4y,360.53h,103.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D206.58623%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

I want to take a guess that:

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on February 19, 2022, 01:06:51 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2022, 11:38:46 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on February 18, 2022, 11:23:29 PM
What are these white things in traffic lights i can only find em in cali
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2961756,-119.0833111,3a,50.4y,360.53h,103.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D206.58623%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

I want to take a guess that:


  • the LED modules simply haven't been installed in the signal heads yet (most probable)
  • the LED modules are covered (not probable... inactive signal heads in CA from my knowledge are either bagged and/or gift-wrapped)
yeh ive seen one flash with the covers on so it must like be a cover with tons of wires inside that go to the panel
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 19, 2022, 02:33:51 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on February 18, 2022, 11:23:29 PM
What are these white things in traffic lights i can only find em in cali
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2961756,-119.0833111,3a,50.4y,360.53h,103.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DikuaEXZPX4YSKuDM_E0dVw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D206.58623%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

As long as your question has been answered...

This intersection is yet further evidence that California has no standard for a left turn signal mounting position, even at brand new intersections. At some intersections (about 50%), the mounting piece (tenon + plumbizer) is between the red and amber, but at others (like here, and the other 50%), it is above the red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 19, 2022, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on February 18, 2022, 11:38:07 PM
A traffic light mounted behind a mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6446616,-90.2744655,3a,20y,325.09h,97.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2FHA8IGcp7fuVoxMke9c_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). First time seeing this.

I can't say that I've seen this either, and I've seen some pretty kooky installations. I can see those type of signals are mounted on a bracket wrapped around a pole between the red a yellow sections (I have seen those before) but that is just wild!!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 06:01:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.

NJ would often have 6 mast arms at a typical four way intersection. On highways it was a neat feature to have.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.438471,-79.1276102,3a,60y,35.28h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sASO9H6wu_qTXnobgDvWSEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Something that is fairly common in the Carolinas is having a near-side signal overhead at certain intersections.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 19, 2022, 08:43:08 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 06:01:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.

NJ would often have 6 mast arms at a typical four way intersection. On highways it was a neat feature to have.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.438471,-79.1276102,3a,60y,35.28h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sASO9H6wu_qTXnobgDvWSEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Something that is fairly common in the Carolinas is having a near-side signal overhead at certain intersections.

I remember when NC in particular used to have exactly one far side and one near side signal for each direction at many regular (no turn lane) intersections, and of course all hung from wire spans. I used to think they looked funny.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 10:07:49 PM
Quote from: plain on February 19, 2022, 08:43:08 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 06:01:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.

NJ would often have 6 mast arms at a typical four way intersection. On highways it was a neat feature to have.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.438471,-79.1276102,3a,60y,35.28h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sASO9H6wu_qTXnobgDvWSEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Something that is fairly common in the Carolinas is having a near-side signal overhead at certain intersections.

I remember when NC in particular used to have exactly one far side and one near side signal for each direction at many regular (no turn lane) intersections, and of course all hung from wire spans. I used to think they looked funny.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0006475,-78.3277254,3a,32.7y,304.06h,94.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2OAhZBs7kt8PmrNNjSKGeg!2e0!5s20071101T000000!7i3328!8i1664

From 2007 in Clinton, NC
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2022, 09:09:09 AM
Original type of PHB: https://youtu.be/YPBRhl-VH3E


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 22, 2022, 01:29:20 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 10:07:49 PM
Quote from: plain on February 19, 2022, 08:43:08 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on February 19, 2022, 06:01:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 18, 2022, 11:06:25 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 10:47:01 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/cDS9CuFWLkPP4L8D6

NJ always had signals with heads over the opposing lanes of traffic.  I never understood that reasoning until I moved down to Florida where the state here follows the MUTCD hanging only the needed signal heads directly in front of the driver.  That created a problem once I had semis in front of me blocking my sight of the signals.

The above location has the two sided double back to back heads as you can see which allows you to have an alternate view of the signals orientation if a large semi is the vehicle ahead of you.

IL and CA have something similar, but near right side side mount signal heads instead.

Too bad NJ is phasing out the median mast arms you see here for more traditional mast arm set ups, but I like this set up here. I don't like the street blades though showing the cardinal directions here though due to the inability to turn left or right here restricted by the NO TURNS sign posted.
I like those setups that have some near side and vertically mounted signals. So many states just use far side overhead signals, and nothing else.

NJ would often have 6 mast arms at a typical four way intersection. On highways it was a neat feature to have.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.438471,-79.1276102,3a,60y,35.28h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sASO9H6wu_qTXnobgDvWSEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Something that is fairly common in the Carolinas is having a near-side signal overhead at certain intersections.

I remember when NC in particular used to have exactly one far side and one near side signal for each direction at many regular (no turn lane) intersections, and of course all hung from wire spans. I used to think they looked funny.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0006475,-78.3277254,3a,32.7y,304.06h,94.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2OAhZBs7kt8PmrNNjSKGeg!2e0!5s20071101T000000!7i3328!8i1664

From 2007 in Clinton, NC

Yep, that was basically the setup. Used to be very common in certain parts of the state.


Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2022, 09:09:09 AM
Original type of PHB: https://youtu.be/YPBRhl-VH3E


iPhone

I don't think I've ever seen such an operation like that before. Is that in Tucson?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 22, 2022, 01:49:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 22, 2022, 09:09:09 AM
Original type of PHB: https://youtu.be/YPBRhl-VH3E


iPhone
Looks like a precursor to the HAWK with the all-vertical signal face but behaves the same way without the wigwag.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 22, 2022, 04:13:35 PM
Quote from: plain on February 22, 2022, 01:29:20 PM
I don't think I've ever seen such an operation like that before. Is that in Tucson?
Quote from: Big John on February 22, 2022, 01:49:56 PM
Looks like a precursor to the HAWK with the all-vertical signal face but behaves the same way without the wigwag.

It's an early version of the HAWK installed by the City of Tucson. This signal was one of a couple that were a precursor of the current HAWK.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on March 02, 2022, 08:01:01 PM
Anyone that lives in arizona go to kingman stockton hill rd has FYAs at two intersections its a part of the safety program its finished i went on a trip there and saw it and i said to my self "im proud of you Kingman Proud of you"
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 05, 2022, 09:05:41 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51912702774
Interesting signal mishap I caught on camera.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on March 06, 2022, 08:23:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 05, 2022, 09:05:41 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51912702774
Interesting signal mishap I caught on camera.

I wonder if the controller gave out, or if it just has sloppy tolerances and you got a picture in the half second both the green and yellow are on.

They might have also put those signals on a ridiculously old controller, but probably not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 06, 2022, 08:30:09 PM
^^ The control box (located behind the hospital sign post) looks to be modern.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 07, 2022, 01:01:42 AM
Found pedestrian signals that can be activated by waving close to the button a few days ago. Never seen something like this before. The sensor's pretty strong too, as it sensed me riding my bike past it.

https://imgur.com/a/0yUAA9V
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on March 07, 2022, 01:05:14 AM
These lane signals are synchronized with the nearby traffic light - whenever the light is red, all lanes have an X.

Red light:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51923254443_376cc1f1c7.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7hfyT)Lane signals synced with traffic light 1 (https://flic.kr/p/2n7hfyT) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr

Green light:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51922185992_60cd525589.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7bLXj)Lane signals synced with traffic light 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2n7bLXj) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr

The traffic light itself on Street View (https://goo.gl/maps/mNaxtHtBBMxWUDeU9)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 07, 2022, 07:44:03 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 07, 2022, 01:01:42 AM
Found pedestrian signals that can be activated by waving close to the button a few days ago. Never seen something like this before. The sensor's pretty strong too, as it sensed me riding my bike past it

https://imgur.com/a/0yUAA9V

Why does it need to be activated by waving? For people who are too lazy to press the button maybe ?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 07, 2022, 08:45:09 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 07, 2022, 07:44:03 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 07, 2022, 01:01:42 AM
Found pedestrian signals that can be activated by waving close to the button a few days ago. Never seen something like this before. The sensor's pretty strong too, as it sensed me riding my bike past it

https://imgur.com/a/0yUAA9V

Why does it need to be activated by waving? For people who are too lazy to press the button maybe ?
Or people who don't want to touch a "dirty" button.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on March 07, 2022, 11:51:50 PM
On Saturday, I noticed a ped signal where the symbol was "filled in" (the whole symbol was lit), as opposed to the standard way of outlining the symbols.

Filled in signal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51924307152_8a4a912626.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7nDv3)"Filled in" pedestrian signal (https://flic.kr/p/2n7nDv3) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr

Standard signal, for comparison:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51925374613_c7438da848.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7t7Px)Regular pedestrian signal (https://flic.kr/p/2n7t7Px) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on March 08, 2022, 12:04:50 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 07, 2022, 11:51:50 PM
On Saturday, I noticed a ped signal where the symbol was "filled in" (the whole symbol was lit), as opposed to the standard way of outlining the symbols.

Filled in signal:

[img snipped]

Standard signal, for comparison:

[img snipped]
Filled in "hand" signals are much more common here in the states. I think it may be a Canada thing with the outlines. Even though I haven't visited Quebec yet, I recall seeing outlines when I was in Toronto a while ago.

EDIT: Looking at a few more Canadian cities, Vancouver seems to be an exception in this, using filled in "hand" symbols in a single display (while the other Canadian cities I looked up uses two displays stacked on each other).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on March 08, 2022, 09:26:54 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 07, 2022, 11:51:50 PM
On Saturday, I noticed a ped signal where the symbol was "filled in" (the whole symbol was lit), as opposed to the standard way of outlining the symbols.

Filled in signal:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51924307152_8a4a912626.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7nDv3)"Filled in" pedestrian signal (https://flic.kr/p/2n7nDv3) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr

Standard signal, for comparison:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51925374613_c7438da848.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2n7t7Px)Regular pedestrian signal (https://flic.kr/p/2n7t7Px) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr

Quote from: SkyPesos on March 08, 2022, 12:04:50 AM
Filled in "hand" signals are much more common here in the states. I think it may be a Canada thing with the outlines. Even though I haven't visited Quebec yet, I recall seeing outlines when I was in Toronto a while ago.

EDIT: Looking at a few more Canadian cities, Vancouver seems to be an exception in this, using filled in "hand" symbols in a single display (while the other Canadian cities I looked up uses two displays stacked on each other).

It is a technology issue.  For the two Canadian examples from LilianaUwU, the first is LED technology (light emitting diode) and the second is LCD technology (liquid crystal diode).  Plus, an older technology that is still common here in the States used a silk-screened coverglass with back lighting.  We railroaders coined the term "Blank Out Sign" for that technology, but the term now applies to a much wider group of sign technologies (including that first example here).

The most simplistic versions of LCD and silk-screened coverglass involved stencil-type appliques, which make it inherently difficult to create thin lines.  There are other overlapping techniques that work to provide finer details, but these require either a separate backlight diffuser screenlens or targeted backlighting, both which increase the cost of the sign.

I'm more familiar with signage used in rail transit and railroading, so there may also also be some other types used in traffic signs.  I noticed one type of newfangled blank-out technology that uses active blacking of the front coverglass when the power is removed from the sign backlighting.  I have no idea why that would be necessary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 10, 2022, 04:47:50 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 08, 2022, 12:04:50 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 07, 2022, 11:51:50 PM
On Saturday, I noticed a ped signal where the symbol was "filled in" (the whole symbol was lit), as opposed to the standard way of outlining the symbols.

Filled in signal:

[img snipped]

Standard signal, for comparison:

[img snipped]
Filled in "hand" signals are much more common here in the states. I think it may be a Canada thing with the outlines. Even though I haven't visited Quebec yet, I recall seeing outlines when I was in Toronto a while ago.

EDIT: Looking at a few more Canadian cities, Vancouver seems to be an exception in this, using filled in "hand" symbols in a single display (while the other Canadian cities I looked up uses two displays stacked on each other).

"Outline" pedestrian signal indications are actually not allowed in the United States anymore. They were used in a few areas, probably coming about as LED signal indications began proliferating in the late 1990s/early 2000s. I don't know that outlines were ever specifically allowed, but they were later specifically prohibited (can't remember if it was the 2003 or 2009 MUTCD that did this, or was some other interpretation). I think part of the rationale was the outline versions not being as easy to see from distance for people with visual impairments.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on March 10, 2022, 05:30:12 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4862384,-75.0234513,3a,41.2y,192.33h,85.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9cNYQiddh82qU5mpivQtZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Replaced between 2016 and 2018, but Vineland NJ had VERY old signals until recently. The biggest highlight to me is the fact that GREEN "walk" indications were used.

Anyone have an estimate on how old these were?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on March 27, 2022, 12:04:59 AM
Found some interesting signals on a recent trip to Florida.

A 5 section left turn signal with 2 green arrows, 1 yellow arrow, and 2 red arrows. Presumably to cover the dual left turn lanes

https://maps.app.goo.gl/4XFz4UsS8TqhmuAD9

Fully 8 inch doghouse, including the arrows

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Prnarts1Uorbptog7

A "seagull" intersection, but not all thru lanes get a continuous green

https://maps.app.goo.gl/JhhHEXFs3DkUp5sk6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 27, 2022, 10:07:15 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220327/7e81748d892112af9530a362c9f1b169.jpg)
Somerville MA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: STLmapboy on March 27, 2022, 07:46:54 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.7897753,-80.3772378,3a,18.7y,246.79h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svXo4n7HrNo5pTWtgT33Ikw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) whole set-up in Miami is interesting. Continuous green left arrow, sign in Spanish.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mariethefoxy on March 28, 2022, 03:28:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/1oqhS9cutTNLgHJM7 Des Moines for some reason uses PV signals in places where you wouldnt normally need them like angled or skewed intersections. This is just a standard city block downtown. The side mounted ones are regular lights. I have no idea why they would do this and spend the extra money on PV lights.

I noticed something similar in Minneapolis but I put it down to them just wanting to support 3M being a Minnesota company. But they also use other brands of PV signals too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on March 28, 2022, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on March 28, 2022, 03:28:00 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/1oqhS9cutTNLgHJM7 Des Moines for some reason uses PV signals in places where you wouldnt normally need them like angled or skewed intersections. This is just a standard city block downtown. The side mounted ones are regular lights. I have no idea why they would do this and spend the extra money on PV lights.

I noticed something similar in Minneapolis but I put it down to them just wanting to support 3M being a Minnesota company. But they also use other brands of PV signals too.

That is really cool.  This is something we do more frequently on the railroads, except that we don't have programmable visibility signals.  Normally, you use PV signals to reduce the viewing angle to help folks like me who see too many signals and might stop for the wrong display.  But they are often quite useful in improving the aim of the signal lens to an exact spot at the furthest visible location.  On the railroads, we call this "spotting" and the fresnel lenses are modified with a rotatable "spot" lens that can be aimed (almost always aimed around a curve).

In this case, there is an overhead walkway on Locust Street at the edge of the intersection (straight above you in this image).  The two PV traffic signals on the mast arms you are looking ought to both be programmed to aim the best angle just under the bottom edge of that walkway structure at the driver's position of each lane (the right one has the 7th Street megastreetblade, and the left one is R6-1R one way).  The view from the location of the GSV camera atop the vehicle is similar to a trucker's view.  However, it doesn't appear that either of these are actually spotted correctly.  I'm guessing that the traffic signal contractor proposed using PV signals all through the downtown area to address any such issues (those overhead crosswalks are all over the place) to avoid any additional costs associated with fixing the one or two spots that do have problems.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 28, 2022, 07:51:09 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on March 27, 2022, 07:46:54 PM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.7897753,-80.3772378,3a,18.7y,246.79h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svXo4n7HrNo5pTWtgT33Ikw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) whole set-up in Miami is interesting. Continuous green left arrow, sign in Spanish.
Loosely translated: Don't stop, you have the freedom (priority).


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 07, 2022, 11:16:38 PM
Thought this might be relevant over here too. Cross-post from the WA thread:

Quote from: jakeroot on April 07, 2022, 11:12:00 PM
I had always thought Seattle's old-style flashing yellow left turn signal (https://youtu.be/Ey27vyMxea4) was relegated to Seattle only. Apparently not. Here is a video showing the 518 back and forth to-from Burien. At the very end of the video (literally last 20 seconds of footage from about 9:25 onwards) you can actually see a Seattle-style flashing yellow arrow left turn signal at the point where westbound 518 turns left onto the southbound 509 on-ramp (Google Maps link (https://goo.gl/maps/wFE5iz1S9yYZL6Fx5)). This operated permissively until 2008, when it was turned into a double left turn. At some point, probably during the 1990s, the approach was modified so that the left turn used a 5-section doghouse, as was most common by that point.

https://youtu.be/H4zHsApLJ4A?t=565
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on April 11, 2022, 01:39:04 AM
Speaking of flashing yellow, can anyone tell me what the hell the point of this right FYA is in North Carolina? No possible pedestrians, no conflicting traffic that I can tell...it's weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 11, 2022, 09:56:06 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on April 11, 2022, 01:39:04 AM
Speaking of flashing yellow, can anyone tell me what the hell the point of this right FYA is in North Carolina? No possible pedestrians, no conflicting traffic that I can tell...it's weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

It could make sense if opposing traffic had a green left-turn arrow, but that obviously isn't the case at the time the picture was taken.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on April 11, 2022, 10:18:15 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on April 11, 2022, 01:39:04 AM
Speaking of flashing yellow, can anyone tell me what the hell the point of this right FYA is in North Carolina? No possible pedestrians, no conflicting traffic that I can tell...it's weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

If you poke around that intersection on street view, the flashing yellow phase appears to operate when the cross street has a protected left phase as well, so there's some purpose behind a right turn signal at this intersection.

However, a green arrow would have served the same functionality. Maybe they made it an FYA as a courtesy to jaywalking hitchhikers, or have a plan for a bike path next to the road in the future.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on April 11, 2022, 10:33:57 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on April 11, 2022, 01:39:04 AM
Speaking of flashing yellow, can anyone tell me what the hell the point of this right FYA is in North Carolina? No possible pedestrians, no conflicting traffic that I can tell...it's weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Quote from: kphoger on April 11, 2022, 09:56:06 AM
It could make sense if opposing traffic had a green left-turn arrow, but that obviously isn't the case at the time the picture was taken.

A number of years ago, I worked alongside some folks in what's now known as the NCDOT ITS and Signals Unit.  I'm going to make an educated guess here based on what I know about how the rulemakers at NCDOT adapt to unique situations.   

For left turns, in addition to adding PFYAs to signals that could display all reds during a cycle where a permissive left turn is now acceptable, NCDOT has also been downgrading a number of protected left turns to permanent permissive left turns.  I would assume that this change is based on a rule using the most recent traffic counts.  That same change could also be applied to protected right turns.  If you aren't familiar with the difference, the flashing yellow arrow can be lit during several phases rather than the solid green arrow being lit during that specific phase (and a solid red ball or solid green ball during other phases where the flashing yellow arrow is now allowable).  Early on, it was hard for folks here in North Carolina to get used to the PFYA.  Nowadays, it seems like most everyone understand that it means "Yield to Oncoming Traffic".

I should point out that my experience is quite different than the typical NCDOT project.  I had a bunch of grade crossings with adjacent traffic signals in two different counties, which was a project large enough to get 3 or 4 different "signal engineers" assigned to my project.  Instead, we were fortunate to get the "rulemaker" from [then] NCDOT Signals directly assigned to my project.  That's much different than working with someone who is trying to interpret the Signal Design Manual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 11, 2022, 10:39:53 AM
Quote from: Hobart on April 11, 2022, 10:18:15 AM
Maybe they made it an FYA as a courtesy to jaywalking hitchhikers ...

Hitchhiking from the shoulder is perfectly legal in North Carolina, and I cannot find anything more restrictive in the Wilmington municipal code.

Quote from: North Carolina General Statutes
Chapter 20 — Motor Vehicles

§ 20-175. Pedestrians soliciting rides, employment, business or funds upon highways or streets.

(a) No person shall stand in any portion of the State highways, except upon the shoulders thereof, for the purpose of soliciting a ride from the driver of any motor vehicle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2022, 02:46:54 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on April 11, 2022, 10:33:57 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on April 11, 2022, 01:39:04 AM
Speaking of flashing yellow, can anyone tell me what the hell the point of this right FYA is in North Carolina? No possible pedestrians, no conflicting traffic that I can tell...it's weird.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539391,-77.889551,3a,42.4y,83.21h,88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqlrWgP1UdGfE_Sm8_QzWcA!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656)

Quote from: kphoger on April 11, 2022, 09:56:06 AM
It could make sense if opposing traffic had a green left-turn arrow, but that obviously isn't the case at the time the picture was taken.

A number of years ago, I worked alongside some folks in what's now known as the NCDOT ITS and Signals Unit.  I'm going to make an educated guess here based on what I know about how the rulemakers at NCDOT adapt to unique situations.   

For left turns, in addition to adding PFYAs to signals that could display all reds during a cycle where a permissive left turn is now acceptable, NCDOT has also been downgrading a number of protected left turns to permanent permissive left turns.  I would assume that this change is based on a rule using the most recent traffic counts.  That same change could also be applied to protected right turns.  If you aren't familiar with the difference, the flashing yellow arrow can be lit during several phases rather than the solid green arrow being lit during that specific phase (and a solid red ball or solid green ball during other phases where the flashing yellow arrow is now allowable).  Early on, it was hard for folks here in North Carolina to get used to the PFYA.  Nowadays, it seems like most everyone understand that it means "Yield to Oncoming Traffic".

I should point out that my experience is quite different than the typical NCDOT project.  I had a bunch of grade crossings with adjacent traffic signals in two different counties, which was a project large enough to get 3 or 4 different "signal engineers" assigned to my project.  Instead, we were fortunate to get the "rulemaker" from [then] NCDOT Signals directly assigned to my project.  That's much different than working with someone who is trying to interpret the Signal Design Manual.

I'm probably guessing the FYA only flashes with the thru phases (2,4,6,8), as well as the compatable protected left turns on the perpendicular streets (Phases 1,3,5,7). (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539147,-77.8899145,3a,20.5y,92.56h,87.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svGkOZZP9el1kkhEYnvDgcA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) On US 74, I thought the FYA would flash during N Kerr Ave's thru phases (4 and 8), but clicking around says no (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2543264,-77.8893708,3a,86.7y,186.75h,78.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sakvJ1H91kh694xgSPfLMDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). I thought this becuase the right turns on US 74 looked like yield slip ramps. So basically, they only flash during the adjacent thru and the compatable protected left from the perpendicular street.

I'm probably also guessing there are no more load swtiches in the cabinet to house a green arrow, and/or there are no more overlaps available. The overlaps I could guess are the four right turn overlaps, and the two FYA overlaps (so 6 overlaps in use), and probably 8-12 load switches in use at this intersection (12-16 is the max I've seen in a TS2 cabinet).

Are U-turns allowed on US 74? At least for N Kerr Ave's right turns, using a green arrow would introduce a conflict if US 74's left turns are also allowed to U-turn as well. I know of a signal near me that changed out the shared right turn signal (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4472355,-71.3601809,3a,48.1y,355.02h,96.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sE2ueKaNlZDzHP65BKnUqcg!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192) for a 3-section FYA (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4473063,-71.36023,3a,86.5y,0.9h,92.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szpI1bCC57k_spWIREMb-5w!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192) due to the U-turns (link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yhxsYxcZBA)) causing a conflict with the right turning traffic.

For the record, South Portland ME has something similar, however at an actual slip ramp, where the FYA flashes on Phases 2 3 4 5 6, and is red arrow for Phase 1 (opposing left turn), or Phase 2 ped phase.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 27, 2022, 09:21:09 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52030750683/in/photostream/

Why can’t Texas ( or at least Harris County) be much neater in  installing span wires?  The cables installed here have much to be desired.

In my state, only temporary signals, are allowed to look this badly.  Florida at least takes pride in their span wires. Occasionally you may have a mismatched pole or two or one strain pole taller than the other like on US 98 in Lakeland with two strain poles next to each other at two different heights and featuring two side by side diagonal span wires,  its nothing as so sloppy like there in the photo and many other Houston Area signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on April 27, 2022, 11:07:35 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 11, 2022, 02:46:54 PM
I'm probably guessing the FYA only flashes with the thru phases (2,4,6,8), as well as the compatable protected left turns on the perpendicular streets (Phases 1,3,5,7). (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2539147,-77.8899145,3a,20.5y,92.56h,87.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svGkOZZP9el1kkhEYnvDgcA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) On US 74, I thought the FYA would flash during N Kerr Ave's thru phases (4 and 8), but clicking around says no (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2543264,-77.8893708,3a,86.7y,186.75h,78.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sakvJ1H91kh694xgSPfLMDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). I thought this becuase the right turns on US 74 looked like yield slip ramps. So basically, they only flash during the adjacent thru and the compatable protected left from the perpendicular street.

I'm probably also guessing there are no more load swtiches in the cabinet to house a green arrow, and/or there are no more overlaps available. The overlaps I could guess are the four right turn overlaps, and the two FYA overlaps (so 6 overlaps in use), and probably 8-12 load switches in use at this intersection (12-16 is the max I've seen in a TS2 cabinet).

Regarding the load switches, if the original phase had the opposing through green phase and the protected right arrow connected together, the new permissive flashing right arrow (PFYA) would have needed an additional load switch.  However, the total number of 30W incandescent bulbs that can driver through an individual contactor is limited, so it is still likely that there was a separate load switch for the original protected right arrow.  All of that is probably irrelevant here in North Carolina, as NCDOT is really pushing to standardize on PFYA all over the state and is probably not concerned about the cost of additional load switches.  NCDOT is concerned when the number of phases increases so as to require an upgrade to the traffic controller (so are all of the other DOTs that I have worked with).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on April 27, 2022, 09:33:28 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on March 10, 2022, 05:30:12 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4862384,-75.0234513,3a,41.2y,192.33h,85.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9cNYQiddh82qU5mpivQtZQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Replaced between 2016 and 2018, but Vineland NJ had VERY old signals until recently. The biggest highlight to me is the fact that GREEN "walk" indications were used.

Anyone have an estimate on how old these were?


The signal head are Crouse-Hinds Type R,, mid 60s to mid 80s.

The peds have a standard lunar white lens. New Jersey was one of the places that used LPS-20s which required colored lamps (65 volt Red or Portland Orange and 130 volt Green or Lunar White), so they might have had a bunch of greens laying around and threw them in a standard ped signal.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on April 28, 2022, 12:54:42 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 27, 2022, 09:21:09 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52030750683/in/photostream/

Why can't Texas ( or at least Harris County) be much neater in  installing span wires?  The cables installed here have much to be desired.

In my state, only temporary signals, are allowed to look this badly.  Florida at least takes pride in their span wires. Occasionally you may have a mismatched pole or two or one strain pole taller than the other like on US 98 in Lakeland with two strain poles next to each other at two different heights and featuring two side by side diagonal span wires,  its nothing as so sloppy like there in the photo and many other Houston Area signals.

TX as a whole never really been clean with their wire installs, but I agree that Harris County is the worst. The state usually have to use extra wires in an attempt to keep the signals level, but not like Indiana, who does it right. They have the extra wires above the existing ones in most cases (probably because the signals are horizontal), which makes the install look messier than it already is.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QRhws7X9AoZXbSs28

This one in Galveston is truly horrifying
https://maps.app.goo.gl/1vdbZLYi6jVXGvD17
These vertical 4-ways don't look  quite as bad though
https://maps.app.goo.gl/xxJvfFxSWxmE1ttt5

Other TX locales are better at it but not by much
https://maps.app.goo.gl/hJ5gK3VbPY3GptGf8
https://maps.app.goo.gl/64WFvCBJQHSyj38g9

San Antonio generally does a decent job
https://maps.app.goo.gl/z5dTQuPcLp4gv3CK9
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S8Jx46rMzR7FSRgU7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Mdcastle on April 28, 2022, 12:23:56 PM
Just my opinion: All span wires look messy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on April 28, 2022, 12:30:57 PM
Quote from: Mdcastle on April 28, 2022, 12:23:56 PM
Just my opinion: All span wires look messy.

I'm on the same page.  Someone will undoubtedly link to or post a view of a nice-looking span wire installation, but I'm sure I'll still think it looks a little sloppy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on April 28, 2022, 12:37:57 PM
They are definitely messy, and I'm not saying this just because I'm a mast arm liking dude. Some places just suck with them and TX is definitely the king of such.

Indiana has the best wire spans around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on April 28, 2022, 02:07:04 PM
Wire spans in general look especially bad when they're with horizontal signals. This one in Austin, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/QVPfomMwd9KkDJkm7) comes to mind as a prime example. Mercifully, it does not exist anymore as 290 got a freeway upgrade through there and the new signals there are all clean-looking mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 28, 2022, 07:49:07 PM
Span wire installation, at least with vertical signals need not look sloppy. On Long Island Nassau County DPW and New York State DOT Region-10's installations are very neat and professional looking and probably among the best span-wire installations to be found anywhere.

Not only that but in NYS DOT's case, their span-wire installs actually look better in some cases, than their more recent very crude looking mast-arms which they are not very good at. And I'm a guy who generally prefers mast-arms.

Sorry, no photos to post. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 08:50:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ltkqotcxt3eYBXUJ6

This is an oddity. A horizontal signal head mount on s straight mast arm in California!  That's impressive. 

Usually CA likes it's curved mast arms except in SF, which even now is starting to conform to the rest of the state using back plates and phasing out the side mounts slowly.

However there is not even a clearance issue here that usually would be the exception outside Nebraska and Texas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 30, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 08:50:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ltkqotcxt3eYBXUJ6
Usually CA likes it's curved mast arms except in SF, which even now is starting to conform to the rest of the state using back plates and phasing out the side mounts slowly.

"Phasing out the side mounts" ? Huh? California is definitely not phasing out side mounted signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 10:57:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 30, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 08:50:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ltkqotcxt3eYBXUJ6
Usually CA likes it's curved mast arms except in SF, which even now is starting to conform to the rest of the state using back plates and phasing out the side mounts slowly.

"Phasing out the side mounts" ? Huh? California is definitely not phasing out side mounted signals.

I mean San Francisco side mounts.   The ones like DC used to have solely.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 01, 2022, 05:11:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 10:57:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 30, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 08:50:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ltkqotcxt3eYBXUJ6
Usually CA likes it's curved mast arms except in SF, which even now is starting to conform to the rest of the state using back plates and phasing out the side mounts slowly.

"Phasing out the side mounts" ? Huh? California is definitely not phasing out side mounted signals.

I mean San Francisco side mounts.   The ones like DC used to have solely.

I think I understand. I think better phrasing may be "phasing in overhead signals", as the side mounted signals are obligatory in California; in effect, overhead signals are supplemental to the side mounted signals, although both are used in 99% of cases.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Bruce on May 03, 2022, 12:57:55 AM
A very tall one on the northbound I-5 offramp to Northgate: https://goo.gl/maps/KGLH4hreDHqurfE37 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 03, 2022, 01:17:34 AM
Quote from: Bruce on May 03, 2022, 12:57:55 AM
A very tall one on the northbound I-5 offramp to Northgate: https://goo.gl/maps/KGLH4hreDHqurfE37

That's the tallest ground mounted signal I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on May 04, 2022, 04:58:26 PM
Quote from: Bruce on May 03, 2022, 12:57:55 AM
A very tall one on the northbound I-5 offramp to Northgate: https://goo.gl/maps/KGLH4hreDHqurfE37

Smart idea, although I bet it also encourages people to speed to try and catch the green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 06, 2022, 11:36:00 AM
Found some more red arrows in Canada, this time in Gatineau. This marks the 3rd city that I know of and all of them are in Quebec.

Most of them are right turn reds in this case with at least one left turn example.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/he5j15LAWBaov4VV9
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4QFMsMQ4tpf6DB6YA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jznHy5SKPp8Er6ZQA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JdcdHKFNaG2cU57L8
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aqDDxNYvg2QbsUoa9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 06, 2022, 04:17:09 PM
Nice finds!

Indeed, it does seem that Quebec is the only province that installs red turn arrows.

I really don't understand the aversion to red arrows in Canada. I've heard it's related to luminosity; all-arrow displays have less lit area, so they are a bit less bright. Admittedly, I've noticed this myself in person in the US: arrow displays are definitely less bright. But then, is it really a problem? I don't know -- we made do with 8-inch displays for decades (and BC, until recently, still installed 8-inch displays very regularly), so I doubt the brightness provided by a 12-inch orb should be the minimum luminosity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 07, 2022, 12:45:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2022, 05:11:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 10:57:38 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 30, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2022, 08:50:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Ltkqotcxt3eYBXUJ6
Usually CA likes it’s curved mast arms except in SF, which even now is starting to conform to the rest of the state using back plates and phasing out the side mounts slowly.

“Phasing out the side mounts”? Huh? California is definitely not phasing out side mounted signals.

I mean San Francisco side mounts.   The ones like DC used to have solely.

I think I understand. I think better phrasing may be "phasing in overhead signals", as the side mounted signals are obligatory in California; in effect, overhead signals are supplemental to the side mounted signals, although both are used in 99% of cases.

Yeah I should have said side mount only are being phased out in San Fran, but yes it’s really that SF is adding overheads to the existing signal system as well as adding backplates to them.  Nothing is being taken away as you pointed out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on May 07, 2022, 08:33:03 PM
Quote from: plain on May 06, 2022, 11:36:00 AM
Found some more red arrows in Canada, this time in Gatineau. This marks the 3rd city that I know of and all of them are in Quebec.

Most of them are right turn reds in this case with at least one left turn example.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/he5j15LAWBaov4VV9
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4QFMsMQ4tpf6DB6YA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jznHy5SKPp8Er6ZQA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JdcdHKFNaG2cU57L8
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aqDDxNYvg2QbsUoa9

I only know of two isolated examples of left-pointing red arrows in Québec City, in each direction of Chemin Sainte-Foy at Avenue Saint-Sacrement (westbound (https://goo.gl/maps/taXx88wdnhJodpkY6) and eastbound (https://goo.gl/maps/uksZ4soNWsegfFmy7)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 08, 2022, 09:59:24 AM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on May 07, 2022, 08:33:03 PM
Quote from: plain on May 06, 2022, 11:36:00 AM
Found some more red arrows in Canada, this time in Gatineau. This marks the 3rd city that I know of and all of them are in Quebec.

Most of them are right turn reds in this case with at least one left turn example.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/he5j15LAWBaov4VV9
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4QFMsMQ4tpf6DB6YA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jznHy5SKPp8Er6ZQA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JdcdHKFNaG2cU57L8
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aqDDxNYvg2QbsUoa9

I only know of two isolated examples of left-pointing red arrows in Québec City, in each direction of Chemin Sainte-Foy at Avenue Saint-Sacrement (westbound (https://goo.gl/maps/taXx88wdnhJodpkY6) and eastbound (https://goo.gl/maps/uksZ4soNWsegfFmy7)).

Indeed. You were the one who told me about Quebec City lol. Before that I thought they only existed in Montreal.


Quote from: jakeroot on May 06, 2022, 04:17:09 PM
Nice finds!

Indeed, it does seem that Quebec is the only province that installs red turn arrows.

I really don't understand the aversion to red arrows in Canada. I've heard it's related to luminosity; all-arrow displays have less lit area, so they are a bit less bright. Admittedly, I've noticed this myself in person in the US: arrow displays are definitely less bright. But then, is it really a problem? I don't know -- we made do with 8-inch displays for decades (and BC, until recently, still installed 8-inch displays very regularly), so I doubt the brightness provided by a 12-inch orb should be the minimum luminosity.

I'm not sure why that is either. It seems like places like Alberta and Ontario especially would benefit from red arrows.

I could understand that red orbs would be more visible, but now that most signals use some variation of LEDs it shouldn't make that much of a difference.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 08, 2022, 07:39:51 PM
I've never had any trouble seeing a 12-inch red arrow even before the LED era.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2022, 12:25:44 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 08, 2022, 07:39:51 PM
I've never had any trouble seeing a 12-inch red arrow even before the LED era.

Well, neither have I. But I think it's safe to say that a 12-inch orb is going to be brighter than an arrow within that 12-inch lens. The difference may be enough for most Canadian traffic agencies to prefer red orbs even for dedicated left turn signals.

Of course, you and I both agree that the actual solution is to use supplemental turn signals, rather than focusing on making that one left turn signal as bright as possible (see my next reply)....

Quote from: plain on May 08, 2022, 09:59:24 AM
I'm not sure why that is either. It seems like places like Alberta and Ontario especially would benefit from red arrows.

I might argue that British Columbia would be a great place to use red arrows too. The average protected left in BC uses three dedicated signals (overhead, far left, near-side median -- example (https://goo.gl/maps/dNmwqBf4NEhUg8hW8)), so I don't think there's any reason to worry about how bright each signal is when there's already so many of them. Switching away from red orbs would at least allow for way fewer ".... TURN SIGNAL" signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MASTERNC on May 09, 2022, 09:47:03 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL

PennDOT still uses those signs unnecessarily with red arrows
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 10, 2022, 12:03:47 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL

At least NYS used louvers in the past. In PA , not all red ball signals have louvers and it just looks sloppy. PA also uses unnecessary Right Turn Signal signs with doghouses...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 10, 2022, 01:48:49 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on May 10, 2022, 12:03:47 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL

At least NYS used louvers in the past. In PA , not all red ball signals have louvers and it just looks sloppy. PA also uses unnecessary Right Turn Signal signs with doghouses...

At least Pennsylvania uses the signs. There's at least one assembly I found in Oklahoma that doesn't mount any sort of sign. Maybe there was some supply chain issue? Most other assemblies in this town use a 3M head with a red ball for left turn signal (without a sign).
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6894246,-101.4664633,3a,41.1y,228.62h,97.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJQ40tlBzl9h-TjdLmTvO8g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Illinois uses the signs that say "Left turn on green arrow only" still, and they've used red arrow signals for a while in most places. Maybe it relates to the fact that you can make a right turn on red on a red arrow in the state of Illinois only if the sign is absent?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on May 10, 2022, 11:05:57 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL
This signal on Ridgeway Av. at NY 390 still has red balls for the protected left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1905217,-77.6857946,3a,30y,232.19h,99.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY5R0Pl_72N9R4d9s0kQ-iQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on May 10, 2022, 09:44:44 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on May 10, 2022, 11:05:57 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL
This signal on Ridgeway Av. at NY 390 still has red balls for the protected left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1905217,-77.6857946,3a,30y,232.19h,99.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY5R0Pl_72N9R4d9s0kQ-iQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

These signals for a double left in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio (https://goo.gl/maps/A8LGQyx4wkatnzsw7) are too new to not be red arrows, but they are still not.  And no LEFT TURN SIGNAL signs either so you get red and green balls adjacent every cycle.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 10, 2022, 10:30:25 PM
Required to be red-arrows. Manual Section 4D.19.03-A on Page 470. Clear violation of the MUTCD standard. Surprising on such new looking signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 11, 2022, 09:16:20 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on May 10, 2022, 09:44:44 PM
These signals for a double left in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio (https://goo.gl/maps/A8LGQyx4wkatnzsw7) are too new to not be red arrows, but they are still not.  And no LEFT TURN SIGNAL signs either so you get red and green balls adjacent every cycle.

Quote from: SignBridge on May 10, 2022, 10:30:25 PM
Required to be red-arrows. Manual Section 4D.19.03-A on Page 470. Clear violation of the MUTCD standard. Surprising on such new looking signals.

They aren't just new looking.  GSV history (https://goo.gl/maps/agQBEC9xjKWRC9wg6) indicates they were installed shortly after July 2014.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on May 11, 2022, 10:22:18 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 09, 2022, 08:32:21 PM
New York State DOT stubbornly used to use mostly red ball (with the required sign) instead of red arrows until the current Manual mandated the use of red arrows and NYS had to change them. But they saved a lot of money on all those signs they don't need anymore. LOL


How recent were they using the red ball as opposed to the red arrows?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 11, 2022, 08:23:40 PM
New York was commonly using the red ball with the sign until after the 2009 Manual came out. So maybe ten years ago they started gradually changing them over to red arrows. There are few if any red-ball left-turn signals left on Long Island nowadays.

I was really happy to see NYSDOT take that requirement seriously. I hated their red-ball lights with the stupid louvers to limit visibility of that head. The louvers would always get out of alignment and obstruct the view of the light. It was a very crude approach and I'm glad they're  mostly gone.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on May 12, 2022, 10:39:27 AM
There are still numerous left turn signals in Dubuque, Iowa that use red balls with the left turn signal signage. Plenty of them along the US-20 corridor.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 16, 2022, 08:54:33 AM
Here's an oddity in Northern CA.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52076855254_56d9084ef3_4k.jpg)

Usually Caltrans has only one near side signal head side mounted. I'm guessing this is to comply with the MUTCD with one head per lane and being the curve is here the mast arm in the front ( which is now compatible) would not work well in the location of the post intersection mast arm ( that BTW was the typical California installation before the latest.) as seen in the distance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 16, 2022, 07:35:46 PM
Seems like an excessive number of heads facing this approach. I count six altogether.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on May 17, 2022, 12:04:00 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


iPhone

What the duck?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 01:04:25 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2022, 07:35:46 PM
Seems like an excessive number of heads facing this approach. I count six altogether.

Florida would hang a span wire  diagonally here and just have two ( one third of the amount) signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on May 17, 2022, 02:09:58 AM
Quote from: Hobart on May 10, 2022, 01:48:49 AM
At least Pennsylvania uses the signs. There's at least one assembly I found in Oklahoma that doesn't mount any sort of sign. Maybe there was some supply chain issue? Most other assemblies in this town use a 3M head with a red ball for left turn signal (without a sign).
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6894246,-101.4664633,3a,41.1y,228.62h,97.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJQ40tlBzl9h-TjdLmTvO8g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Is it a "supply chain issue" if the thing in short supply is the DOT giving a shit?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on May 17, 2022, 02:59:42 AM
Quote from: Hobart on May 10, 2022, 01:48:49 AM
At least Pennsylvania uses the signs. There's at least one assembly I found in Oklahoma that doesn't mount any sort of sign. Maybe there was some supply chain issue? Most other assemblies in this town use a 3M head with a red ball for left turn signal (without a sign).
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6894246,-101.4664633,3a,41.1y,228.62h,97.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJQ40tlBzl9h-TjdLmTvO8g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

On a completely unrelated note, why does Google give me the address as 1115 U.S. 412 トラック?

(https://i.imgur.com/MyEL6eu.png)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 17, 2022, 10:11:51 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


iPhone

What a ridiculous setup. That bottom arrow on the 4-section is completely unnecessary. It just needs to be a standard left turn signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on May 17, 2022, 12:30:27 PM
Quote from: Hobart on May 10, 2022, 01:48:49 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6894246,-101.4664633,3a,41.1y,228.62h,97.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJQ40tlBzl9h-TjdLmTvO8g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Quote from: LilianaUwU on May 17, 2022, 02:59:42 AM
On a completely unrelated note, why does Google give me the address as 1115 U.S. 412 トラック?

(https://i.imgur.com/MyEL6eu.png)

Good question.  My map shows US-412 routed up Main Street, and this location should have an address of "1115 US Route 54".  トラック is Japanese for "truck", so I wonder if the road is also posted as Truck US-412 so that trucks avoid Main Street.  Most of the automatic mapping programs are having issues with how to display bannered routes.  But that shouldn't be the issue here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 17, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 01:04:25 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 16, 2022, 07:35:46 PM
Seems like an excessive number of heads facing this approach. I count six altogether.

Florida would hang a span wire  diagonally here and just have two ( one third of the amount) signals.

Exactly, lots of states would do very little. California should always be applauded for their efforts to ensure signals are well-spaced and cover every potential point-of-view. This signal certainly does not disappoint.

For the record, I don't believe California has any rules about signal-per-lane. That is a recommendation within the MUTCD, but California has historically had quite a unique set of rules for signal placement and operation. Distinct enough that I doubt they even recognize the MUTCD's recommendation. Not that they really need to, I prefer California's strategy ten-fold.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 17, 2022, 02:29:04 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 17, 2022, 12:04:00 AM

Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


What the duck?

I'm not a signal guy, so correct me if I'm wrong, but...  doesn't this work functionally the same as a standard RYG light with right-turn arrows?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 17, 2022, 05:25:59 PM
Quote from: plain on May 17, 2022, 10:11:51 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


iPhone

What a ridiculous setup. That bottom arrow on the 4-section is completely unnecessary. It just needs to be a standard left turn signal.
It's even weirder bc the left lane is a shared left and right turn lane


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 17, 2022, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 17, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
For the record, I don't believe California has any rules about signal-per-lane. That is a recommendation within the MUTCD, but California has historically had quite a unique set of rules for signal placement and operation. Distinct enough that I doubt they even recognize the MUTCD's recommendation. Not that they really need to, I prefer California's strategy ten-fold.

I think Alaska is the same about the signal per lane discussion, they have a table in their own state MUTCD that gives a certain number of overhead signals on an approach that's not one overhead signal per lane, and requires a far right supplemental signal to be mounted.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 17, 2022, 08:19:26 PM
Quote from: Hobart on May 17, 2022, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 17, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
For the record, I don't believe California has any rules about signal-per-lane. That is a recommendation within the MUTCD, but California has historically had quite a unique set of rules for signal placement and operation. Distinct enough that I doubt they even recognize the MUTCD's recommendation. Not that they really need to, I prefer California's strategy ten-fold.

I think Alaska is the same about the signal per lane discussion, they have a table in their own state MUTCD that gives a certain number of overhead signals on an approach that's not one overhead signal per lane, and requires a far right supplemental signal to be mounted.

Very true. For example, I don't think I've seen a double left turn in Alaska that has more than one overhead left turn signal. Every double left turn has a single overhead left turn signal, and a far-left corner left turn signal.

Alaska actually has some of the best signals in the US, and it rarely seems to get much recognition. I know supplemental left corner signals are required for all approaches that don't use fully-permissive phasing, and far-right supplemental signals are mandatory.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Hvdok6admkGeDKzBA

What kind of signal is that red x on the two section for?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2022, 09:00:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Hvdok6admkGeDKzBA

What kind of signal is that red x on the two section for?

If I had to ask, maybe a MUNI (bus) queue jump to go straight (or even left)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 11:33:39 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2022, 09:00:45 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Hvdok6admkGeDKzBA

What kind of signal is that red x on the two section for?

If I had to ask, maybe a MUNI (bus) queue jump to go straight (or even left)?

I'm not from there.  In Florida we use white PRR positional signals in a three section head for buses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 18, 2022, 08:15:41 PM
Roadman65, I assume you're referring to traditional Pennsylvania Railroad position-light signals, in the form of white rectangular bars in the signal heads?

Didn't know you were a railroad buff! LOL
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 18, 2022, 11:17:18 PM
The 2009 MUTCD LRT signals: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part8/fig8c_03_longdesc.htm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 19, 2022, 09:37:01 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 11:33:39 PM

Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2022, 09:00:45 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Hvdok6admkGeDKzBA

What kind of signal is that red x on the two section for?

If I had to ask, maybe a MUNI (bus) queue jump to go straight (or even left)?

I'm not from there.  In Florida we use white PRR positional signals in a three section head for buses.

See below.

Quote from: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Upgrading the T: Weigh in on a New Type of Train Signal on 3rd Street
Rachel Hyden, 22—FEB-2017

Implementing a Standard, Concise Design for Train Signals

Currently, Muni trains are guided by three different types of train signals. We're in the process of upgrading 400 signals along the T Line to one uniform system within the next few months.


The three designs used for existing train signals (left) which will be consolidated into one standard type of signal (right).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: djlynch on May 22, 2022, 05:45:01 PM
Stumbled across these signals in Cancun when looking at Street View - RGB LED matrix panels instead of separate lights. https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742923,-86.8268313,3a,82.6y,244.25h,96.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3WYGeifU8LYMch94MzsPdg!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on May 22, 2022, 08:55:00 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 08:38:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Hvdok6admkGeDKzBA

What kind of signal is that red x on the two section for?

Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2022, 09:00:45 PM
If I had to ask, maybe a MUNI (bus) queue jump to go straight (or even left)?

Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2022, 11:33:39 PM
I'm not from there.  In Florida we use white PRR positional signals in a three section head for buses.

Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2022, 09:37:01 AM
See below.

Quote from: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Upgrading the T: Weigh in on a New Type of Train Signal on 3rd Street
Rachel Hyden, 22—FEB-2017

Implementing a Standard, Concise Design for Train Signals

Currently, Muni trains are guided by three different types of train signals. We're in the process of upgrading 400 signals along the T Line to one uniform system within the next few months.


The three designs used for existing train signals (left) which will be consolidated into one standard type of signal (right).

Oh, that's interesting.  I like this concept, but the red "lowered semaphore" is specifically not recommended by MUTCD because the red lens can be illuminated by sunshine and therefore be misinterpreted by automotive traffic.  That being said, I'm pretty sure that it is not specifically discouraged because a misinterpreted red traffic signal is not inherently unsafe (even though there are some safety issues related to the next car seeing a green signal).  I doubt that there are any situations where a red (or lunar white) "lowered semaphore" transit signal is displayed for a route where automotive traffic is given a green phase.

Fun fact:  What Roadman65 affectionately calls "PRR positional signals" is an attempt by certain railroads to duplicate the position of a magnetically-activated semaphore blade with an attached multiple-lens searchlight signal head.  The Baltimore and Ohio had color position light (CPL) signals and the Pennsylvania Railroad (along with the Norfolk and Western and others) had position light signals.  The top-and-bottom positions are for a clear aspect (no obstruction ahead in the next two blocks, a situation where the semaphore blade is standing straight up (to simulate a signalman with a lantern held up).  The 45-degree diagonal positions are for an approach aspect (approach next signal prepared to stop).  The left-and-right positions are for a stop aspect, a situation where the semaphore blade has a lowered arm (to simulate a signalman with a lantern held out).  The B&O had green-yellow-red lenses in these positions, respectively; whereas the PRR simply used lunar white lenses all the way around. 

By the way, there is another position (the minus-45-degree semaphore blade) which is a "call-on signal" where the dispatcher has specifically granted the train permission to pass a stop signal.  Those are always lunar white, no matter which railroad and what type of signal.  (Don't get this confused with what other railroads used as lower-quadrant semaphores).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on May 22, 2022, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: djlynch on May 22, 2022, 05:45:01 PM
Stumbled across these signals in Cancun when looking at Street View - RGB LED matrix panels instead of separate lights. https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742923,-86.8268313,3a,82.6y,244.25h,96.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3WYGeifU8LYMch94MzsPdg!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Yeah various parts of Mexico have been using those for quite a while now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 22, 2022, 10:05:44 PM
Dirt Roads, Pennsy used yellow in their position-light signals. White was only used in dwarf signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 23, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Quote from: plain on May 22, 2022, 08:58:00 PM

Quote from: djlynch on May 22, 2022, 05:45:01 PM
Stumbled across these signals in Cancun when looking at Street View - RGB LED matrix panels instead of separate lights. https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742923,-86.8268313,3a,82.6y,244.25h,96.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3WYGeifU8LYMch94MzsPdg!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Yeah various parts of Mexico have been using those for quite a while now.

As I mentioned at some point on some thread:  what wasn't immediately obvious to me when I first started seeing them in Mexico is that they only have one aspect per signal.  I guess you'd better hope the affected colorblind drivers know how to read!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on May 23, 2022, 04:49:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 23, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Quote from: plain on May 22, 2022, 08:58:00 PM

Quote from: djlynch on May 22, 2022, 05:45:01 PM
Stumbled across these signals in Cancun when looking at Street View - RGB LED matrix panels instead of separate lights. https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742923,-86.8268313,3a,82.6y,244.25h,96.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3WYGeifU8LYMch94MzsPdg!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Yeah various parts of Mexico have been using those for quite a while now.

As I mentioned at some point on some thread:  what wasn't immediately obvious to me when I first started seeing them in Mexico is that they only have one aspect per signal.  I guess you'd better hope the affected colorblind drivers know how to read!

To be fair, the red ALTO light is on top (https://goo.gl/maps/JxuAjSTqzsAg5Fs48) and the green SIGA light is on the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/kvaADxLyUvcoAs3G7)... and any rate, looking at newer imagery, it looks like the dot-matrix part is still there but they dispensed with the words and now it just looks like a regular traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/dHKeK629kfdixRcV9).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 23, 2022, 06:37:45 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 23, 2022, 04:49:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 23, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Quote from: plain on May 22, 2022, 08:58:00 PM

Quote from: djlynch on May 22, 2022, 05:45:01 PM
Stumbled across these signals in Cancun when looking at Street View - RGB LED matrix panels instead of separate lights. https://www.google.com/maps/@21.1742923,-86.8268313,3a,82.6y,244.25h,96.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3WYGeifU8LYMch94MzsPdg!2e0!5s20161201T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Yeah various parts of Mexico have been using those for quite a while now.

As I mentioned at some point on some thread:  what wasn't immediately obvious to me when I first started seeing them in Mexico is that they only have one aspect per signal.  I guess you'd better hope the affected colorblind drivers know how to read!

To be fair, the red ALTO light is on top (https://goo.gl/maps/JxuAjSTqzsAg5Fs48) and the green SIGA light is on the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/kvaADxLyUvcoAs3G7)... and any rate, looking at newer imagery, it looks like the dot-matrix part is still there but they dispensed with the words and now it just looks like a regular traffic light (https://goo.gl/maps/dHKeK629kfdixRcV9).

I'm frankly still not a huge fan of them. I feel like there's more to go wrong and that they're more difficult to service. They just... don't look right to me I guess.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 24, 2022, 10:04:06 AM
Quote from: US 89 on May 23, 2022, 04:49:48 PM
To be fair, the red ALTO light is on top (https://goo.gl/maps/JxuAjSTqzsAg5Fs48) and the green SIGA light is on the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/kvaADxLyUvcoAs3G7)...

Cool, thanks for pointing that out.

I see the same is true at a horizontal signal I'm familiar with as well.

Red ball is on the left (https://goo.gl/maps/m474t6agS7MPRU3F9), green ball is on the right (https://goo.gl/maps/hY9j4oyAi9TDT3Qd6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 26, 2022, 12:48:46 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2022, 09:37:01 AM
Quote from: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Upgrading the T: Weigh in on a New Type of Train Signal on 3rd Street
Rachel Hyden, 22—FEB-2017

Implementing a Standard, Concise Design for Train Signals

Currently, Muni trains are guided by three different types of train signals. We're in the process of upgrading 400 signals along the T Line to one uniform system within the next few months.


The three designs used for existing train signals (left) which will be consolidated into one standard type of signal (right).

Very interesting that they decided to use red in the final design. The third pattern (with the two white bars) they're changing out is the only one of these that is MUTCD-compliant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 26, 2022, 07:54:15 PM
Does Calif. have a State Supplement to the Federal Manual? If they do, does it maybe authorize the red stop bar to be used?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on May 26, 2022, 07:55:34 PM
Wonder why you need three lights WHEN YOU CANT U TURN OR LEFT https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412251,-119.0473766,3a,49.1y,270.57h,93.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DyGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D196.8536%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on May 26, 2022, 08:56:26 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on May 26, 2022, 07:55:34 PM
Wonder why you need three lights WHEN YOU CANT U TURN OR LEFT https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412251,-119.0473766,3a,49.1y,270.57h,93.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DyGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D196.8536%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Because there are three lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 27, 2022, 12:27:55 AM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on May 26, 2022, 07:55:34 PM
Wonder why you need three lights WHEN YOU CANT U TURN OR LEFT https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412251,-119.0473766,3a,49.1y,270.57h,93.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DyGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D196.8536%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

They could have had that many signals on the mast arm in case the cross street gets extended across and the leftmost signal needs to be changed out for a left turn one.

I do agree though, three thru signals overhead for one direction is a bit much. I know the MUTCD advises one overhead per lane, but two thru signals and the right supplemental thru signal should be perfectly fine, especially considering that's what they're doing on the oncoming approach.
Title: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on May 27, 2022, 11:46:58 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on May 26, 2022, 07:55:34 PM
Wonder why you need three lights WHEN YOU CANT U TURN OR LEFT https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4412251,-119.0473766,3a,49.1y,270.57h,93.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DyGZj6DA4vGSWkVhjn0qHTA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D196.8536%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Signal per lane. It's good practice. In fact, I would go further and add a vertical green arrow for it


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on May 28, 2022, 12:20:45 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 24, 2022, 10:04:06 AM
Quote from: US 89 on May 23, 2022, 04:49:48 PM
To be fair, the red ALTO light is on top (https://goo.gl/maps/JxuAjSTqzsAg5Fs48) and the green SIGA light is on the bottom (https://goo.gl/maps/kvaADxLyUvcoAs3G7)...

Cool, thanks for pointing that out.

I see the same is true at a horizontal signal I'm familiar with as well.

Red ball is on the left (https://goo.gl/maps/m474t6agS7MPRU3F9), green ball is on the right (https://goo.gl/maps/hY9j4oyAi9TDT3Qd6).

That one is...less great. With the red/green background, it could be kind of hard to tell which end is the ball if you're far enough away that you can't read the text.

Quote from: Hobart on May 23, 2022, 06:37:45 PM
I'm frankly still not a huge fan of them. I feel like there's more to go wrong and that they're more difficult to service. They just... don't look right to me I guess.

LED panels like that are cheap enough nowadays if anything went wrong you could probably replace the whole signal head and it wouldn't be too much more expensive than replacing a single aspect in a traditional signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 28, 2022, 08:08:38 AM
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52097637546_2af436304a_4k.jpg
This one near the Johnson Space Center in Webster, TX is unusual.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52097637546_2af436304a_4k.jpg)

Only one signal head for a double left turn setup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 28, 2022, 11:45:12 AM
Quote from: roadfro on May 26, 2022, 12:48:46 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 19, 2022, 09:37:01 AM
Quote from: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Upgrading the T: Weigh in on a New Type of Train Signal on 3rd Street
Rachel Hyden, 22—FEB-2017

Implementing a Standard, Concise Design for Train Signals

Currently, Muni trains are guided by three different types of train signals. We're in the process of upgrading 400 signals along the T Line to one uniform system within the next few months.


The three designs used for existing train signals (left) which will be consolidated into one standard type of signal (right).

Very interesting that they decided to use red in the final design. The third pattern (with the two white bars) they're changing out is the only one of these that is MUTCD-compliant.
Quote from: SignBridge on May 26, 2022, 07:54:15 PM
Does Calif. have a State Supplement to the Federal Manual? If they do, does it maybe authorize the red stop bar to be used?

California actually has a state MUTCD.

The most recent CA MUTCD states in section 8C.11 that all LRT signal indications should be as shown in Figure 8C-3(CA), and that figure notes that all indications are white. However, section 8C.11 is a guidance statement and not a standard, so technically they can get away with using the red I guess.

Also of note: Figure 8C-3(CA) is a modification of the national MUTCD Figure 8C-3 that eliminates the standard three-section LRT signal display as an option.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 28, 2022, 08:20:41 PM
Roadfro, maybe you can clarify for me: I thought California had abolished their State Traffic Manual some time ago and went with the Federal MUTCD. Am I mistaken about that?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 28, 2022, 11:11:08 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 28, 2022, 08:20:41 PM
Roadfro, maybe you can clarify for me: I thought California had abolished their State Traffic Manual some time ago and went with the Federal MUTCD. Am I mistaken about that?

You are mistaken. California has way too many state-specific practices and vehicle code peculiarities (e.g. yellow crosswalk markings for school zones) to go with vanilla MUTCD.

California adopted a state MUTCD in 2006, which was based on the 2003 Federal MUTCD. Basically they took the Federal MUTCD and insert/strike-out text and figures as appropriate to California--and they have a "substantial conformance" from FHWA for it. There are many parts of the CA MUTCD where there are a lot of inserts of policies or state-specific information, which I think is how they incorporated a great deal of the information that had been in the State Traffic Manual. (They're now on 2014 CA MUTCD revision 6, based on the 2009 Federal MUTCD 2012 revision.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 29, 2022, 10:44:20 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 28, 2022, 08:20:41 PM
Roadfro, maybe you can clarify for me: I thought California had abolished their State Traffic Manual some time ago and went with the Federal MUTCD. Am I mistaken about that?

I'm a bit surprised, of all users, that you'd think California uses the federal MUTCD. From their guide signs, to traffic signals, to route markers and road markings, California has a substantial number of unique practices and standards.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 29, 2022, 08:35:22 PM
You're right Jakeroot. Guess I was having a senior moment. LOL It's been twelve years since I last visited California so I guess I'd kind of forgotten how that state is almost like a separate country in a lot of their practices.

And thanks Roadfro for your detailed update. It's all good!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 08, 2022, 02:35:44 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It almost looks like they switched the configuration at that intersection at some point for that particular setup to look like that.

I'm using my phone so I can't go back in time on GSV to see what that intersection looked like a few years ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 02:35:44 PM

Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It almost looks like they switched the configuration at that intersection at some point for that particular setup to look like that.

I'm using my phone so I can't go back in time on GSV to see what that intersection looked like a few years ago.

It wasn't signalized at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 08, 2022, 03:22:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 02:35:44 PM

Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It almost looks like they switched the configuration at that intersection at some point for that particular setup to look like that.

I'm using my phone so I can't go back in time on GSV to see what that intersection looked like a few years ago.

It wasn't signalized at all.

Oh ok, thanks!

For that particular signal he posted I now think they placed the full length mast arm there just in case they decide to widen the street east of there and need to shift the signals to match it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on June 08, 2022, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 03:22:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 02:35:44 PM

Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It almost looks like they switched the configuration at that intersection at some point for that particular setup to look like that.

I'm using my phone so I can't go back in time on GSV to see what that intersection looked like a few years ago.

It wasn't signalized at all.

Oh ok, thanks!

For that particular signal he posted I now think they placed the full length mast arm there just in case they decide to widen the street east of there and need to shift the signals to match it.
That's like what they did with this intersection in Rochester, NY. Note that the street to the left isn't built yet.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1097764,-77.5746501,3a,75y,340.03h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stDb6YLfWm2QB7iCYgcywLw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

EDIT: Going the opposite direction there is a mast arm with no signals attached.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1098818,-77.5745936,3a,75y,208.61h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz29YPlwY-YbQ-ZMqno6k1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

On another note, just past this intersection is a diverging diamond interchange.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 04:47:53 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 03:22:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 02:37:36 PM
Quote from: plain on June 08, 2022, 02:35:44 PM

Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 02:16:13 PM
Oh Bakersfield what am i gonna do with you https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2741154,-119.0389599,3a,75y,48.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRn9H2p_Gyd7sXDAA2SYA3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It almost looks like they switched the configuration at that intersection at some point for that particular setup to look like that.

I'm using my phone so I can't go back in time on GSV to see what that intersection looked like a few years ago.

It wasn't signalized at all.

Oh ok, thanks!

For that particular signal he posted I now think they placed the full length mast arm there just in case they decide to widen the street east of there and need to shift the signals to match it.
Well at old river and panama The same story happens https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2963581,-119.1098749,3a,15y,194.17h,93.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D297.42096%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 05:09:42 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 04:47:53 PM
Well at old river and panama The same story happens https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2963581,-119.1098749,3a,15y,194.17h,93.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D297.42096%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

That one had a shorter mast arm in the past:  https://goo.gl/maps/VZ2zhenoUhcYVWBWA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 05:17:51 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2022, 05:09:42 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 08, 2022, 04:47:53 PM
Well at old river and panama The same story happens https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2963581,-119.1098749,3a,15y,194.17h,93.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dfn39mD1gldxKziwByz2OLw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D297.42096%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

That one had a shorter mast arm in the past:  https://goo.gl/maps/VZ2zhenoUhcYVWBWA
stine and mcutchen rd has this https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2813889,-119.0570683,3a,33.4y,92.17h,94.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjSDvis4Er6mM0BwUvSFGSQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DjSDvis4Er6mM0BwUvSFGSQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D90.425095%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on June 09, 2022, 12:57:37 AM
Here's a kinda neat disused traffic signal mount (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.9254501,38.3961365,3a,44.5y,322.38h,103.77t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipML5OxJyssPlQmBVthODeSdOcjnyXj5qbI3V6FX!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipML5OxJyssPlQmBVthODeSdOcjnyXj5qbI3V6FX%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-10-ya112.464676-ro0-fo100!7i12908!8i6454) in Lysychansk, Ukraine. (If you click over to the other side of the intersection, you can see that one of the signal heads is smashed, and the fourth is entirely missing.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on June 12, 2022, 02:59:23 AM
I've noticed the way-too-long mast arm trend starting to infect Seattle too in the past few years. This intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6061617,-122.3167548,3a,75y,323.92h,103.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKoilGSiJ07AdQFkvQRG_kA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) is one of the worst -- the mast arms extend across nearly the entire street.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on June 12, 2022, 11:01:38 AM
Quote from: jay8g on June 12, 2022, 02:59:23 AM
I've noticed the way-too-long mast arm trend starting to infect Seattle too in the past few years. This intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6061617,-122.3167548,3a,75y,323.92h,103.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKoilGSiJ07AdQFkvQRG_kA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) is one of the worst -- the mast arms extend across nearly the entire street.

it's interesting to note, that one could theoretically pass on that road with the dotted line..
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

This will end up being one of the last signals with 8-inch lenses, as the new BC MOTI manual now requires 12-inch lenses. While I understand the idea, the near-side signals really don't need to be 12-inches; the other two far-side signals are probably best as 12-inches all-around (as opposed to just the green arrow):

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52148010434_4a7092c184_o.jpg)
BC Left Turn Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2ns9bGb) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 12:40:14 AM
Found some unique phasing near Midland, TX. Would anyone know how this works? Streetview doesn't help much.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352566,-102.0587668,3a,75y,97.89h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0Tibwg0tOxWvHHgVW1_zWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on June 16, 2022, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 12:40:14 AM
Found some unique phasing near Midland, TX. Would anyone know how this works? Streetview doesn't help much.

How in Helsinki do you expect us to know what you're talking about?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 08:06:46 PM
Well I'm an idiot and forgot to paste the link. :spin: Should be there now, my bad
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 16, 2022, 08:10:03 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 08:06:46 PM
Well I'm an idiot and forgot to paste the link. :spin: Should be there now, my bad

Nope.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 11:11:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 16, 2022, 08:10:03 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 08:06:46 PM
Well I'm an idiot and forgot to paste the link. :spin: Should be there now, my bad

Nope.

What is going on? To me it shows it is in my original comment. If the rest of y'all cannot see it, I'll paste it again.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352566,-102.0587668,3a,75y,97.89h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0Tibwg0tOxWvHHgVW1_zWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on June 16, 2022, 11:23:24 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 11:11:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 16, 2022, 08:10:03 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 08:06:46 PM
Well I'm an idiot and forgot to paste the link. :spin: Should be there now, my bad

Nope.

What is going on? To me it shows it is in my original comment. If the rest of y'all cannot see it, I'll paste it again.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352566,-102.0587668,3a,75y,97.89h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0Tibwg0tOxWvHHgVW1_zWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Came through for me. Never seen a Flashing Yellow ball sign before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on June 17, 2022, 05:08:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

[...]
Why not just use arrows for protected turns? And get rid of those ridiculous "Left Turn Signal" signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 17, 2022, 05:20:39 PM
Quote from: riiga on June 17, 2022, 05:08:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

[...]
Why not just use arrows for protected turns? And get rid of those ridiculous "Left Turn Signal" signs.

As they are regulatory signage, they are often posted to override the absence of a law specific to the signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on June 17, 2022, 06:50:16 PM
Quote from: riiga on June 17, 2022, 05:08:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

[...]
Why not just use arrows for protected turns? And get rid of those ridiculous "Left Turn Signal" signs.

IIRC, MoDOT sometimes uses arrows AND Left Turn Signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CardInLex on June 17, 2022, 06:56:11 PM
Quote from: US71 on June 16, 2022, 11:23:24 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 11:11:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 16, 2022, 08:10:03 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 16, 2022, 08:06:46 PM
Well I'm an idiot and forgot to paste the link. :spin: Should be there now, my bad

Nope.


What is going on? To me it shows it is in my original comment. If the rest of y'all cannot see it, I'll paste it again.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.0352566,-102.0587668,3a,75y,97.89h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0Tibwg0tOxWvHHgVW1_zWw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Came through for me. Never seen a Flashing Yellow ball sign before.


I think there is no green phase. Only a flashing yellow to draw emphasis that the right turns should yield to the peds when turning right.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 18, 2022, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: riiga on June 17, 2022, 05:08:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

[...]
Why not just use arrows for protected turns? And get rid of those ridiculous "Left Turn Signal" signs.

I've never received a clear answer why all-arrow displays aren't used in Canada apart from a few signals in Quebec. They don't seem to be banned but it's basically a national policy to only use green and yellow arrows, with yellow arrows only being used as part of protective-permissive displays and some protected-only signals.

Could also be a layover from British influence. I know the UK uses symbol versions of the same signs for dedicated right/left turn signals, and only green arrows are used there.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 17, 2022, 05:20:39 PM
As they are regulatory signage, they are often posted to override the absence of a law specific to the signal.

It's just because the signals use red orbs. The signs indicate which signals are for turning traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on June 18, 2022, 11:50:49 AM
Quote from: US71 on June 17, 2022, 06:50:16 PM
Quote from: riiga on June 17, 2022, 05:08:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 15, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
Grabbed a quick picture of a brand new protected left turn in North Vancouver, BC.

[...]
Why not just use arrows for protected turns? And get rid of those ridiculous "Left Turn Signal" signs.

IIRC, MoDOT sometimes uses arrows AND Left Turn Signal.
What you saw in MO was likely left behind from when circular red was used. Sure, it's redundant but there was no compelling reason to take it down when it still gets the message across.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 01:55:08 PM
Quote from: US71 on May 17, 2022, 12:04:00 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on May 16, 2022, 11:11:26 PM
Here's an interesting light I stumbled upon: https://youtu.be/NleEmMbvMO4


iPhone

What the duck?

This reminds me of the intersection of Sunset Blvd and Beverly Glen Blvd in Los Angeles:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0824576,-118.434773,3a,75y,50.61h,91.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1qz_NaLSjADbdYtUHI-CqA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The geomety of the intersection really leads to an unusual result:

First, this is a split intersection.  Half a block to the west, Beverly Glen / Bel_Air meets Sunset.  So Beverly Glen's traffic must turn onto Sunset in order to continue north on Bevely Glen.  At the pictured corner, the intersection is very much Y-shaped.  The left turn onto Beverly Glen is nearly straight, while staying on Sunset requires a relatively sharp right turn.  So the intersection is signalized as though there is a straight movement with a protected right turn phase for the two lanes continuing on Sunset.

Another way of looking at it, is as a straight movement with a protected left turn.  But in that case, they are using a red ball instead of a red left arrow to protect the left from EB Sunset onto NB Beverly Glen.  I think LADOT views the left movement as a straight movement, so they don't have to adjust the arrows here.

IIRC, the sequence is as follows:


Sunset EB:  Red ball;                                        Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Red ball
Sunset EB:  Red ball, green right arrow;            Sunset WB: Green ball; BG SB: Red ball
Sunset EB:  Red ball, green right arrow;            Sunset WB: Yellow ball; BG SB: Red ball
Sunset EB:  Red ball, green right arrow;             Sunset WB: Red ball;    BG SB: Red ball
Sunset EB:  Green left arrow, green right arrow; Sunset WB: Red ball;    BG SB: Red ball, green right arrow
Sunset EB:  Yellow left arrow, yellow right arrow; Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Red ball, green right arrow
Sunset EB:  Red ball;                                         Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Red ball, green right arrow
Sunset EB:  Red ball;                                        Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Green left arrow, green right arrow
Sunset EB:  Red ball;                                        Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Yellow left arrow, yellow right arrow
Sunset EB:  Red ball;                                        Sunset WB: Red ball;   BG SB: Red ball

Here's a video at the signal from the perspective of BG SB.  Start at 13:45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRcsTMj8S0w


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 20, 2022, 08:26:16 PM
That is a very odd signal for California. They usually do better. This is more like something you'd see in Massachusetts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 10:34:12 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on June 20, 2022, 08:26:16 PM
That is a very odd signal for California. They usually do better. This is more like something you'd see in Massachusetts.

I agree.  I don't quite remember how this looked 25 years ago when I passed by here regularly.  But knowing how signals were in CA at that time, I believe it may have been one signal face on the left side mount, one signal face on the right side, and one (not two) signal face on the guy wire mast arm.  If there were only three signal faces to work with, it would make some sense to have the mast arm signal be some type of hybrid to control both left and right turning movements.  But now that there are four signal faces to work with (two on the mast arm), instead of retaining the old doghouse for both left and right turns, it would make more sense to have the two singal faces on the right being RA-YA-GA for the right turn (angled right turn) and the two signal faces on the left being RA-YA-GA for the left movement.  And I would suggest similar for the Beverly Glen view of the intersection as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192

(I believe the right most mast arm light also has a right arrow bulb, that must have burned out when GSV came by.)

This intersection has been signalized this way as long as I can remember.  A number of years ago, there were two lanes turning right from SM to Wilshire, with the leftmost right turn lane being an option lane that was primarily used by buses, since the third lane ended just after the bus stop.  The signalization controlling the option lane made some sense, as it was controlling both straight and right movements.  Now, it is just ugly.  The correct fix would be either 5 section towers, that would not be as disconcerting (RYG-YA-GA) or having the two right signals controlling the right turn movement exclusively (RA-YA-GA) and the two left signals (Left mast arm and left side mount) controlling the straight movements (R-Y-G straight arrow).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 21, 2022, 01:29:33 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192

I'm probably guessing it's a miswire since the signal never did this in the summer of 2021, but as of 27 December 2021, this right turn signal in Salem NH is acting as such described above. Not sure if its fixed or still acting like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wug5xTIxnH8

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on June 21, 2022, 08:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.

Whoa. Do you have any examples? Because I'm having a mind blown moment. Is that why there's a fair number of signals in modern VA that have green right arrows but still show red balls even when traffic from the right has a left arrow? Are those relics from the days when they would show BOTH the red ball and green arrow?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:47:30 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 21, 2022, 08:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.

Whoa. Do you have any examples? Because I'm having a mind blown moment. Is that why there's a fair number of signals in modern VA that have green right arrows but still show red balls even when traffic from the right has a left arrow? Are those relics from the days when they would show BOTH the red ball and green arrow?

The two that I think might be left are in Hampton but I haven't been at either intersection in a couple years and I can't get a good shot on GSV to see if the red stays on, I'll try to look the next time I'm down there.

Hampton used to do it on nearly every 3-section right turn signal that had the corresponding left from the right side street you described, and they did this even when they still had 3-2-3 heads.

VDOT themselves did this at quite a few locations statewide, but I'm not sure if any of them are like this now.

The ones in the Richmond area (both city and VDOT installed) are gone, the last one by 2017.

As for your 2nd question, it sounds like you're describing right turn arrows that doesn't illuminate at all when the corresponding left from the side street is active, or are you describing a standard doghouse/tower?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on June 22, 2022, 01:49:34 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:47:30 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 21, 2022, 08:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.

Whoa. Do you have any examples? Because I'm having a mind blown moment. Is that why there's a fair number of signals in modern VA that have green right arrows but still show red balls even when traffic from the right has a left arrow? Are those relics from the days when they would show BOTH the red ball and green arrow?

The two that I think might be left are in Hampton but I haven't been at either intersection in a couple years and I can't get a good shot on GSV to see if the red stays on, I'll try to look the next time I'm down there.

Hampton used to do it on nearly every 3-section right turn signal that had the corresponding left from the right side street you described, and they did this even when they still had 3-2-3 heads.

VDOT themselves did this at quite a few locations statewide, but I'm not sure if any of them are like this now.

The ones in the Richmond area (both city and VDOT installed) are gone, the last one by 2017.

As for your 2nd question, it sounds like you're describing right turn arrows that doesn't illuminate at all when the corresponding left from the side street is active, or are you describing a standard doghouse/tower?

A 3-section turn arrow light. I've noticed it in a couple places around the state, here's One such signal I've been through before which I know has this operation and it's shown on streetview.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0226051,-77.4071635,3a,60.4y,255.73h,91.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWQyiaaHy2EFclZdbZulf6g!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DWQyiaaHy2EFclZdbZulf6g%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D233.09843%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Notice in the shot here the green left arrow turning from Cascades SB to Potomac View EB is illuminated. However Potomac View WB has all red lights, no green right arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0224434,-77.4068144,3a,41.4y,272.14h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMQPsaOk722Qpm8u0KxKfsw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But in THIS shot, again of Potomac View WB, there is a green right arrow activated. This same issue occurs in three of the directions (there appears to be no green right arrow for Nokes WB). Why can't the right green arrows be illuminated when the appropriate conflicting movements have left green arrows?

EDIT: Another example: Enon Rd EB green left arrow, all red balls on US-1 S: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3639919,-77.4572464,3a,75y,133.29h,85.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skY2eENvnGfK1UfpDIJRppA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Green right arrow for US-1 S despite not being illuminated when traffic to the right had a protected left: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3642102,-77.4569763,3a,75y,215.56h,81.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXS_7zZFxliGUpjkQBwPMhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 22, 2022, 09:35:19 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 22, 2022, 01:49:34 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:47:30 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on June 21, 2022, 08:48:38 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.

Whoa. Do you have any examples? Because I'm having a mind blown moment. Is that why there's a fair number of signals in modern VA that have green right arrows but still show red balls even when traffic from the right has a left arrow? Are those relics from the days when they would show BOTH the red ball and green arrow?

The two that I think might be left are in Hampton but I haven't been at either intersection in a couple years and I can't get a good shot on GSV to see if the red stays on, I'll try to look the next time I'm down there.

Hampton used to do it on nearly every 3-section right turn signal that had the corresponding left from the right side street you described, and they did this even when they still had 3-2-3 heads.

VDOT themselves did this at quite a few locations statewide, but I'm not sure if any of them are like this now.

The ones in the Richmond area (both city and VDOT installed) are gone, the last one by 2017.

As for your 2nd question, it sounds like you're describing right turn arrows that doesn't illuminate at all when the corresponding left from the side street is active, or are you describing a standard doghouse/tower?

A 3-section turn arrow light. I've noticed it in a couple places around the state, here's One such signal I've been through before which I know has this operation and it's shown on streetview.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0226051,-77.4071635,3a,60.4y,255.73h,91.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWQyiaaHy2EFclZdbZulf6g!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DWQyiaaHy2EFclZdbZulf6g%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D233.09843%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Notice in the shot here the green left arrow turning from Cascades SB to Potomac View EB is illuminated. However Potomac View WB has all red lights, no green right arrow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0224434,-77.4068144,3a,41.4y,272.14h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMQPsaOk722Qpm8u0KxKfsw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

But in THIS shot, again of Potomac View WB, there is a green right arrow activated. This same issue occurs in three of the directions (there appears to be no green right arrow for Nokes WB). Why can't the right green arrows be illuminated when the appropriate conflicting movements have left green arrows?

EDIT: Another example: Enon Rd EB green left arrow, all red balls on US-1 S: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3639919,-77.4572464,3a,75y,133.29h,85.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skY2eENvnGfK1UfpDIJRppA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Green right arrow for US-1 S despite not being illuminated when traffic to the right had a protected left: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3642102,-77.4569763,3a,75y,215.56h,81.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXS_7zZFxliGUpjkQBwPMhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Those places might not have operated like that to begin with, which is odd especially considering there's no pedestrian signals or even crosswalks there. Seems to me that those would be the intersections where the right turn would stay green when the corresponding left is active.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 24, 2022, 12:23:44 PM
Quote from: plain on June 22, 2022, 09:35:19 PM

[snip]

Why can't the right green arrows be illuminated when the appropriate conflicting movements have left green arrows?


There are some states that do not allow a right turn arrow to be illuminated at the same time as the corresponding left turn arrow when U-turns are permitted. (CA comes to mind).  In Tucson, AZ they apply similar logic at some intersections and allow for a flashing yellow arrow for right turns that are protected from all movements other than the u-turn.

But I don't believe that VA generally follows that line of thinking.  They generally do allow a corresponding right turn green arrow, despite the potential conflict with u-turns.

Here, it seems to be a case of wiring the intersection as simply as possible.  The right turn signal is wired directly to the the normal orb signals.  When there is green orb, there is green arrow; and when there is red orb, there is red orb over the right turn signal.  This also seems to be a (mis)application of the one signal head per lane rule.  Each lane gets its own signal head.  The right lane, since it only allows for right turns, gets a right arrow.  But there is a problem, in that it could produce a conflict with a pedestrian who may want to walk along US 1 and cross Enon.  There is no safe opportunity to make this crossing, since during the entire green time on US 1, there is a green right arrow conflicting with the pedestrian path.  Granted, given the layout of this intersection, there are likely few pedestrians, but unless the crossing were illegal, the crossing should be allowed to occur as safely as practical.  At the very least, signal a green orb and not a green arrow so that cars would still have to concern themselves with pedestrians (if present) and not be presented with an automatic protected right turn.

IMO, a better approach would be to replace the rightmost signal (or even the right two signals, since I don't buy in to the signal head per lane approach as being necessary and three signal heads should be sufficient here) with a doghouse (or 5 section tower).  Green orb lit when all traffic has green.  Green right arrow to be lit during the phase of the corresponding protected green left arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 24, 2022, 01:38:20 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 24, 2022, 12:23:44 PM
Quote from: plain on June 22, 2022, 09:35:19 PM

[snip]

Why can't the right green arrows be illuminated when the appropriate conflicting movements have left green arrows?


There are some states that do not allow a right turn arrow to be illuminated at the same time as the corresponding left turn arrow when U-turns are permitted. (CA comes to mind).  In Tucson, AZ they apply similar logic at some intersections and allow for a flashing yellow arrow for right turns that are protected from all movements other than the u-turn.

But I don't believe that VA generally follows that line of thinking.  They generally do allow a corresponding right turn green arrow, despite the potential conflict with u-turns.

Here, it seems to be a case of wiring the intersection as simply as possible.  The right turn signal is wired directly to the the normal orb signals.  When there is green orb, there is green arrow; and when there is red orb, there is red orb over the right turn signal.  This also seems to be a (mis)application of the one signal head per lane rule.  Each lane gets its own signal head.  The right lane, since it only allows for right turns, gets a right arrow.  But there is a problem, in that it could produce a conflict with a pedestrian who may want to walk along US 1 and cross Enon.  There is no safe opportunity to make this crossing, since during the entire green time on US 1, there is a green right arrow conflicting with the pedestrian path.  Granted, given the layout of this intersection, there are likely few pedestrians, but unless the crossing were illegal, the crossing should be allowed to occur as safely as practical.  At the very least, signal a green orb and not a green arrow so that cars would still have to concern themselves with pedestrians (if present) and not be presented with an automatic protected right turn.

IMO, a better approach would be to replace the rightmost signal (or even the right two signals, since I don't buy in to the signal head per lane approach as being necessary and three signal heads should be sufficient here) with a doghouse (or 5 section tower).  Green orb lit when all traffic has green.  Green right arrow to be lit during the phase of the corresponding protected green left arrow.

That's exactly what VDOT did at the intersection of US 250 & VA 271 in Short Pump. When both roads was widened back in the 90's, the right turn signals on 250 were originally 3-sections with the red orbs and green arrows illuminated simultaneously. Eventually they eliminated the red orbs when the green arrows were on (still the same 3-sections). Now they are doghouses, combining the through movement with the right turn.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/HbMwSuatWYkKtbf69
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on June 30, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
MUTCD doesn't like a right turn signal on a far left signal.  For context, need to pan around the intersection to see what is going on and why through traffic is not allowed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2022, 10:41:35 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 30, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
MUTCD doesn't like a right turn signal on a far left signal.  For context, need to pan around the intersection to see what is going on and why through traffic is not allowed.

I can see why through traffic isn't permitted, the neighborhood is a RIRO to reduce cut-through traffic. Not too unusual of a setup IMO.

I was under the impression that it was okay to have right or left turn signals position on the opposite corner if that was the only permitted movement, especially in California where post-mounted signals are incredibly common. But I may be mistaken on that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 01, 2022, 10:43:30 AM
Good ole PA with mix and match mast arms.
https://goo.gl/maps/SrHLhNsVXxg8NUJw7

Though I like the older one on the right welded at the attach point to the pole.

Probably soon the pole will be replaced as you can see the fatigue showing badly on the pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 01, 2022, 12:02:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2022, 10:41:35 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 30, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
MUTCD doesn't like a right turn signal on a far left signal.  For context, need to pan around the intersection to see what is going on and why through traffic is not allowed.
I can see why through traffic isn't permitted, the neighborhood is a RIRO to reduce cut-through traffic. Not too unusual of a setup IMO.

And from that perspective, the use of right red arrows seems particularly egregious if a right turn is the only allowable movement from that side street...why not have a circular red so that it can more readily allow RTOR? (Not sure on the status of right turn on red arrow in California.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on July 01, 2022, 12:08:41 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 01, 2022, 12:02:41 PM
(Not sure on the status of right turn on red arrow in California.)

Not permitted.

https://california.public.law/codes/ca_veh_code_section_21453
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on July 01, 2022, 05:04:47 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 01, 2022, 10:43:30 AM
Good ole PA with mix and match mast arms.
https://goo.gl/maps/SrHLhNsVXxg8NUJw7

Though I like the older one on the right welded at the attach point to the pole.

Probably soon the pole will be replaced as you can see the fatigue showing badly on the pole.

The new pole is likely an accident induced replacement or hardware failure.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on July 03, 2022, 11:20:41 AM
LA'S Being copied
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3231786,-119.6479832,3a,15y,232.7h,99.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D266.43823%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 03, 2022, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 03, 2022, 11:20:41 AM
LA'S Being copied
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3231786,-119.6479832,3a,15y,232.7h,99.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D266.43823%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

My god, dude....explain what we are looking at.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 03, 2022, 02:07:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 03, 2022, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 03, 2022, 11:20:41 AM
LA'S Being copied
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3231786,-119.6479832,3a,15y,232.7h,99.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D266.43823%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

My god, dude....explain what we are looking at.

It's in California, and to my eyes it looks like any other light in California...?  :spin:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on July 03, 2022, 02:24:37 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 03, 2022, 02:07:43 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 03, 2022, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 03, 2022, 11:20:41 AM
LA'S Being copied
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3231786,-119.6479832,3a,15y,232.7h,99.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DBvUy6fQWFt9NFRw5zRXH-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D266.43823%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

My god, dude....explain what we are looking at.

It's in California, and to my eyes it looks like any other light in California...?  :spin:
It has those curved visiors like la
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 04, 2022, 12:06:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2022, 10:41:35 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 30, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
MUTCD doesn't like a right turn signal on a far left signal.  For context, need to pan around the intersection to see what is going on and why through traffic is not allowed.

I can see why through traffic isn't permitted, the neighborhood is a RIRO to reduce cut-through traffic. Not too unusual of a setup IMO.

I was under the impression that it was okay to have right or left turn signals position on the opposite corner if that was the only permitted movement, especially in California where post-mounted signals are incredibly common. But I may be mistaken on that.

It seems to be followed generally in other parts of CA as well.  Here are two signals that are right turn only in the LA area, where there is no left side supplemental.

Olive at 5th, Downtown LA:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0496962,-118.2526234,3a,15y,228.58h,90.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srqHgg4vQoQe7RNf1w2zT9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Roxbury Dr. at Wilshire, Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0669444,-118.4056667,3a,37.5y,1.85h,89.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAZhh375AE9Ful-NLvHhYQA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

CA is very good about side mounted posting.  Side mount posted signals have been around CA since the early days of signaling.  Beginning in the 1950's, CA started using guy wire mast arms for a supplemental overhead signal - but supplemental to the two side mounted.

At some point more recently, I have noticed newer installations treat the left side mount as a signal for left turning vehicles.  For regular intersections, it would be a normal RYG.  For those with protected phases, it would largely match the leftmost overhead signal (i.e. 4 aspect signals for FYA, 5 aspect signals for doghouses or their 5 tower equivalent, 4 aspect signals [RYG-GA] for split-phase and some lagging signals, and RA-YA-GA for fully protected signals.)  But one other aspect of this that I have also noted is that where a left turn is not possible (T-intersections), the left sidemount supplement is completely omitted.  The omission would usually be on newer signals on wide two way streets.  (Older signals largely still have them, as they were once standard, even at T-intersections.)  I guess they figure that nobody is looking at that corner, so no need to put a signal face there.

Here';s a signal in Laguna Niguel with no left side supplement at a T-intersection:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5257747,-117.7192674,3a,15y,231.77h,92.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sixSCq35iz-Kd4aI1A8VmMA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DixSCq35iz-Kd4aI1A8VmMA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D57.993053%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 05, 2022, 11:32:57 AM
At least in the last photo in Laguna Niguel, there is a near-right corner supplemental head which maintains the usual Calif. standard of 3 heads on the approach where there are two or more lanes. In this case it helps with the slight curve as well.  I'm surprised the above photos in Los Angeles didn't have a near-right signal. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 05, 2022, 05:58:46 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 01, 2022, 12:02:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 30, 2022, 10:41:35 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 30, 2022, 09:19:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 29, 2022, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 29, 2022, 10:58:30 PM
Creative Bakersfield Creative https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3707251,-119.1455968,3a,39y,260.46h,96.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYOfJaLstlHvA_KvU-KPXSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Additional context and/or thoughts from you would be helpful. I see nothing unusual, apart from the lack of a far-left supplemental turn signal.
MUTCD doesn't like a right turn signal on a far left signal.  For context, need to pan around the intersection to see what is going on and why through traffic is not allowed.
I can see why through traffic isn't permitted, the neighborhood is a RIRO to reduce cut-through traffic. Not too unusual of a setup IMO.

And from that perspective, the use of right red arrows seems particularly egregious if a right turn is the only allowable movement from that side street...why not have a circular red so that it can more readily allow RTOR? (Not sure on the status of right turn on red arrow in California.)
Right turn on red can be really unsafe. Not always the best option, I typically like to restrict it as much as possible.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 05, 2022, 07:10:55 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 04, 2022, 12:06:47 PM
At some point more recently, I have noticed newer installations treat the left side mount as a signal for left turning vehicles.  For regular intersections, it would be a normal RYG.  For those with protected phases, it would largely match the leftmost overhead signal (i.e. 4 aspect signals for FYA, 5 aspect signals for doghouses or their 5 tower equivalent, 4 aspect signals [RYG-GA] for split-phase and some lagging signals, and RA-YA-GA for fully protected signals.)  But one other aspect of this that I have also noted is that where a left turn is not possible (T-intersections), the left sidemount supplement is completely omitted.  The omission would usually be on newer signals on wide two way streets.  (Older signals largely still have them, as they were once standard, even at T-intersections.)  I guess they figure that nobody is looking at that corner, so no need to put a signal face there.

Here';s a signal in Laguna Niguel with no left side supplement at a T-intersection:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5257747,-117.7192674,3a,15y,231.77h,92.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sixSCq35iz-Kd4aI1A8VmMA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DixSCq35iz-Kd4aI1A8VmMA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D57.993053%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

I have actually noticed this change as well. Needless to say, I'm not a big fan.

To my knowledge, there are only two jurisdictions that require a left-side signal no matter what, even at T-intersections or where left turns are not permitted: IDOT District 1 (Chicago), and British Columbia. And with that said, British Columbia is the only place I've been where that rule is completely steadfast: every single intersection has a signal on the left, no matter what. In many cases, the far left corner signal is one of the primary signals, with only a single overhead primary signal, such as here (https://goo.gl/maps/c5vNVjBd8jcvaARe9). In cases where the left turn is fully protected, the supplemental signal is instead on the far right corner. At many, many intersections (probably 60 to 70 percent), there is a supplemental signal on both the far left and far right corner; a good chunk of these have only a single overhead signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 13, 2022, 09:21:13 PM
I think they forgot something here.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1145112,-77.6225245,3a,75y,111.27h,93.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shxkg6mu9qdlTKvwFl0XxmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

This signal is new. Normally they would install a FYA with these. Permissive only in this case.

EDIT TO ADD: If the installers didn't intend to install a FYA here then the two signal heads should have been spaced farther apart on the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 09:57:00 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 13, 2022, 09:21:13 PM
I think they forgot something here.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1145112,-77.6225245,3a,75y,111.27h,93.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shxkg6mu9qdlTKvwFl0XxmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

This signal is new. Normally they would install a FYA with these. Permissive only in this case.

Eh, matches the old configuration. EB didn't have protected/permissive before the rebuild. But the fact that Rochester is installing FYAs on their own roads is fascinating in and of itself, because that signal isn't to state specs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:09:43 PM
cl94, in what way is that new signal not to state specs? It looks correctly designed to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:09:43 PM
cl94, in what way is that new signal not to state specs? It looks correctly designed to me.

For one, yellow signal heads instead of green. Two, none of the signs are on Z-bars.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 13, 2022, 10:17:54 PM
If anyone wondered how MassDOT designed new traffic signal intersections, here's a brand new one! It's got an exclusive walk phase, all direction NTOR, APS buttons, reflective backplates, and bicycle/pedestrian accommodations. Here's an almost 2 minute video of the signal cycling a bit: https://youtu.be/xAYgTkafJUE

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220714/4956d955f0a90c569df84fd6939417f8.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220714/7e9f4281cfd23d63112775585a507e52.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:26:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:09:43 PM
cl94, in what way is that new signal not to state specs? It looks correctly designed to me.

For one, yellow signal heads instead of green. Two, none of the signs are on Z-bars.

Are either of those roads numbered state routes? If not, I assume the heads can be yellow, not NYS DOT dark green. New York City, Nassau and Suffolk Counties all use yellow heads on their signals. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 11:34:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:26:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:09:43 PM
cl94, in what way is that new signal not to state specs? It looks correctly designed to me.

For one, yellow signal heads instead of green. Two, none of the signs are on Z-bars.

Are either of those roads numbered state routes? If not, I assume the heads can be yellow, not NYS DOT dark green. New York City, Nassau and Suffolk Counties all use yellow heads on their signals.

NYSDOT projects generally follow NYSDOT specs regardless of who maintains the road. The big exception is NYC, but they get to do their own thing.

This is a numbered road, but it's city-maintained. Given that neither the signal nor the new signs surrounding it follow state specs, I'm willing to assume minimal involvement from the state, other than possibly funding via the MPO.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 14, 2022, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 11:34:52 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:26:02 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 13, 2022, 10:12:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 13, 2022, 10:09:43 PM
cl94, in what way is that new signal not to state specs? It looks correctly designed to me.

For one, yellow signal heads instead of green. Two, none of the signs are on Z-bars.

Are either of those roads numbered state routes? If not, I assume the heads can be yellow, not NYS DOT dark green. New York City, Nassau and Suffolk Counties all use yellow heads on their signals.

NYSDOT projects generally follow NYSDOT specs regardless of who maintains the road. The big exception is NYC, but they get to do their own thing.

This is a numbered road, but it's city-maintained. Given that neither the signal nor the new signs surrounding it follow state specs, I'm willing to assume minimal involvement from the state, other than possibly funding via the MPO.
That is correct. Although Mt. Hope is NY 15 it is maintained by the city or county. All non NYSDOT signals in Rochester are owned by Monroe County and have mostly the yellow heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 14, 2022, 07:56:18 PM
Back twenty years ago when New York had their own separate MUTCD, it allowed for either green or yellow heads depending on engineering judgment of site conditions though there seemed to be a slight bias toward green in the wording. (Sec. 272-14-a) I don't know if that provision still exists in the current State Supplement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on July 16, 2022, 03:11:06 PM
HOW!? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1391254,-77.7084796,3a,15.4y,280.33h,99.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sar8YgBMkYheZ4tX2sd2J5w!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 16, 2022, 03:19:52 PM
^^A clear violation of MUTCD mounting height of pedestrian signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 16, 2022, 03:58:25 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 16, 2022, 03:11:06 PM
HOW!? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1391254,-77.7084796,3a,15.4y,280.33h,99.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sar8YgBMkYheZ4tX2sd2J5w!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Not a ped signal. It's a "NO TURN ON RED" sign that lights up when there's a train. I live in that area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 16, 2022, 08:36:23 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 16, 2022, 03:58:25 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 16, 2022, 03:11:06 PM
HOW!? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1391254,-77.7084796,3a,15.4y,280.33h,99.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sar8YgBMkYheZ4tX2sd2J5w!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Not a ped signal. It's a "NO TURN ON RED" sign that lights up when there's a train. I live in that area.
Not uncommon to see those around here.
They also use them for LPIs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 16, 2022, 08:51:53 PM
Anyone know what railroad that is in the photo? Is it the CSX (former New York Central) Main Line?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: betfourteen on July 16, 2022, 09:25:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874503,-82.3959633,3a,63.3y,150.98h,92.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNPjRwHKz11VRy6B-UOTzsA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I find this intersection interesting....To the left you can see on the mast arm a doghouse signal and a regular signal....to the right....no road, and its been this way for a while too....at least since 2016: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874468,-82.3959704,3a,75y,130.49h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suLuRQuqLiTN-yQ8lSjaj_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It's even equipped with a pre-emption device on the mast arm that faces nothing!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on July 16, 2022, 11:46:03 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on July 16, 2022, 09:25:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874503,-82.3959633,3a,63.3y,150.98h,92.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNPjRwHKz11VRy6B-UOTzsA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I find this intersection interesting....To the left you can see on the mast arm a doghouse signal and a regular signal....to the right....no road, and its been this way for a while too....at least since 2016: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874468,-82.3959704,3a,75y,130.49h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suLuRQuqLiTN-yQ8lSjaj_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It's even equipped with a pre-emption device on the mast arm that faces nothing!

Several on the "new" (not that new, but not very old) alignment of US 41 southeast of downtown Chicago have this kind of thing.
https://goo.gl/maps/hNvypm42fDLVsWaE9
It is surprising that they bother using the electricity for signals facing nothing, but it must make sense to someone.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RX78NT-1 on July 17, 2022, 01:01:21 AM
I've noticed an odd thing with new signal installations in the Des Moines, IA metro area:

Normally, when a traffic signal changes lights, it's instant. That is, it goes from green -> yellow -> red; the previous light turns off at the same time as the next light turns on.

A few new signal installations here, particularly in the suburbs (several new installs in Ankeny in particular), change differently. The signals change from green -> no light (briefly) -> yellow -> no light (briefly) -> red. The no-light "phase" is a very short interval, but noticeable enough. This also affects the duration of the FYA, as it's on for a shorter period of time before going off again, and it seems "delayed" in turning on whenever it blinks.

Is there an explanation for this? It doesn't happen for all new installations; a recent Iowa DOT install at the IA-44/IA-141 interchange changes lights normally. Is it related to the controller box? It seems to happen with any brand of signal heads, as far as I can tell.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 17, 2022, 10:09:01 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 16, 2022, 08:51:53 PM
Anyone know what railroad that is in the photo? Is it the CSX (former New York Central) Main Line?
Yes it is. Also used by Amtrak.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on July 17, 2022, 10:31:57 AM
Speaking of "NO TURN ON RED" signals there are some along NY 104 in Rochester.

Here's one at a shopping center entrance.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2056243,-77.6680592,3a,15y,193.1h,105.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_npGKTLjlBFMyXW9AOCTVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

These come on when the signals for NY 104 are in protected left/u turn phase.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 17, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 16, 2022, 08:36:23 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 16, 2022, 03:58:25 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 16, 2022, 03:11:06 PM
HOW!? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1391254,-77.7084796,3a,15.4y,280.33h,99.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sar8YgBMkYheZ4tX2sd2J5w!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Not a ped signal. It's a "NO TURN ON RED" sign that lights up when there's a train. I live in that area.
Not uncommon to see those around here.
They also use them for LPIs.

CA also coverted ped signals as a warning for when the freeway meters were on.  They would flash "meter on" in white with the same technology as "Don't walk" when the meters were on, and off otherwise.  Eventually, they followed MUTCD standard with yellow flashing orbs as the warning for when meters were on.

As the ped signal is a common piece of hardware, I can see it being used when other hardware is not available.

Quote from: steviep24 on July 17, 2022, 10:31:57 AM
Speaking of "NO TURN ON RED" signals there are some along NY 104 in Rochester.

Here's one at a shopping center entrance.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2056243,-77.6680592,3a,15y,193.1h,105.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_npGKTLjlBFMyXW9AOCTVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

These come on when the signals for NY 104 are in protected left/u turn phase.

These are far more common for NTOR signals.  But these are designed specifically for a warning message at specified times.  (Similar hardware can also light up for "no left turn" when left turns are restricted during rush hours, and for "Use 2 lanes" or other messaging as appropriate in reversible lane situations.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on July 17, 2022, 08:54:53 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on July 16, 2022, 11:46:03 PM
Quote from: betfourteen on July 16, 2022, 09:25:33 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874503,-82.3959633,3a,63.3y,150.98h,92.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNPjRwHKz11VRy6B-UOTzsA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I find this intersection interesting....To the left you can see on the mast arm a doghouse signal and a regular signal....to the right....no road, and its been this way for a while too....at least since 2016: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.1874468,-82.3959704,3a,75y,130.49h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suLuRQuqLiTN-yQ8lSjaj_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It's even equipped with a pre-emption device on the mast arm that faces nothing!

Several on the "new" (not that new, but not very old) alignment of US 41 southeast of downtown Chicago have this kind of thing.
https://goo.gl/maps/hNvypm42fDLVsWaE9
It is surprising that they bother using the electricity for signals facing nothing, but it must make sense to someone.

It looks like they since cannibalized this installation to replace a left turn signal somewhere in the city.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.744687,-87.5403959,3a,48.7y,299.31h,96.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1ICLEmW4f0vmgjHmpcl10w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on July 18, 2022, 09:53:05 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 17, 2022, 10:31:57 AM
Speaking of "NO TURN ON RED" signals there are some along NY 104 in Rochester.

Here's one at a shopping center entrance.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2056243,-77.6680592,3a,15y,193.1h,105.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_npGKTLjlBFMyXW9AOCTVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

These come on when the signals for NY 104 are in protected left/u turn phase.
They're known as blank-out, or part-time restriction signs.

Here's a video of one in my state, being used for an exclusive pedestrian phase. https://youtu.be/OFlZIaYSdWY


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
ANOTHER EXCUSE A LIGHT THAT FACES DIRT CMON COUNTY PULL YOUR SHIT TOGETHER https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441539,-119.2046511,3a,70.6y,280.49h,94.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1NDrTDtD4nHOB7R9_3shFA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1NDrTDtD4nHOB7R9_3shFA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D316.0508%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on July 18, 2022, 11:13:27 PM
On the second one, it does look like as recently as last year there was traffic coming and going from a grove which is now all mowed down.  Prior years' views show plenty of tire tracks of stuff going in and out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 18, 2022, 11:15:27 PM
What traffic signal warrants were met? :hmmm:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:53:48 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 17, 2022, 08:51:22 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 16, 2022, 08:36:23 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 16, 2022, 03:58:25 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 16, 2022, 03:11:06 PM
HOW!? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1391254,-77.7084796,3a,15.4y,280.33h,99.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sar8YgBMkYheZ4tX2sd2J5w!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Not a ped signal. It's a "NO TURN ON RED" sign that lights up when there's a train. I live in that area.
Not uncommon to see those around here.
They also use them for LPIs.

CA also coverted ped signals as a warning for when the freeway meters were on.  They would flash "meter on" in white with the same technology as "Don't walk" when the meters were on, and off otherwise.  Eventually, they followed MUTCD standard with yellow flashing orbs as the warning for when meters were on.

As the ped signal is a common piece of hardware, I can see it being used when other hardware is not available.

Nevada also did the same for ramp meter warnings initially. The few that were installed in the Reno area are gone, replaced by the standard MUTCD sign with a warning beacon. However, they are still very prevalent in the Las Vegas area (but new installations now use the sign and beacon).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
ANOTHER EXCUSE A LIGHT THAT FACES DIRT CMON COUNTY PULL YOUR SHIT TOGETHER https://www.google.com/maps/@35.441539,-119.2046511,3a,70.6y,280.49h,94.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1NDrTDtD4nHOB7R9_3shFA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1NDrTDtD4nHOB7R9_3shFA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D316.0508%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: PurdueBill on July 18, 2022, 11:13:27 PM
On the second one, it does look like as recently as last year there was traffic coming and going from a grove which is now all mowed down.  Prior years' views show plenty of tire tracks of stuff going in and out.
Also a place to provide for a legal u-turn after a distance with no median break.

Lukeisroads, I think you might need to dial it down a little. Neither of these is super uncommon.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 19, 2022, 07:28:37 PM
Quote from: plain on June 21, 2022, 11:44:39 AM
Quote from: mrsman on June 20, 2022, 11:02:18 PM
An even uglier example of red orb with green right arrow together is here at Wilshire/Santa Monica in Beverly Hills:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.067312,-118.4102217,3a,15y,233.17h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZfLTV8qH9p4ahG0dWV1sew!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192



These used to be very common for right turn signals in Virginia but not so much nowadays. I hate them with a passion.

Bumping this because I happen to spot this while playing around on GSV. This is in Pittsburgh. Note the NTOR sign...

https://maps.app.goo.gl/xZBq2ZMgPHKHwocX7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 19, 2022, 08:23:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.

Ehh, that intersection most reminds me of this one at a rock quarry in Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/HRVW5f5BPfVq86QB9), which uses protected-only phasing (and Utah is not a state to fully protect turns without good reason, except in the case of dual left turn lanes). Trucks making that turn are so slow that they'd never be able to get across on a permissive left with any amount of oncoming traffic until the light started to change... and then of course, it takes like 10 seconds for said truck to clear the intersection. Protecting these sorts of turns seems fine to me. Saves the trucker from worrying about whether that car a quarter mile down the road will be at the intersection by the time he can clear it, and saves the driver from having to stop and wait on a green if the trucker guessed wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 09:17:53 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 19, 2022, 08:23:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.

Ehh, that intersection most reminds me of this one at a rock quarry in Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/HRVW5f5BPfVq86QB9), which uses protected-only phasing (and Utah is not a state to fully protect turns without good reason, except in the case of dual left turn lanes). Trucks making that turn are so slow that they'd never be able to get across on a permissive left with any amount of oncoming traffic until the light started to change... and then of course, it takes like 10 seconds for said truck to clear the intersection. Protecting these sorts of turns seems fine to me. Saves the trucker from worrying about whether that car a quarter mile down the road will be at the intersection by the time he can clear it, and saves the driver from having to stop and wait on a green if the trucker guessed wrong.

Are you sure it's not protected-only because it's across four lanes of 50+ mph traffic? That would warrant protected-only phasing in a lot places, irrespective of gap availability, number of turn lanes, etc.

If we're just going off personal experience, I can think of plenty of left turns that are "truck heavy" that have either no protected phasing, or protected-permissive phasing. A particularly famous double left turn in New Westminster BC was almost 100% trucks, but was permissive anyways (https://goo.gl/maps/vCtGkfZ4oN7DrRRg7). This heavy left turn in Issaquah to a quarry was originally permissive only (https://goo.gl/maps/A45FhwxWGbriCxNM7), but they recently installed a flashing yellow arrow (https://goo.gl/maps/xBK2Zwp6EWBu3QVs5). Most signals in the SODO (industrial) area of Seattle are fully permissive, many without even a left turn lane. At none of these was I/am I aware of any outstanding issues.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 20, 2022, 09:16:16 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 09:17:53 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 19, 2022, 08:23:20 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.

Ehh, that intersection most reminds me of this one at a rock quarry in Salt Lake City (https://goo.gl/maps/HRVW5f5BPfVq86QB9), which uses protected-only phasing (and Utah is not a state to fully protect turns without good reason, except in the case of dual left turn lanes). Trucks making that turn are so slow that they'd never be able to get across on a permissive left with any amount of oncoming traffic until the light started to change... and then of course, it takes like 10 seconds for said truck to clear the intersection. Protecting these sorts of turns seems fine to me. Saves the trucker from worrying about whether that car a quarter mile down the road will be at the intersection by the time he can clear it, and saves the driver from having to stop and wait on a green if the trucker guessed wrong.

Are you sure it's not protected-only because it's across four lanes of 50+ mph traffic? That would warrant protected-only phasing in a lot places, irrespective of gap availability, number of turn lanes, etc.

I mean, the fact that it crosses three lanes of 50mph traffic certainly helps its case, but the light just up the road at 400 West is entirely permissive across 3 lanes of 45mph (though turn volumes on that left are likely far less).

State guidance only requires fully protecting a left with dual turn lanes, 4 oncoming through lanes, or a 60+ mph speed limit - and even then, there are exceptions to that last criteria (as on SR 36 north of Tooele, which has multiple protected-permissive lefts across two 60mph lanes that in my experience carry quite a bit of traffic). That would suggest an additional safety factor exists to require fully protecting those turns at the SLC intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 20, 2022, 03:58:27 PM
Not sure if Maine or IDOT  :hmmm:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/RbF5PohN7xoDG5fz7

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 20, 2022, 04:33:59 PM
^^ IDOT doesn't use yellow visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 20, 2022, 04:56:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.
Fair point. That's one of the areas of traffic control that I'm glad Nevada differs from California... Nevada is not afraid to install protected-permitted left turns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on July 20, 2022, 05:02:26 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 20, 2022, 04:33:59 PM
^^ IDOT doesn't use yellow visors.

I know lol it's a joke...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 20, 2022, 08:05:57 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 20, 2022, 04:56:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.
Fair point. That's one of the areas of traffic control that I'm glad Nevada differs from California... Nevada is not afraid to install protected-permitted left turns.

I've noticed that too in some parts of California, notably Santa Clara County, that every signalized intersection is protected left only, whether it needs it or not. Can't imagine what the reasoning is out there. But here's an idea: the appropriate level of left-turn protection should be determined by the guidelines in the MUTCD and established engineering criteria. Not just a blanket policy that may not make sense in all cases. When did one size fits all ever apply to traffic engineering?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2022, 07:42:38 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 20, 2022, 08:05:57 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 20, 2022, 04:56:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2022, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 19, 2022, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on July 18, 2022, 10:22:10 PM
Ive Had Enough of the county TO A FERTILIZER PLACE REALLY https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4417952,-119.1941408,3a,65.7y,241.88h,88.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DuK6FzbetQyZ3E-5gPtBWEg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D152.14487%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

A fertilizer plant, that likely has high peak flows during shift changes, and trucks heading in that may have a harder time turning left across traffic... Not unreasonable.

A left turn signal may be warranted. But, need it be protected-only?

The incessant need to fully protect every. single. left. turn is very much a California (if not Caltrans)-specific issue, and I find the policy to be rather irritating.
Fair point. That's one of the areas of traffic control that I'm glad Nevada differs from California... Nevada is not afraid to install protected-permitted left turns.

I've noticed that too in some parts of California, notably Santa Clara County, that every signalized intersection is protected left only, whether it needs it or not. Can't imagine what the reasoning is out there. But here's an idea: the appropriate level of left-turn protection should be determined by the guidelines in the MUTCD and established engineering criteria. Not just a blanket policy that may not make sense in all cases. When did one size fits all ever apply to traffic engineering?

Agreed.  New technology and new realities demand a re-evaluation of many of these policies.  The FYA signal can provide so much flexibility, eliminating yellow trap for lagging lefts and allowing for TOD signaling.

Plus, a lot of areas of life, including traffic engineering, need to be re-evaluated in light of post-COVID and WFH.  Are we seeing considerably less traffic consistently given those realitie?  If so, perhaps the peak is not so peaky and we can do away or modify rush-hour parking and turn restrictions and also re-evalute these left turn policies.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2022, 08:01:41 AM
Here's a weird signal in Washington DC at the corner of 5th and Quincy, NW.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9379189,-77.0190026,3a,75y,193.62h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shmowpdcf3Jx_fWLTjizbvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9378369,-77.0189863,3a,75y,193.62h,88.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUXOk0akyXgB9YVHZyiSjfg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Two signal heads on 5th street, which is one way.  Red - yellow - flashing yellow.  Quincy doesn't see a signal head, only stop signs.  Normally, a regular intersection with 5th having no stop and Quincy facing stop signs.  But since this is kind of close* to the next intersection, DC puts in a mandatory stop with a red light, whenever the next signal (at Rock Creek Church) has a red light.

In some ways, this is similar to a HAWK, but with two key exceptions.  The red light does not flash.  There are no pedestrian signals facing Quincy, and otherwise no indication if there is enough time to safely cross the street while the traffic on 5th faces a red light.

There are similar "half signals" in DC on two-way streets as well.  In those cases, the signal only faces the direction of traffic that is prior to the main signal, not the reverse direction.  Here is one that used to exist at 5th and I, but a few years ago, it was changed to a full signal (controlling movements on both 5th and I) that are done in coordination with the main signal at Massachusetts and 5th.  [The changes make the area far safer, especially for those walking.]

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9005688,-77.0189117,3a,15y,357.1h,88.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1shqQhUSuqKWTaUr3kU-9nOw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656


* I personally do not think this is close enough to recieve any special treatment and I believe the signal should be removed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: andarcondadont on July 28, 2022, 11:40:02 PM
Check out this approach in Coon Rapids, MN. Protected only phasing with dual left turn lanes and a straight only lane for a total of 5 signals. Here in 2017 (https://goo.gl/maps/MVadBqmLbsCCuTVh7), all of the signals have red orbs, including the signals for the left turn lanes. By 2021 (https://goo.gl/maps/guNqLZja41VnH5Py8), 2 of the left turn signals have been retrofitted with red turn arrows, yet the remaining left turn signal (for the outer turn lane) still has a red orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 03, 2022, 03:36:54 PM
I saw this weird one in person in San Francisco last week walking back to my uncle's place just up the street. This is Vermont St at 16th St. When the light changes off the red, the bottom 2 lights flash yellow arrows. Vermont St becomes a one way street south of 16th heading north.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661193,-122.4046944,3a,19.7y,175.32h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6atbRrC8knASjKzRRARyKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 03, 2022, 04:48:38 PM
^^ Per MUTCD, the left arrow is supposed to be above the right arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 03, 2022, 05:40:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 03, 2022, 03:36:54 PM
I saw this weird one in person in San Francisco last week walking back to my uncle's place just up the street. This is Vermont St at 16th St. When the light changes off the red, the bottom 2 lights flash yellow arrows. Vermont St becomes a one way street south of 16th heading north.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661193,-122.4046944,3a,19.7y,175.32h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6atbRrC8knASjKzRRARyKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is incredibly strange. But I love it!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 03, 2022, 07:56:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 03, 2022, 05:40:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 03, 2022, 03:36:54 PM
I saw this weird one in person in San Francisco last week walking back to my uncle's place just up the street. This is Vermont St at 16th St. When the light changes off the red, the bottom 2 lights flash yellow arrows. Vermont St becomes a one way street south of 16th heading north.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661193,-122.4046944,3a,19.7y,175.32h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6atbRrC8knASjKzRRARyKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is incredibly strange. But I love it!

Many weird signals in SF.  They have  some unique interpretations of traffic engineering.

Given the high density of pedestrians, they definitely try some novel things.

OK, this intersection is at a point where two-traffic becomes one-way traffic in the opposite direction.  The one-way portion of Vermont is northbound.  If you are north of the intersection on the two-way portion facing southbound, you must turn either left or right.  Going straight is not an option.

In most other places, this will be signified with a green ball.  Green ball means right of way going forward (but that movement is prohibited), yielding to oncoming traffic and pedestrians going left, and yielding to pedestrians going right.  I guess there is a concern that traffic seeing the green ball will just go straight and blow through the do not enter, so they came up with alternative signals to handle the yielding turn movements.  Both left FYA and right FYA have meanings consistent with the turn must yield, so they are good choices, although somewhat unorthodox. 

Here is a GSV of the same intersection going back to 2009.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661399,-122.4046398,3a,37.5y,168.09h,92.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snvWMmAdugA2wUP0YS2JCHw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

The bottom aspect is a flashing yellow ball to warn of the danger of forcing turns (which is why a green ball wasn't used).  I imagine that since the flashing yellow ball doesn't really have any official meaning other than caution, and is most often used to denote an intersection where cross traffic faces a flashing red ball, it was changed to the arrows that we see today.

It may have been less confusing if there were four separate signal faces, instead of three.  Then, you could have two signal faces controlling the left movement and two signal faces controlling the right movement.  But that would add to the expense when there were already three signal faces present.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 03, 2022, 09:27:28 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 03, 2022, 07:56:56 PM
Here is a GSV of the same intersection going back to 2009.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661399,-122.4046398,3a,37.5y,168.09h,92.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snvWMmAdugA2wUP0YS2JCHw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

The bottom aspect is a flashing yellow ball to warn of the danger of forcing turns (which is why a green ball wasn't used).  I imagine that since the flashing yellow ball doesn't really have any official meaning other than caution, and is most often used to denote an intersection where cross traffic faces a flashing red ball, it was changed to the arrows that we see today.

Reminds me of this intersection in Seattle:

East Marginal Way S / 1st Ave S: https://goo.gl/maps/KD2zwUJvXVXzX6te6

The left turn from 1st Ave S to East Marginal Way S is a quadruple left turn, but there is also a driveway leaving from the opposite industrial park. Though perhaps in the past it may have been green orbs in all directions (technically denoting a four-lane yield?), the driveway approach uses a flashing yellow orb. Sadly I cannot find this on street view, though you can see the yellow orbs in this GSV image (https://goo.gl/maps/iMyzQU1yxGMk87HA8) (may need to pan up). In practice, vehicles leaving from the driveway correctly yield, although sometimes, as many of the vehicles are large trucks, they just command the right-of-way, forcing left turning traffic to yield.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 04, 2022, 07:41:59 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 03, 2022, 09:27:28 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 03, 2022, 07:56:56 PM
Here is a GSV of the same intersection going back to 2009.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661399,-122.4046398,3a,37.5y,168.09h,92.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snvWMmAdugA2wUP0YS2JCHw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

The bottom aspect is a flashing yellow ball to warn of the danger of forcing turns (which is why a green ball wasn't used).  I imagine that since the flashing yellow ball doesn't really have any official meaning other than caution, and is most often used to denote an intersection where cross traffic faces a flashing red ball, it was changed to the arrows that we see today.

Reminds me of this intersection in Seattle:

East Marginal Way S / 1st Ave S: https://goo.gl/maps/KD2zwUJvXVXzX6te6

The left turn from 1st Ave S to East Marginal Way S is a quadruple left turn, but there is also a driveway leaving from the opposite industrial park. Though perhaps in the past it may have been green orbs in all directions (technically denoting a four-lane yield?), the driveway approach uses a flashing yellow orb. Sadly I cannot find this on street view, though you can see the yellow orbs in this GSV image (https://goo.gl/maps/iMyzQU1yxGMk87HA8) (may need to pan up). In practice, vehicles leaving from the driveway correctly yield, although sometimes, as many of the vehicles are large trucks, they just command the right-of-way, forcing left turning traffic to yield.

The intersection is unique enough that it is probably justified for the industrial park to have their own exclusive phase to enter that is separate from the phases for both 1st Ave and Marginal Way.

Los Angeles has a practice that many driveways at signalized intersections will see a flashing red light in place of green.  30 years ago, this meant a signal face with two aspects that the top light was solid red (concurrent with opposing red and yellow) and bottom light was flashing red (concurrent with opposing green). 

Here's one that still exists at La Tijera/Knowlton:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.976085,-118.3731878,3a,75y,141.96h,79.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLu5JwGwAvUMFsqJxLsh9Bw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Modern versions of this signal have incorporated a yellow signal in the bottom aspect - so red, flashing red, yellow. 

Here's an example at a bank parking lot at Pico/Livonia.  Middle light is illuminated and it's a flashing red, pan around to see that Livonia traffic sees a green light during the same time.  Traffic exiting the bank parking lot sees a sign to "watch opposing traffic."

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0551659,-118.3863613,3a,37.5y,243.56h,87.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sazM-jxKu7tboUrfxdCAQow!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Personally, I don't like this approach either.  Busy driveways should just get their own green, either as an exclusive phase in a split-phase timing pattern, or as a regular green where left turners from either direction have to yield to opposing traffic.  I'm not sure that you can convince drivers coming out of the private driveway, who only get a brief period when main street traffic gets a red, to stop and yield to all opposing traffic, even when heading straight.  Especially, that in many cases the private driveway could be busier than the side street, like at the shopping center off La Tijera.]

More San Francisco weirdness.  Here is the corner of Franklin and Oak.  Oak is a primary eastbound street that gets a lot of traffic.  [It borders the Panhandle park, where it gets a lot of traffic funnelling onto it from the west and the Panhandle was the route of a cancelled freeway.]  All of that traffic is forced to make a left turn onto northbound Franklin, a triple left.  Yet, there is one orphaned block of Oak that exists to the east.  Since Oak ends right at the intersection of Van Ness/Market, one of the busiest intersections in the city, that one block is one-way westbound, away from Market.  This one westbound block does not get much traffic, but it will face off with all of the Oak traffic turning left on Franklin.  So, the westbound traffic sees a one aspect red signal.  This signal flashes red when opposing Oak gets their green left arrow, and is solid red otherwise.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7752697,-122.4205912,3a,15y,267.33h,88.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLt5vI05xOdVvz9wWq8CVQQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DLt5vI05xOdVvz9wWq8CVQQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D15.486733%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hobsini2 on August 04, 2022, 11:43:18 AM
Another one that was on my recent trip. This was in Roseville CA. I like the concept of a U Turn Green arrow.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7518209,-121.2873337,3a,32.2y,251.88h,92.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqL9CwnO9o1HVqqosq9Aj_A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqL9CwnO9o1HVqqosq9Aj_A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D109.12238%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Same intersection, opposite side. Red Ball and Red Arrow lit.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7518209,-121.2873337,3a,32.2y,87.46h,90.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqL9CwnO9o1HVqqosq9Aj_A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqL9CwnO9o1HVqqosq9Aj_A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D109.12238%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 04, 2022, 03:14:52 PM
^^
I've never seen a u-turn arrow in New York. NYSDOT just uses regular left turn arrows for u-turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on August 05, 2022, 10:22:43 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 04, 2022, 03:14:52 PM
^^
I've never seen a u-turn arrow in New York. NYSDOT just uses regular left turn arrows for u-turn signals.
In some jurisdictions, you may only proceed in the arrow's direction, meaning that it would be illegal for anyone to make a U-turn there. That is the case in countries like Poland and the UK.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 10, 2022, 12:27:25 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 03, 2022, 07:56:56 PM
Here is a GSV of the same intersection going back to 2009.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661399,-122.4046398,3a,37.5y,168.09h,92.32t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snvWMmAdugA2wUP0YS2JCHw!2e0!5s20090701T000000!7i13312!8i6656

The bottom aspect is a flashing yellow ball to warn of the danger of forcing turns (which is why a green ball wasn't used).  I imagine that since the flashing yellow ball doesn't really have any official meaning other than caution, and is most often used to denote an intersection where cross traffic faces a flashing red ball, it was changed to the arrows that we see today.

It may have been less confusing if there were four separate signal faces, instead of three.  Then, you could have two signal faces controlling the left movement and two signal faces controlling the right movement.  But that would add to the expense when there were already three signal faces present.

There appears to be only one lane on this approach, so having separate signal faces for the left and right turns would probably be a bit unnecessary.

Also intriguing is that there's a fire station on the corner here, and the approach we've been discussing is right at the station's garages. So vehicles are supposed to stop probably a good 40 or 50 feet back from the intersection. I'm surprised there's not a supplemental signal anywhere back there, because the main signals are quite distant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on August 10, 2022, 08:26:37 PM
Holy Unique the traffic signal is installed on the highway sign post :-o
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3824593,-119.0111031,3a,15y,118.66h,93.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.08272%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 10, 2022, 09:34:03 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on August 10, 2022, 08:26:37 PM
Holy Unique the traffic signal is installed on the highway sign post :-o
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3824593,-119.0111031,3a,15y,118.66h,93.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.08272%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Clearly someone's never been to Wyoming...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 11, 2022, 12:39:34 PM
^^^
I recall Oregon using this style of mounting with some regularity as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on August 11, 2022, 09:42:35 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on August 10, 2022, 08:26:37 PM
Holy Unique the traffic signal is installed on the highway sign post :-o
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3824593,-119.0111031,3a,15y,118.66h,93.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.08272%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Illinois does this from time to time, especially in District 3.

I'm more impressed by those absolutely massive backplates.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 11, 2022, 10:41:41 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on August 10, 2022, 08:26:37 PM
Holy Unique the traffic signal is installed on the highway sign post :-o
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3824593,-119.0111031,3a,15y,118.66h,93.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIBx2oWtpa04dhtfVngB8xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D134.08272%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

And when you look closely, it's really just a single attachment to a piece of conduit with what I presume is a few metal zipties to the catwalk for the gantry.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 12, 2022, 03:15:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2022, 12:39:34 PM
^^^
I recall Oregon using this style of mounting with some regularity as well.
Yup(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220812/89a3d8cc4e71155eaf3a4d8b6acdba84.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2022, 03:56:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 12, 2022, 03:15:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2022, 12:39:34 PM
^^^
I recall Oregon using this style of mounting with some regularity as well.
Yup(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220812/89a3d8cc4e71155eaf3a4d8b6acdba84.jpg)



Is the little guy a ped signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 12, 2022, 06:39:21 PM
Quote from: US71 on August 12, 2022, 03:56:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 12, 2022, 03:15:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 11, 2022, 12:39:34 PM
^^^
I recall Oregon using this style of mounting with some regularity as well.
Yup(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220812/89a3d8cc4e71155eaf3a4d8b6acdba84.jpg)



It's also a bike signal.  Very European style to use near-side small signals for bikes.  This must be either 3" or 4" diameter lights on the signal face.
Is the little guy a ped signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 12, 2022, 11:24:39 PM
Found a two section signal head still in use in Brooklyn, NY.
https://goo.gl/maps/3HF5vyCes9vZMEqM6

The funny thing is it's only for one direction. The others have the normal three section heads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 12, 2022, 11:57:53 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 12, 2022, 11:24:39 PM
Found a two section signal head still in use in Brooklyn, NY.
https://goo.gl/maps/3HF5vyCes9vZMEqM6

The funny thing is it's only for one direction. The others have the normal three section heads.

It's a 2 head red blinker, although looking at a series of GSVs coming down the street, it may be a steady red at top for a time period, then alternating red on top & bottom. https://goo.gl/maps/sYuQfvFNar5Mb3L89 then https://goo.gl/maps/JeNHQbBdefvYkvnt9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 13, 2022, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 12, 2022, 11:57:53 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 12, 2022, 11:24:39 PM
Found a two section signal head still in use in Brooklyn, NY.
https://goo.gl/maps/3HF5vyCes9vZMEqM6

The funny thing is it's only for one direction. The others have the normal three section heads.

It's a 2 head red blinker, although looking at a series of GSVs coming down the street, it may be a steady red at top for a time period, then alternating red on top & bottom. https://goo.gl/maps/sYuQfvFNar5Mb3L89 then https://goo.gl/maps/JeNHQbBdefvYkvnt9

Those 2 section red lights are usually solid red on top, then change to flashing red on the bottom. Usually used for a driveway or other special circumstance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2022, 09:27:20 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/MrXzh9CC1zFheUKG8

This one is a rarity https://goo.gl/maps/MrXzh9CC1zFheUKG8

A 12-8-12.  Usually 8-8-12 are common in New York for protected left heads or exclusive turns at an intersection.  This one, however, is to encourage no left turns and to also let motorists know that the street crossing is one way from the right.  You would think to use all 12 inch lenses here instead of this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 13, 2022, 11:52:22 AM
^^^
There are some 12-8-12 signals in Tacoma, WA. The city went and retrofitted all red signals to be 12 inches 10-20 years ago. Those signals that already had 12-inch green arrows became 12-8-12.

https://goo.gl/maps/zaPAZkxgRo9PK4Wj7
https://goo.gl/maps/wHcs1Qzk9ec43wZC9
https://goo.gl/maps/3nLnhAx2rtYVQ6cV6
https://goo.gl/maps/gTmtoe25UWVuUnKw6

There is also a bunch of 12-8-8-12-12 towers across the city, but that's for another time and place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 13, 2022, 01:32:10 PM
8 8 8 12 12 signal towers mounted on mast arms. These are on NY 31 at Elmwood Ave. in Rochester, NY. These are the only signals of that configuration left in the Rochester, NY area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1262815,-77.5643684,3a,37.5y,298.03h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAmwhuCbHGXN3_ME9WUUiXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

8 8 8 12 12 towers are common in NYC but are never mounted on the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2022, 10:20:20 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 13, 2022, 01:32:10 PM
8 8 8 12 12 signal towers mounted on mast arms. These are on NY 31 at Elmwood Ave. in Rochester, NY. These are the only signals of that configuration left in the Rochester, NY area.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1262815,-77.5643684,3a,37.5y,298.03h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAmwhuCbHGXN3_ME9WUUiXA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

8 8 8 12 12 towers are common in NYC but are never mounted on the mast arm.

I've seen NYC use 12-12 and 8-8-8 side by side when that application is used on mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 14, 2022, 06:30:27 PM
This is interesting.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1131502,-77.5505011,3a,75y,152.84h,100.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMHxLzy53niePTY8McpEV9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

This was recently installed on NY 31 (Monroe Ave.) in Pittsford, NY. The mast arm for EB traffic has only a left turn FYA signal. No other signals are on the mast arm.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2022, 08:19:50 PM
That's very puzzling.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 14, 2022, 08:34:23 PM
Not too puzzling–since that is a T intersection, there's no situation in which any traffic would cross EB traffic. So there is no reason that a light for EB should ever turn red. Most places would at least put green-only signal heads there, but apparently in this case they decided not to bother.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2022, 08:38:57 PM
You're right. I missed the right-turn only sign on the mast-arm the first time I looked at it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 14, 2022, 10:08:34 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 14, 2022, 08:19:50 PM
That's very puzzling.
Thet would usually have the eternal green ahead arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 12:25:59 AM
I think there needs to be a second left turn signal, per the MUTCD. One signal head for an approach hasn't been allowed in a long time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 15, 2022, 10:03:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 12:25:59 AM
I think there needs to be a second left turn signal, per the MUTCD. One signal head for an approach hasn't been allowed in a long time.
It is debatable whether that is a secondary signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 11:23:12 AM
Quote from: Big John on August 15, 2022, 10:03:20 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 12:25:59 AM
I think there needs to be a second left turn signal, per the MUTCD. One signal head for an approach hasn't been allowed in a long time.
It is debatable whether that is a secondary signal.

It's the only signal at that intersection for that approach. Therefore it needs two signal heads. Most intersections have a through signal, which must always have two signals. But lacking a through signal, the left turn here would be the primary movement (I don't see the through movement as part of the intersection) and therefore needs two signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on August 15, 2022, 12:29:07 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 12:25:59 AM
I think there needs to be a second left turn signal, per the MUTCD. One signal head for an approach hasn't been allowed in a long time.

Quote from: Big John on August 15, 2022, 10:03:20 AM
It is debatable whether that is a secondary signal.

Quote from: jakeroot on August 15, 2022, 11:23:12 AM
It's the only signal at that intersection for that approach. Therefore it needs two signal heads. Most intersections have a through signal, which must always have two signals. But lacking a through signal, the left turn here would be the primary movement (I don't see the through movement as part of the intersection) and therefore needs two signals.

There's a long-standing FRA regulation for railway signalling that applies here.  The rule is called "Light-out Protection" and, in a nutshell, you need to have a backup design if a burnt-out bulb would cause confusion that could upgrade the aspect of a signal.  To apply this to traffic signals, if a left turn signal has only one red arrow (or red ball) and it is burnt out, you MUST have a secondary signal (or a double red) if the dark signal might be missed and a green ball on the other heads could be confused as a protected left turn.  That doesn't happen very often, but it is certainly a problem for traffic signals complexes that once were programmed with green ball through and green arrow turn in the same phase (and I would make the safety case that this is also an issue if you are the lone signal with a separate left turn phase in a string of traffic signals with the other arrangement).

Keep in mind that the dark signal is the most restrictive aspect (both in railroading and traffic signals).  It is a great safety default if there aren't any other signal heads to get confused with.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 16, 2022, 06:00:17 PM
It seems that that particular entrance doesn't really need to be signalized at all given that traffic leaving the shopping complex can only turn right in the first place (no sign prohibiting left turns though). Unless they signalized it for pedestrian safety purposes.

A Whole Foods is under construction at this location which is probably why they did it. Still, the single FYA as the only signal doesn't make sense. As others have mentioned they could have the eternal green arrows there.

The other entrance to the complex on the other side of Starbucks is fully signalized and allows left and right turns.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.112848,-77.5500978,3a,75y,120.81h,80.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbw4FI0-6xf8wISk3MepqAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 16, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 16, 2022, 06:00:17 PM
It seems that that particular entrance doesn't really need to be signalized at all given that traffic leaving the shopping complex can only turn right in the first place (no sign prohibiting left turns though). Unless they signalized it for pedestrian safety purposes.

A Whole Foods is under construction at this location which is probably why they did it. Still, the single FYA as the only signal doesn't make sense. As others have mentioned they could have the eternal green arrows there.

I'd bet there's consistently very heavy oncoming traffic going northwest on Monroe. Having that FYA allows the possibility of a protected left turn for southeastbound traffic on Monroe into that complex.

That said, I don't think I've ever seen a perma-green setup like that where there wasn't some sort of curb or island or clear indicator that physically separated the unimpeded through lanes from turning traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 16, 2022, 07:40:56 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 16, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
That said, I don't think I've ever seen a perma-green setup like that where there wasn't some sort of curb or island or clear indicator that physically separated the unimpeded through lanes from turning traffic.

Like this?

https://goo.gl/maps/VJmmHb2WYLUEGrG18

Or do you mean without at least a through signal?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 17, 2022, 12:44:39 AM
Nah, I mean something like this (https://goo.gl/maps/mRVQaGUJFQSoDJct5) or this (https://goo.gl/maps/7ReW268t97C5YyBC7) or this (https://goo.gl/maps/dadmzVU2HdaznDiUA). In all of those, there's a raised curb to the left of the through lanes to physically separate them and emphasize "no, these are not part of the intersection, you can blow through this light". The first example above used to not even have a green up arrow signal, but it didn't make a difference because the curbs made it clear it wasn't part of the signal-controlled intersection.

That Washington example would be #2 for me. Maybe the curb/island is just a Utah standard and I've just never paid all that much attention anywhere else.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 17, 2022, 05:44:18 PM
New signal outside of peak hour:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220817/c345b2dd4bf57a3b47657f2875b7bf95.jpg)
In peak hour:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220817/e41b7854c3a3248b67d0f8d8ce1dea50.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 18, 2022, 02:48:44 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 16, 2022, 06:56:40 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 16, 2022, 06:00:17 PM
It seems that that particular entrance doesn't really need to be signalized at all given that traffic leaving the shopping complex can only turn right in the first place (no sign prohibiting left turns though). Unless they signalized it for pedestrian safety purposes.

A Whole Foods is under construction at this location which is probably why they did it. Still, the single FYA as the only signal doesn't make sense. As others have mentioned they could have the eternal green arrows there.

I'd bet there's consistently very heavy oncoming traffic going northwest on Monroe. Having that FYA allows the possibility of a protected left turn for southeastbound traffic on Monroe into that complex.

That said, I don't think I've ever seen a perma-green setup like that where there wasn't some sort of curb or island or clear indicator that physically separated the unimpeded through lanes from turning traffic.

While setting up a perma-green signal in such situations seems ideal to avoid driver confusion, I don't think those signals are strictly necessary.  Left turn at the signal in Rochester is controlled by an FYA signal, but straight through is uncontrolled.  Straight through traffic will simply go straight through and not be worried that they don't have a signal.  They simply proceed.

Jakeroot mentioned that MUTCD would likely require two left turn signal heads here as it is the primary movement.  I wonder if that would be true if the striaght through movement were signaled with perma-greens.  One left turn signal head and two straight signal heads, but the straight signal heads are all perma-greens.  So if only one left turn signal head is necessry if they have two perma-greens, why would more than one be necessary when the perma-greens are replaced with nothing, which is the functional equivalent?  I do agree that it is good practice to put in two left turn signal heads (IMO everywhere), but I don't think it is strictly required.

US 89 mentioned that these situations are usually set up with a curb separating left turning and through traffic on the main road.  While that is a good safety practice, I don't think the curb is really necessary unless there is a left turn movement from the side street to the main street.  In that circumstance, you need the curb to provide a channelization function so that the side street left turn traffic does not turn dirctly onto the main lanes that see a perma-green (or equivalent).  The left turners in those situations are to merge in somewaht later, as shown most clearly in US 89's third link.  Where side street traffic is not allowed to turn left, the curb is not necessary.  In situations where the side street is one-way away from the intersection (like in the circumstances involving on-ramps to freeways), I see no benefit at all to the separating curb.  But in situations where only right turns are allowed, but left turns are possible but illegal, the curb provides one more level of protection against an errant driver.  So this is a long way of saying that in the Rochester situation, the curb is not necessary because traffic from the shopping center must turn right, but a curb will probably be a good idea to prevent illegal lefts that may be very tempting at this intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 18, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on August 13, 2022, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 12, 2022, 11:57:53 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 12, 2022, 11:24:39 PM
Found a two section signal head still in use in Brooklyn, NY.
https://goo.gl/maps/3HF5vyCes9vZMEqM6

The funny thing is it's only for one direction. The others have the normal three section heads.

It's a 2 head red blinker, although looking at a series of GSVs coming down the street, it may be a steady red at top for a time period, then alternating red on top & bottom. https://goo.gl/maps/sYuQfvFNar5Mb3L89 then https://goo.gl/maps/JeNHQbBdefvYkvnt9

Those 2 section red lights are usually solid red on top, then change to flashing red on the bottom. Usually used for a driveway or other special circumstance.

These are quite unique signals.  Basically as it toggles between a solid red and a flashing red.  During solid red, it's the equivalent of a red light, but during flashing red it acts like a stop sign.

When signed at a driveway, it imposes a stop control during the flahsing phase.  The most practical application of this is that it means that traffic coming out of the driveway has to yield to opposing left turns, which is contrary to the usual practice.  For a really minor driveway, it is OK, but I don't think it fits for many busy driveways, like out of shopping centers.  IMO, it's better to sign a full RYG signal instead.

In the situation above, the signal is used at one of the many service roads that can be found on wide NYC streets.  The service roads are meant to access parking, driveways, and side streets, leaving the main road unimpeded.  The number of conflicts with this arrangement are staggering and it would not be safe unless the service road traffic is really quite small.  And putting stop signs at every cross street instead of signals helps discourage through traffic from the service roads.  (And this distiguishes the service roads on Ocean Parkway from the service roads on other streets like Kings Hwy or Queens Blvd.  The other streets have a lot of traffic on the service roads and the service roads are fully signalized.)

So what we have at the corner of Neptune and Ocean Parkway is an enhanced stop sign at the service roads.  I presume the service road sees a solid red (no movement at all, even right turns) whenever parallel main road traffic has a solid red (the times when left turns or Neptune Ave traffic has the right of way) and gets the flashing red whenever the main road gets a green.  This allows for traffic to proceed, but being watchful for pedestrians (who very frequently jaywalk across the service road) and from possible turning traffic from the main road.  It seems that right turns from the main road are prohibited, but I don't think this was always the case.  If right turns from the main road are allowed, only stop signs (or flahsing red) would be appropriate so that the traffic on the service road properly yields to all other traffic in its path.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: traffic light guy on August 18, 2022, 11:14:27 PM
I've noticed that in Southeast Pennsylvania, there are these weird looking Durasigs. Typically they're found in the vicinity of Abington Township, typically around Glenside, hence the nickname I gave them; "Glenside style" Durasigs.

They have aluminum Siemens visors unlike the standard ones. These were mostly installed sometime between the time that they discontinued the 2nd gen ones with the black ring around the lenses and the third generation ones.

Here are several intersections that have them:

  https://www.google.com/maps/place/New+Vision+Youth+%26+Community/@40.1042768,-75.1645017,3a,75y,84.45h,94.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN0ENmg5URxJRdvzI5nH5XQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m13!1m7!3m6!1s0x89c6ba0ab2d8cf81:0xc03bc345ceabce59!2sEaston+Rd+%26+E+Waverly+Rd,+Glenside,+PA+19038!3b1!8m2!3d40.098642!4d-75.1554277!3m4!1s0x89c6ba71eae9e445:0x300eab4594312819!8m2!3d40.1062977!4d-75.1646793

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1079437,-75.1635287,3a,75y,44.36h,94.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBd7Fp-WTlJwmNE7LllRoNQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1134253,-75.1526764,3a,75y,219.8h,107.71t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNYvzUN-_1McYBW-8gAtc8Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DNYvzUN-_1McYBW-8gAtc8Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D122.48542%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1326352,-75.1528154,3a,75y,168.98h,91.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCu1fBq_w1vQ_Do42Jtgt_A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DCu1fBq_w1vQ_Do42Jtgt_A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D75.68352%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on August 19, 2022, 06:17:40 PM
Here is a very good article on the pedestrian buttons at traffic signals that pedestrain activists derisively call beg buttons.  It provides the right type of defense and really explains their function.

https://ggwash.org/view/86231/an-engineers-defense-of-the-pedestrian-push-button


Of course the activist commenters ridicule the responses of the traffic engineer because they don't seem to mind when drivers are forced to wait for nobody, which is all too common in non-actuated signals.  I happily choose to ignore them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 19, 2022, 06:31:34 PM
There was a midblock crosswalk I used to use regularly in Atlanta that did not have buttons at all - rather, it had pedestrian sensors that were supposed to detect if there were people waiting to cross and change the light accordingly.

The sensors sucked. Often times they simply wouldn't detect pedestrians at all until enough of them showed up, but other times they'd change the light when nobody was there. And as a pedestrian, there was no way to know if the light was just waiting for the right timing to change or if the sensors simply hadn't seen you.

They wound up getting rid of the sensors entirely and putting in buttons. That should be the way to go.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2022, 06:50:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 19, 2022, 06:17:40 PM
Here is a very good article on the pedestrian buttons at traffic signals that pedestrain activists derisively call beg buttons.  It provides the right type of defense and really explains their function.

https://ggwash.org/view/86231/an-engineers-defense-of-the-pedestrian-push-button


Of course the activist commenters ridicule the responses of the traffic engineer because they don't seem to mind when drivers are forced to wait for nobody, which is all too common in non-actuated signals.  I happily choose to ignore them.
I always tell them, you're not mad at the button, you're mad at the signal timing.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2022, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 19, 2022, 06:31:34 PM
There was a midblock crosswalk I used to use regularly in Atlanta that did not have buttons at all - rather, it had pedestrian sensors that were supposed to detect if there were people waiting to cross and change the light accordingly.

The sensors sucked. Often times they simply wouldn't detect pedestrians at all until enough of them showed up, but other times they'd change the light when nobody was there. And as a pedestrian, there was no way to know if the light was just waiting for the right timing to change or if the sensors simply hadn't seen you.

They wound up getting rid of the sensors entirely and putting in buttons. That should be the way to go.
Just because one experience with Ped detection was bad doesn't mean they all are. We've had good experience with Ped detection, it just needs a back up button and confirmation. Also, many signals should have Ped phases on recall.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 19, 2022, 07:37:58 PM
I used to walk to school every day for a couple of years. The street I used (Market St in Tacoma, WA) was entirely timed, alongside most of the intersections in the area. Most of the time, I jaywalked. I had no more of an interest in waiting for a walk signal than the car next to me waiting for their green. Market, alongside every other road in the area, was not timed for pedestrians, obviously. Ergo, there was no "WALK"  band afforded to me. Actuated signals with push buttons would've save me lots of time, as I was usually waiting for no one, and I could have changed the signal within a few seconds of arriving.

I have only one issue with pedestrian push buttons: if you arrive too late, you have to wait a whole cycle before getting a walk sign again. This happens for very obvious reasons: if one direction gets a green while someone is already waiting at the cross street, they have the next priority. The controller has already designated them for the next phase, and the current through phase will end as soon as vehicles stop arriving or it times out. There really needs to be a good four to six seconds at the beginning of a through phase to allow pedestrians to hit the button before it stops them from receiving a WALK sign.

Now, this is where automatic WALK is actually very important. Corridors with so much traffic that it's effectively a guarantee that the through phase will last at least as long as the WALK sign...those movements should have automatic WALK.

Pedestrian detection methods are a whole other issue. As are, I assume, bike detection, as there is already robust methods that don't require any button pressing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 19, 2022, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2022, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 19, 2022, 06:31:34 PM
There was a midblock crosswalk I used to use regularly in Atlanta that did not have buttons at all - rather, it had pedestrian sensors that were supposed to detect if there were people waiting to cross and change the light accordingly.

The sensors sucked. Often times they simply wouldn't detect pedestrians at all until enough of them showed up, but other times they'd change the light when nobody was there. And as a pedestrian, there was no way to know if the light was just waiting for the right timing to change or if the sensors simply hadn't seen you.

They wound up getting rid of the sensors entirely and putting in buttons. That should be the way to go.
Just because one experience with Ped detection was bad doesn't mean they all are. We've had good experience with Ped detection, it just needs a back up button and confirmation. Also, many signals should have Ped phases on recall.

Speaking as someone who writes code here and there...accurate pedestrian detection is such a difficult problem to solve that it's unlikely that a really good implementation of it can be done for the price that a government would want to pay for it.

Or as Past Scott said once...
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 24, 2021, 12:51:07 AM
Vehicles are a lot easier to detect than pedestrians, simply because vehicles are a lot more uniform in their composition, construction, and behavior than humans are. Cars nearly always contain enough iron to be magnetically detectable. They nearly always appear in the lines between lanes, so they can be detectable visually. Meanwhile, pedestrians can be anywhere from 3 to 7 feet tall and weigh from 50 to 400 pounds and rarely travel in straight lines and wait in uniform places. They're not always shaped the same (some are missing parts, use things like wheelchairs, walkers, or canes, or are carrying things like grocery bags that distort the silhouette). And if your ped-detecting algorithm happens to choke on a certain type of person that happens to coincide with a protected class (like, say, a dark background making it so dark-skinned people aren't reliably detected), now you've got a civil suit you've got to deal with.

Ideally, whenever a button is used, it wouldn't matter where in the cycle the light is, the button would trigger the requested pedestrian cycle more or less immediately (which seems to be the case in Norman whenever I've used a ped button). Even if you had flawless pedestrian detection equipment, it would be a scant improvement over a button if the request isn't serviced in a timely manner, which I suspect is your real beef with button-actuated signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on August 20, 2022, 09:59:22 AM
do you think this signal is useless it leads to a service center in buena park https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8703489,-118.0031917,3a,75y,302.11h,89.95t,0.92r/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh7995nQ4hQb4o8CW8lZMpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 20, 2022, 10:23:12 AM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on August 20, 2022, 09:59:22 AM
do you think this signal is useless it leads to a service center in buena park https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8703489,-118.0031917,3a,75y,302.11h,89.95t,0.92r/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh7995nQ4hQb4o8CW8lZMpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I will say I don't think I've ever seen Driveway abbreviated as "Dwy" on a street blade before...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 20, 2022, 04:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 20, 2022, 04:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.
I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 20, 2022, 04:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.
I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 20, 2022, 04:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.
I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane. Gotta think about the context of the street you're turning over. I'd have to study it more to make a choice, I'd probably allow a TOD FYA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UCFKnights on August 20, 2022, 09:00:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 19, 2022, 07:37:58 PM
I used to walk to school every day for a couple of years. The street I used (Market St in Tacoma, WA) was entirely timed, alongside most of the intersections in the area. Most of the time, I jaywalked. I had no more of an interest in waiting for a walk signal than the car next to me waiting for their green. Market, alongside every other road in the area, was not timed for pedestrians, obviously. Ergo, there was no "WALK"  band afforded to me. Actuated signals with push buttons would've save me lots of time, as I was usually waiting for no one, and I could have changed the signal within a few seconds of arriving.

I have only one issue with pedestrian push buttons: if you arrive too late, you have to wait a whole cycle before getting a walk sign again. This happens for very obvious reasons: if one direction gets a green while someone is already waiting at the cross street, they have the next priority. The controller has already designated them for the next phase, and the current through phase will end as soon as vehicles stop arriving or it times out. There really needs to be a good four to six seconds at the beginning of a through phase to allow pedestrians to hit the button before it stops them from receiving a WALK sign.

Now, this is where automatic WALK is actually very important. Corridors with so much traffic that it's effectively a guarantee that the through phase will last at least as long as the WALK sign...those movements should have automatic WALK.
The programming is often so lazy and poorly done for most pedestrian signals, even in high pedestrian traffic areas. For example, at my university, this intersection has a exit only, narrow driveway on one side of the street, and the other side has more of a real road, with a PPLT to access it. The driveway has like a 9 second flashing don't walk time, and the other side has like 15 seconds, and also can't start until the left turn signal finishes.  This means in every circumstance, there is going to be a ton of extra time on the driveway side, so it should obviously shouldn't switch until don't walk until the crosswalk on the opposite side has 9 seconds left, but they are all programmed to have 5 seconds of walk at the beginning of the cycle on any dynamically programmed light, no matter what. This means the intersection has usually 30 seconds of the don't walk on with no conflicting movements every cycle, sometimes even more. If you're crossing over Gemini Blvd, the parallel traffic has no left turn signals, but the walk signals on each side of the intersection are actuated separately, so if 2 people arrive within a few seconds on each side of the street and press the button, one side will get a walk signal and the full 30 seconds to cross, while the other side will have to wait a full cycle of the light before getting the walk signal. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6063017,-81.1987529,3a,75y,74.18h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dmn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D74.18193%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection got an LPI even though the right turn lanes have cross walks prior to the buttons: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6416312,-82.3395375,3a,75y,64.42h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV7gY21ndG9pGGjhO0S3uhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection has an all red pedestrian crossing for 40 seconds. It also allows crossing parallel to 13th St while 13th St has a green light, with a don't walk time of of just 15 seconds. So the same intersection has 2 different crossing times on the same crosswalk, depending on the phase, and even worse then that, the all way stop is always immediately after the 13th timer goes to 0, so its counting down to always give you a walk again.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6485676,-82.3392514,3a,75y,231.64h,84.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D155.45415%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

This highway interchange has a really weird cycle for pedestrians: when you press the button to cross the highway on ramp, all of the straight traffic in both directions get a red. The off ramp gives the left turn a green, the right turn a red on the opposite side of the street, and lights up the "no straight" blankout sign, when there never is an option to go straight anyways. I cannot figure out why for any of this.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6179465,-82.3850794,3a,75y,273.17h,92.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSNSBJYN2h0xLTmX_89T5Zg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 09:17:34 PM
Quote from: UCFKnights on August 20, 2022, 09:00:59 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 19, 2022, 07:37:58 PM
I used to walk to school every day for a couple of years. The street I used (Market St in Tacoma, WA) was entirely timed, alongside most of the intersections in the area. Most of the time, I jaywalked. I had no more of an interest in waiting for a walk signal than the car next to me waiting for their green. Market, alongside every other road in the area, was not timed for pedestrians, obviously. Ergo, there was no "WALK"  band afforded to me. Actuated signals with push buttons would've save me lots of time, as I was usually waiting for no one, and I could have changed the signal within a few seconds of arriving.

I have only one issue with pedestrian push buttons: if you arrive too late, you have to wait a whole cycle before getting a walk sign again. This happens for very obvious reasons: if one direction gets a green while someone is already waiting at the cross street, they have the next priority. The controller has already designated them for the next phase, and the current through phase will end as soon as vehicles stop arriving or it times out. There really needs to be a good four to six seconds at the beginning of a through phase to allow pedestrians to hit the button before it stops them from receiving a WALK sign.

Now, this is where automatic WALK is actually very important. Corridors with so much traffic that it's effectively a guarantee that the through phase will last at least as long as the WALK sign...those movements should have automatic WALK.
The programming is often so lazy and poorly done for most pedestrian signals, even in high pedestrian traffic areas. For example, at my university, this intersection has a exit only, narrow driveway on one side of the street, and the other side has more of a real road, with a PPLT to access it. The driveway has like a 9 second flashing don't walk time, and the other side has like 15 seconds, and also can't start until the left turn signal finishes.  This means in every circumstance, there is going to be a ton of extra time on the driveway side, so it should obviously shouldn't switch until don't walk until the crosswalk on the opposite side has 9 seconds left, but they are all programmed to have 5 seconds of walk at the beginning of the cycle on any dynamically programmed light, no matter what. This means the intersection has usually 30 seconds of the don't walk on with no conflicting movements every cycle, sometimes even more. If you're crossing over Gemini Blvd, the parallel traffic has no left turn signals, but the walk signals on each side of the intersection are actuated separately, so if 2 people arrive within a few seconds on each side of the street and press the button, one side will get a walk signal and the full 30 seconds to cross, while the other side will have to wait a full cycle of the light before getting the walk signal. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6063017,-81.1987529,3a,75y,74.18h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dmn_5DWy8xxtnosM1mFUU6w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D74.18193%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection got an LPI even though the right turn lanes have cross walks prior to the buttons: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6416312,-82.3395375,3a,75y,64.42h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV7gY21ndG9pGGjhO0S3uhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This intersection has an all red pedestrian crossing for 40 seconds. It also allows crossing parallel to 13th St while 13th St has a green light, with a don't walk time of of just 15 seconds. So the same intersection has 2 different crossing times on the same crosswalk, depending on the phase, and even worse then that, the all way stop is always immediately after the 13th timer goes to 0, so its counting down to always give you a walk again.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6485676,-82.3392514,3a,75y,231.64h,84.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDPw9wPSq1PJptbr8G9Nmww%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D155.45415%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

This highway interchange has a really weird cycle for pedestrians: when you press the button to cross the highway on ramp, all of the straight traffic in both directions get a red. The off ramp gives the left turn a green, the right turn a red on the opposite side of the street, and lights up the "no straight" blankout sign, when there never is an option to go straight anyways. I cannot figure out why for any of this.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6179465,-82.3850794,3a,75y,273.17h,92.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSNSBJYN2h0xLTmX_89T5Zg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Would love to see a recording of the last signal


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on August 20, 2022, 10:58:02 PM
The thread on Pedestrian Countdown Signals is almost 10 years old, so I'm going to post here and see if it needs to migrate to there (or a new post).

Today, at the intersection of Churton Street and Margaret Lane (across from the "new" Orange County Courthouse in downtown Hillsborough, North Carolina), I noticed that the AM band was getting a nasty periodic static that took out the station.  Upon further review, the static appeared to be caused by the pedestrian countdown signal as the numbers flashed during the countdown.  That certainly got my attention (duh, distraction) and as I got up to the signal it became obvious that the static window was during the blankout mode between changing the numbers.  I was too far away from the signal when the countdown stopped.  That pedestrian signal was installed when the new traffic light was installed at the Weaver Street Market (officially referred to as "Nash & Kollock Street").  That particular signal head remained out of service for a number of years (for reasons unknown), and has probably only been working for 3 years or so.  If you've been following my posts on other threads, I've got all sorts of ideas on how to fix and how to avoid electromagnetic interference; however, this one has me stumped.

Ooh, big rabbit hole:  By the way, the name "Nash & Kollock Street" with the ampersand has an unusual history.  The Presbyterian Church in town was historically devoid of any adornments, inside or outside.   Except that there is a marble tablet on the south wall of the sanctuary "In memory of Misses Nash & Kollock", who were children's teachers in town and presumably adored members of the church.  The building was constructed with funds raised in a State Lottery in 1810, completed in 1814 (and purportedly given to the first congregation to call a minister to town - which didn't occur until September 1816).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone
How about here? (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1307024,-77.441757,3a,75y,100.52h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqwT3xmhT0Y1_sC57k5FDmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on August 21, 2022, 09:42:40 AM
I've never understood why so many medians don't go all the way to the crosswalk and instead end early, as shown in the GSV link in the post immediately prior to mine. With a median touching the crosswalk (not in, because wheelchairs), pedestrians only have to cross half the street at a time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 21, 2022, 09:51:11 AM
^^ Sometimes there are short medians because of engineering judgment that left-turning traffic (to and from the mainline) can make a proper turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:19:07 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone
How about here? (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1307024,-77.441757,3a,75y,100.52h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqwT3xmhT0Y1_sC57k5FDmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0)
Protected left there


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:19:07 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone
How about here? (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1307024,-77.441757,3a,75y,100.52h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqwT3xmhT0Y1_sC57k5FDmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0)
Protected left there


iPhone
Doghouse signals actually.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 03:28:13 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:19:07 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.

Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility


iPhone
How about here? (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1307024,-77.441757,3a,75y,100.52h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqwT3xmhT0Y1_sC57k5FDmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0)
Protected left there


iPhone
Doghouse signals actually.
I know,,, I'm saying it should be a protected left


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2022, 03:55:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 03:28:13 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 11:04:23 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:19:07 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 21, 2022, 09:35:25 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 08:29:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 06:21:48 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane.
Yeah, I'd say it is because you're from MA. Norman would make you crap your pants (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2039351,-97.4634631,3a,75y,95.03h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYAr1EyfXJju7CiuvjLprIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). This is a perfectly normal intersection here (and as far as I know has had zero incidents since the signal went in).
That one doesn't have a tree lined median. I'm good with a FYA there, good visibility
How about here? (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1307024,-77.441757,3a,75y,100.52h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqwT3xmhT0Y1_sC57k5FDmQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0)
Protected left there
Doghouse signals actually.
I know,,, I'm saying it should be a protected left

What's the justification? It's a positive-offset left turn with excellent visibility. It was basically designed for permissive operation.

Also, what is it specifically about tree-lined medians that should require protected left turns? Vegetated medians do not inherently block the vision of traffic turning left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 04:09:26 PM
There are literally thousands of intersections in the more open regions of the US with more than one oncoming lane and some amount of traffic that have permissive turns. The Utah signal manual, for example, directs for protected-only turns when there are at least four oncoming lanes (with provision for less when a safety study or a handful of other considerations call for one, of course). There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example (https://goo.gl/maps/5eNV31uDPntr65y4A)).

Also, in the case of the protected left in California that brought up this whole discussion, the amount of oncoming traffic there is going to be vanishingly small despite the presence of two lanes. Literally the only thing ahead is the Carmax where the road dead ends. To be honest, that's one of the most low-effort turns I've seen and probably shouldn't need any sort of left turn signal at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on August 21, 2022, 04:26:03 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 08:18:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 05:49:07 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on August 20, 2022, 04:28:30 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 20, 2022, 02:31:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2022, 12:36:46 PM
The fact that it's a fully protected left says so much about California's signal practices.
Looks like a good candidate to me, tbh.

I don't think it meets any of the standard guidelines for protected-only signals. Only two oncoming lanes, low turning volume, good visibility, and no oncoming left turn.
You would think a state that cares so much about vehicle emissions would use permissive/protected phasing more.
I'd argue that improving pedestrian and bicycle safety with protected arrows would be a more effective than having more permissive signals

I don't think there's any evidence of improved safety at smaller intersections when using protected-only phasing. Larger intersections are where there's a grey area.
Maybe it's because I'm from MA, but a median and 2 lanes of oncoming traffic are a lot for drivers to handle, plus a bike lane. Gotta think about the context of the street you're turning over. I'd have to study it more to make a choice, I'd probably allow a TOD FYA

You're right, context is everything. So here's the overhead satellite map (https://goo.gl/maps/zo5SD64ZNkx7sEMEA) from the OP (OP's street view (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8703489,-118.0031917,3a,75y,302.11h,89.95t,0.92r/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh7995nQ4hQb4o8CW8lZMpQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), for original context). It appears that the signal at the service driveway also acts as a crosswalk signal (the lot across from the service center appears to be owned by the same dealership, and there is median fencing prohibiting crossing). But also that the "street" is really a glorified dead-end driveway to the service center and a Carmax just beyond.

From that context, just the fact that a signal exists here is borderline outrageous to me. But even if a signal is necessary, it seems in no world should that left turn be fully protected.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 05:33:33 PM
I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

One thing I've learned while I've been looking for places I might want to move to is that the Mountain and Pacific time zones are a thoroughly different animal than the Central time zone, which is different than Eastern. The amount of wide open space in the West blows my mind, but obviously Westerners make it work. But at the same time, I've seen people on Reddit from places further east freak the hell out over Texas/Oklahoma speed limits, arguing they must be inherently unsafe, revealing that they have very little actual experience with what this part of the country is actually like.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 21, 2022, 06:29:40 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 04:09:26 PM
There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example (https://goo.gl/maps/5eNV31uDPntr65y4A)).

Off-topic (kind of): that's the first intersection I've seen in Utah, not at a SPUI, that has supplemental left turn signals. Appallingly, the eastbound double left turn has only one left turn signal. WTF.

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 05:33:33 PM
I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 07:30:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2022, 06:29:40 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 04:09:26 PM
There are tons of intersections in urban Salt Lake City that involve a permissive left turn across three oncoming lanes with a large amount of relatively higher-speed 40-45mph traffic (example (https://goo.gl/maps/5eNV31uDPntr65y4A)).

Off-topic (kind of): that's the first intersection I've seen in Utah, not at a SPUI, that has supplemental left turn signals. Appallingly, the eastbound double left turn has only one left turn signal. WTF.

They are certainly rare, but there are a handful of supplemental left signals here and there if you know where to look. They actually added some to the light at 3rd West and North Temple (https://goo.gl/maps/tSpXApqmDwFBA1Gi8) a few years back when they put in flashing yellow arrows there and got rid of the protected-only lefts from North Temple.

Unfortunately, that is far from the only double left with only one signal in Utah. Check out this intersection in West Jordan (https://goo.gl/maps/hQT6NXUakz4HxfZS8), which has four approaches of single-signal dual left turns.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2022, 06:29:40 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 05:33:33 PM
I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.

I think part of it, too, is that he seems to assume that every crosswalk and bike lane will be in use at all times always. That may well be true in denser parts of Massachusetts, but it's overly optimistic in most other parts of the country. Fretting about pedestrian safety at the Wylie Road/Lindsey Street intersection would be silly, because the odds that a pedestrian and turning traffic are even going to be present at the same time is really, really low.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:28:10 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 09:44:40 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 21, 2022, 06:29:40 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 21, 2022, 05:33:33 PM
I think the real solution here is that Amtrakprod needs to visit somewhere west of Pennsylvania or south of the Mason-Dixon and see that much of the world does not actually operate according to Massachusetts rules and it's perfectly fine.

Well, I can attest that he does, in fact, travel beyond New England. But he does have a stronger focus on pedestrian and bike safety than most of us here. Which is perfectly fine, but there is a time and place for all kinds of traffic control.

Many people (not necessarily him) that tend to be "less car-focused" in their preferences find the idea of permissive turns (so-called "concurrent movements") to be akin to two streets receiving a green at the same time; since that's obviously insane, permissive turns must be insane too. Seems like a strawman to me.

I think part of it, too, is that he seems to assume that every crosswalk and bike lane will be in use at all times always. That may well be true in denser parts of Massachusetts, but it's overly optimistic in most other parts of the country. Fretting about pedestrian safety at the Wylie Road/Lindsey Street intersection would be silly, because the odds that a pedestrian and turning traffic are even going to be present at the same time is really, really low.
So wouldn't you argue that a FYA with ped protect to change the arrow red when the walk sign is activated by a pedestrian push button? That sounds most context appropriate for that location.

I would like to state that I'm not anti car, in any means. I just believe and practice that everyone should have access to safety no matter what method they use to get around. And finding creative solutions to improving safety for everyone is something I'm quite passionate about. I believe it should be a common goal, for all of us.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 11:24:30 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:28:10 PM
So wouldn’t you argue that a FYA with ped protect to change the arrow red when the walk sign is activated by a pedestrian push button? That sounds most context appropriate for that location.

Until a pedestrian pushes the button, then just walks across on his own against the light after waiting for a few seconds and realizing there is no conflicting traffic anywhere near. Then by the time the walk signal activates and the arrow turns red, a handful of cars have arrived and now have to wait for no reason to make their left turn, which is not only annoying but also increases idling emissions.

This is a problem with HAWKs too, by the way. People push the button, get sick of waiting for the light to change, and jaywalk on their own as soon as a gap in traffic shows up. By the time the light does change, any pedestrians have long since crossed and left the scene.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 22, 2022, 07:37:21 AM
Quote from: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 11:24:30 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 21, 2022, 10:28:10 PM
So wouldn't you argue that a FYA with ped protect to change the arrow red when the walk sign is activated by a pedestrian push button? That sounds most context appropriate for that location.

Until a pedestrian pushes the button, then just walks across on his own against the light after waiting for a few seconds and realizing there is no conflicting traffic anywhere near. Then by the time the walk signal activates and the arrow turns red, a handful of cars have arrived and now have to wait for no reason to make their left turn, which is not only annoying but also increases idling emissions.

This is a problem with HAWKs too, by the way. People push the button, get sick of waiting for the light to change, and jaywalk on their own as soon as a gap in traffic shows up. By the time the light does change, any pedestrians have long since crossed and left the scene.
We can give better pedestrian service at the signals you know. Make all the buttons "hot" , and trigger the signal right away.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on August 22, 2022, 11:05:42 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 19, 2022, 06:50:52 PM
I always tell them, you’re not mad at the button, you’re mad at the signal timing.

When a traffic signal is running under a coordinated plan, sometimes funny things can happen if splits don't cover any Ped phases fully (W+FDW+Y+AR), at least for an exclusive pedestrian phase and also if the force-off (Veh and PedApply) calculations are off. It's also dependent on what controller is on the field, as their software and methods can vary.

Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME has a Trafficware Commander ATC controller and initially when the signal was retimed this June, Ped Phase 9 wouldn't get serviced at all when a call was placed. The new cycle lengths were half-cycled at 56s AM, 50s Md and 60s PM. The controller was still running the programmed split time (6-8s), however the ped phase (4 W) and clearance (30 FDW) would not be timed at all, resulting in the Ped phase getting skipped. Eventually after three cycles, the controller would detect that it hasn't serviced at all, resulting in the coordination plan failing and going into Free timing until the next programmed coordination pattern. While not the exact same thing as described below in this post... we did have instances of peds crossing against DW and lots of red light runners due to the controller acting wonky.

Quote from: US 89 on August 21, 2022, 11:24:30 PM
Until a pedestrian pushes the button, then just walks across on his own against the light after waiting for a few seconds and realizing there is no conflicting traffic anywhere near. Then by the time the walk signal activates and the arrow turns red, a handful of cars have arrived and now have to wait for no reason to make their left turn, which is not only annoying but also increases idling emissions.

This is a problem with HAWKs too, by the way. People push the button, get sick of waiting for the light to change, and jaywalk on their own as soon as a gap in traffic shows up. By the time the light does change, any pedestrians have long since crossed and left the scene.

Eventually it was discovered the following things caused this:
- The split for Phase 9 was too low (Must cover Min Green + Y + AR).
- No "dummy" phase was assigned to each side of the barrier in the coordinated ring (There was only a Phase 9 on Ring 1, nothing below on Ring 2).
- Stop-in-Walk (below) wasn't working correctly because of this - it only worked if Phase 5 (lagging prot left) was active and gapped out.
- Easy Calcs (default yield points, or window where phases can be serviced) weren't being calculated correctly (the yield calculation was resulting in a negative number).

The split for Phase 9 was bumped to 8s (W + AR), a "dummy" phase 13 was added to Ring 2 of the Ring/Barrier and the coordination strategy had to be changed from End to Begin of Green. In addition, since the Ped permissive window wasn't being calculated correctly, the Easy Calcs had to be manually calculated for the Veh/PedApply (permissive window) for all of the phases. Since these changes, there haven't been any issues with skipped peds causing long waits and causing the controller to fail the coord plan to go into Free.

QuoteStop-In-Walk is a very important feature that allows the split time of a phase less than the minimum pedestrian requirements (sum of the walk + ped clearance + yellow + all-red clearance).

Stop-In-Walk causes the local cycle counter to “stop” during coordination if a force-off is applied to the phase and it is still timing walk or pedestrian clearance.

TL;DR: Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME, under new Coordination plans, was skipping the exclusive Ped phase and failing Coord plans due to the split being too low and the controller incorrectly calculating when phases can be serviced, resulting in long ped wait times. Remedies were done to correct this issue and the intersection works as intended now with no more long ped waits or Coord Faults.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 26, 2022, 10:09:01 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220827/f418ddbbdaeb820d9f21c58dca75fb61.jpg)
Brand new signal, Cabot/1A/Dodge Beverly, MA


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on August 26, 2022, 11:55:30 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on August 22, 2022, 11:05:42 AM
TL;DR: Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME, under new Coordination plans, was skipping the exclusive Ped phase and failing Coord plans due to the split being too low and the controller incorrectly calculating when phases can be serviced, resulting in long ped wait times. Remedies were done to correct this issue and the intersection works as intended now with no more long ped waits or Coord Faults.

Thanks for the excellent explanation.  I've always been fascinated with coordinated traffic signal networks; one of my managers worked for Sperry on the development of their original system in downtown Miami.  It always seemed to me that conversion of an arterial corridor to one-way pairs would be necessary to balance the needs of [automobile] throughput and pedestrians.  The coordination of perpendicular arterials would be even harder.  In the rail transit industry, we have to perform detailed simulations and conduct appropriate analyses to get all of the [people flow] issues straightened out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 27, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on August 26, 2022, 11:55:30 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on August 22, 2022, 11:05:42 AM
TL;DR: Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME, under new Coordination plans, was skipping the exclusive Ped phase and failing Coord plans due to the split being too low and the controller incorrectly calculating when phases can be serviced, resulting in long ped wait times. Remedies were done to correct this issue and the intersection works as intended now with no more long ped waits or Coord Faults.

Thanks for the excellent explanation.  I've always been fascinated with coordinated traffic signal networks; one of my managers worked for Sperry on the development of their original system in downtown Miami.  It always seemed to me that conversion of an arterial corridor to one-way pairs would be necessary to balance the needs of [automobile] throughput and pedestrians.  The coordination of perpendicular arterials would be even harder.  In the rail transit industry, we have to perform detailed simulations and conduct appropriate analyses to get all of the [people flow] issues straightened out.

This matter of coordinating perpendicular arterials has long fascinated me as well. Seems very, very hard to get right.

Bellevue, WA is pretty impressive. Tight, dense downtown core, but everything is two-way, mostly four to six lanes and dedicated turn signals (some FYA). On one hand, getting around doesn't require much thought, back-tracking, etc like you might see in Seattle, but the timing of the signals is just ridiculously impressive. I don't know how they do it so well. Obviously a lot of lead-lag and some automatic WALK.



Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 26, 2022, 10:09:01 PM
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220827/f418ddbbdaeb820d9f21c58dca75fb61.jpg
Brand new signal, Cabot/1A/Dodge Beverly, MA

I love Mass's commitment to yellow signal poles. At least in some places. Don't even see that in MN anymore.

Are there other emergency beacons for the additional approaches, or do the other signals just go red? Hard to tell without seeing in person, I suppose.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kirbykart on August 27, 2022, 01:51:28 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/XjeLq5mwnxYetqAp8
Traffic signal indeed :bigass:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 27, 2022, 02:06:34 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on August 27, 2022, 01:51:28 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/XjeLq5mwnxYetqAp8
Traffic signal indeed :bigass:

What are we looking at?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kirbykart on August 27, 2022, 02:07:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 27, 2022, 02:06:34 PM
Quote from: kirbykart on August 27, 2022, 01:51:28 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/XjeLq5mwnxYetqAp8
Traffic signal indeed :bigass:

What are we looking at?
A traffic signal. It's the name of the thread.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on August 27, 2022, 09:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 27, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on August 26, 2022, 11:55:30 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on August 22, 2022, 11:05:42 AM
TL;DR: Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME, under new Coordination plans, was skipping the exclusive Ped phase and failing Coord plans due to the split being too low and the controller incorrectly calculating when phases can be serviced, resulting in long ped wait times. Remedies were done to correct this issue and the intersection works as intended now with no more long ped waits or Coord Faults.

Thanks for the excellent explanation.  I've always been fascinated with coordinated traffic signal networks; one of my managers worked for Sperry on the development of their original system in downtown Miami.  It always seemed to me that conversion of an arterial corridor to one-way pairs would be necessary to balance the needs of [automobile] throughput and pedestrians.  The coordination of perpendicular arterials would be even harder.  In the rail transit industry, we have to perform detailed simulations and conduct appropriate analyses to get all of the [people flow] issues straightened out.

This matter of coordinating perpendicular arterials has long fascinated me as well. Seems very, very hard to get right.

Bellevue, WA is pretty impressive. Tight, dense downtown core, but everything is two-way, mostly four to six lanes and dedicated turn signals (some FYA). On one hand, getting around doesn't require much thought, back-tracking, etc like you might see in Seattle, but the timing of the signals is just ridiculously impressive. I don't know how they do it so well. Obviously a lot of lead-lag and some automatic WALK.



Quote from: Amtrakprod on August 26, 2022, 10:09:01 PM
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220827/f418ddbbdaeb820d9f21c58dca75fb61.jpg
Brand new signal, Cabot/1A/Dodge Beverly, MA

I love Mass's commitment to yellow signal poles. At least in some places. Don't even see that in MN anymore.

Are there other emergency beacons for the additional approaches, or do the other signals just go red? Hard to tell without seeing in person, I suppose.
1. Bellevue May be great for driving timing, but it took forever to bike through. They have some long signal cycles!

2. Yes! i love the yellow poles too. Here's another perspective:
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220828/5d644d016514549fcb747ab22f22e817.jpg)

only one approach has the HAWK, but i imagine when it's activated the signal gives a clearance at the signal behind it and all the other approaches go all red.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on August 28, 2022, 03:12:55 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0327772,-95.6156518,3a,39.5y,7.03h,91.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx3oFqv82DsWNjTC3dHemTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's this about?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 28, 2022, 08:25:47 PM
Wonder why that one head is mounted horizontal while the rest are all vertical.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 28, 2022, 08:45:22 PM
That is extremely common in Nebraska. The side-by-side (aka Colorado-style doghouse) left turn with horizontal through signal heads is widespread there, and you can find some legitimate doghouses too (example (https://goo.gl/maps/Qb5JnF34XzMctgE2A)). Wonder if they used a Nebraska-based contractor.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 28, 2022, 08:51:31 PM
I don't get it. What is the reason or purpose for that configuration or is it just odd local practice? If they like horizontal why not make the shared left-turn head a horizontal also, like in Texas?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 29, 2022, 08:33:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/C9Py3icAWDEhE2sG6
I was noticing on the horizontal mounts, the green arrow lens is second to last and not last as it would be vertically.

This photo shows the four section horizontally and vertically in Galloway, NJ.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 29, 2022, 09:31:39 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 29, 2022, 08:33:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/C9Py3icAWDEhE2sG6
I was noticing on the horizontal mounts, the green arrow lens is second to last and not last as it would be vertically.

This photo shows the four section horizontally and vertically in Galloway, NJ.

Standard layout as per the MUTCD.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part4/fig4d-03_longdesc.htm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 29, 2022, 09:36:10 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 28, 2022, 08:51:31 PM
I don't get it. What is the reason or purpose for that configuration or is it just odd local practice? If they like horizontal why not make the shared left-turn head a horizontal also, like in Texas?

I've heard of mounting a left turn signal differently than the through signals, maybe for distinction. I know Lawton, OK used to have a regular thing where the left turn signal would be horizontal while everything else was vertical, but I think they might have moved to all horizontal now as I'm having a hard time finding an example on streetview. Pretty sure I've seen the same thing somewhere in Alberta too. There is also this one-off in Albuquerque (https://goo.gl/maps/6vfBskcomYJtBNhw5) with vertical left turn signal and horizontal otherwise.

I've been to plenty of places that use horizontal signals regularly (NM, TX, FL, NE, parts of LA, AL, OK...) and this is the first I've ever seen a doghouse signal on the same mast as horizontal signals in someplace that's not Nebraska. Seems to be a Nebraska-specific oddity. I agree though that it doesn't make much sense - if the point of horizontal signals is a lower wind profile, a doghouse backplate is basically a sail which kind of defeats the purpose...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 29, 2022, 09:41:40 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 29, 2022, 09:31:39 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 29, 2022, 08:33:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/C9Py3icAWDEhE2sG6
I was noticing on the horizontal mounts, the green arrow lens is second to last and not last as it would be vertically.

This photo shows the four section horizontally and vertically in Galloway, NJ.

Standard layout as per the MUTCD.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part4/fig4d-03_longdesc.htm

Yeah, the arrows are supposed to be positioned on the same side of the green light as the direction they're indicating, which is why the left- and right-turn horizontal 5 section signals have the green in a different place (example (https://goo.gl/maps/WAEhYidF2by9Dwhc6)).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 29, 2022, 09:44:33 AM
Some places in Alberta (namely Edmonton, but there's probably some others) also do something like that; mounting a left turn signal vertically and the rest horizontally. They also do the double red light thing Texas does.

https://goo.gl/maps/i7heX9Yfiq1axoYr8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 29, 2022, 11:16:06 AM
Quote from: US 89 on August 29, 2022, 09:36:10 AM
I've been to plenty of places that use horizontal signals regularly (NM, TX, FL, NE, parts of LA, AL, OK...) and this is the first I've ever seen a doghouse signal on the same mast as horizontal signals in someplace that's not Nebraska. Seems to be a Nebraska-specific oddity. I agree though that it doesn't make much sense - if the point of horizontal signals is a lower wind profile, a doghouse backplate is basically a sail which kind of defeats the purpose...

Both the eastbound and westbound approaches to this intersection in Yakima, Washington have a doghouse left turn signal with a horizontal supplemental through signal, like the Nebraska example:

https://goo.gl/maps/ozubAUPs3wtS6Daj6

I think there are more. This is just the one I saved. Yakima was a big user of horizontal signals, possibly the only city in Washington that did it regularly. So there are some oddities out there.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 29, 2022, 02:20:42 PM
Are there any horizontal doghouses out there? I sure hope not because that shit would look crazy  :-D
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 29, 2022, 02:25:32 PM
Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 02:20:42 PM
Are there any horizontal doghouses out there? I sure hope not because that shit would look crazy  :-D
Not a doghouse like what we're used to in the states, but Japan's horizontal signals with the protective-permissive arrows below the standard RYG balls for turns are the closest I can think of for a "horizontal doghouse" .
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on August 29, 2022, 02:30:24 PM
Example:

(https://fareastfling.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/traffic-lights.jpg)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on August 29, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 29, 2022, 02:30:24 PM
Example:

(https://fareastfling.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/traffic-lights.jpg)

I don't understand why they would have the red ord and green up arrow illuminated at the same time. Is that normal there?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on August 29, 2022, 04:40:11 PM
Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 29, 2022, 02:30:24 PM
Example:

[img snipped]

I don't understand why they would have the red orb and green up arrow illuminated at the same time. Is that normal there?
Yes, it's normal there. It's their way of signaling protected only right turns (equivalent to our left turns as Japan drives on the left). Think of it as "red light except if your direction has a green arrow" for Japanese traffic lights in general, and it would make a bit more sense.

Though this signaling results in some oddities like the left arrow and pedestrian light on the left side both on green (so left turn cars still have to yield to pedestrians), which I've seen zero other cases of.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on August 29, 2022, 09:10:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 29, 2022, 11:16:06 AM
Yakima was a big user of horizontal signals, possibly the only city in Washington that did it regularly.

Have they switched to vertical signals on new installs now? I just poked around a bit on street view and the horizontal ones are everywhere, including on some new-looking signals...which is weird to me in because I had no idea Yakima used them to begin with. Nobody's ever mentioned it on here to my knowledge, and I've even been to Yakima before and feel like I would have remembered such a thing.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 29, 2022, 10:32:48 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 29, 2022, 09:10:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 29, 2022, 11:16:06 AM
Yakima was a big user of horizontal signals, possibly the only city in Washington that did it regularly.

Have they switched to vertical signals on new installs now? I just poked around a bit on street view and the horizontal ones are everywhere, including on some new-looking signals...which is weird to me in because I had no idea Yakima used them to begin with. Nobody's ever mentioned it on here to my knowledge, and I've even been to Yakima before and feel like I would have remembered such a thing.

They are still being installed yes. The newest signal I know of, Ahtanum and 64th, was activated within the last two years, and only the supplemental signals on the poles are vertical, with the overhead signals being horizontal.

https://goo.gl/maps/bb2PG6SEEHtjFTKn7

Yakima has definitely used vertical signals in the past, and has continued to install them from time to time. But they are rarer, and I don't know the rationale behind their usage.

It should be noted that signals in Washington that are on state highways are generally maintained by WSDOT, and will match WSDOT standards. Even in Yakima, where horizontal signals are king, WSDOT-maintained signals will be vertical. This is always true, unless that particular signal was negotiated to be installed and/or maintained by the local agency. In which case, the standards can match the local rules. In the case of Yakima, I believe all traffic lights at the end of the I-82 and US-12 ramps are WSDOT installed and maintained, so are all vertical. Unless you ventured quite a ways off the freeway, it's likely you saw mostly vertical signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 01, 2022, 04:49:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 27, 2022, 01:05:32 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on August 26, 2022, 11:55:30 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on August 22, 2022, 11:05:42 AM
TL;DR: Broadway and Evans St in South Portland ME, under new Coordination plans, was skipping the exclusive Ped phase and failing Coord plans due to the split being too low and the controller incorrectly calculating when phases can be serviced, resulting in long ped wait times. Remedies were done to correct this issue and the intersection works as intended now with no more long ped waits or Coord Faults.

Thanks for the excellent explanation.  I've always been fascinated with coordinated traffic signal networks; one of my managers worked for Sperry on the development of their original system in downtown Miami.  It always seemed to me that conversion of an arterial corridor to one-way pairs would be necessary to balance the needs of [automobile] throughput and pedestrians.  The coordination of perpendicular arterials would be even harder.  In the rail transit industry, we have to perform detailed simulations and conduct appropriate analyses to get all of the [people flow] issues straightened out.

This matter of coordinating perpendicular arterials has long fascinated me as well. Seems very, very hard to get right.

Bellevue, WA is pretty impressive. Tight, dense downtown core, but everything is two-way, mostly four to six lanes and dedicated turn signals (some FYA). On one hand, getting around doesn't require much thought, back-tracking, etc like you might see in Seattle, but the timing of the signals is just ridiculously impressive. I don't know how they do it so well. Obviously a lot of lead-lag and some automatic WALK.

I took undergrad and graduate courses in traffic engineering while in college. Even though I'm not a practicing engineer, I still find it fascinating--and signal coordination strategies among the most fascinating elements. There's a lot to balance, and it's not always easy to achieve that balance.

For two-way road networks, a lot of that balance is lead-lag phasing and adjusting cycle offsets. For grids, sometimes you just have to put in an occasional "bump" because it's just not possible to keep up a progression wave over multiple miles when you have multiple coordinated corridors. Plenty of tinkering around with Synchro and similar programs, and also trial and error...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 05, 2022, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on August 29, 2022, 02:25:32 PM
Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 02:20:42 PM
Are there any horizontal doghouses out there? I sure hope not because that shit would look crazy  :-D
Not a doghouse like what we’re used to in the states, but Japan’s horizontal signals with the protective-permissive arrows below the standard RYG balls for turns are the closest I can think of for a “horizontal doghouse”.

Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 29, 2022, 02:30:24 PM
Example:

(https://fareastfling.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/traffic-lights.jpg)

I don't understand why they would have the red ord and green up arrow illuminated at the same time. Is that normal there?

Some older signals in Massachusetts, particually in Cambridge and Everett have similar configurations to how the Japanese signalling system works, albeit in a vertical 4-section setup. The one in Everett I believe used to run lead-lag (or runs a different phase sequence based on time of day) but when I went to visit that intersection, it ran the typical lead-lead setup. Signals below...

Cambridge, at Massachusetts Ave at Hollis and Dover St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3946018,-71.1269199,3a,62.7y,257.97h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sArayE77pMIXk7HqAGnNUYg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (not my video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMXMfC_WP_E



Everett, at MA Route 16 and Everett Av (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4017994,-71.0412472,3a,44.9y,249.06h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7rzsHgyigquGv8b6E7gswQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), used to run different phasings in the past 30-35+ years but mostly lead-lead for the most part. Believe the bimodal arrow is new, older videos show it using the yellow ball for clearence like in Japan:

July 1988 (Appears to run lead-lead phasing. Notice how the yellow ball clears out the green arrow - Begin of Video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXG85Lzscx0
May 2019 (go to 12:52 for the phasing, which may appear to run lead-lag): https://youtu.be/hQWRjDrGU10?t=773
August 2022 (photos only):

(https://i.ibb.co/QmR1XRb/IMG-9663.jpg) (https://ibb.co/3hqLkqr)
(https://i.ibb.co/GQmg2pV/IMG-9674.jpg) (https://ibb.co/JjZX7tz)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on September 06, 2022, 09:02:54 AM
Those are wild. I've been to MA twice but don't recall seeing signals like that. I would think a lot of visitors would be a bit confused from the up arrow and red orb combo like that.

The phasing in the Cambridge example is especially interesting.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 06, 2022, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: plain on September 06, 2022, 09:02:54 AM
Those are wild. I've been to MA twice but don't recall seeing signals like that. I would think a lot of visitors would be a bit confused from the up arrow and red orb combo like that.

Count me among those people. That cannot be MUTCD compliant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 06, 2022, 10:20:41 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 06, 2022, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: plain on September 06, 2022, 09:02:54 AM
Those are wild. I've been to MA twice but don't recall seeing signals like that. I would think a lot of visitors would be a bit confused from the up arrow and red orb combo like that.

Count me among those people. That cannot be MUTCD compliant.

At least for the Everett example:

Quote from: MUTCD 2009 Edition Chapter 4D. Traffic Control Signal Features - Section 4D.05 Application of Steady Signal IndicationsStandard:
10 The following combinations of signal indications shall not be simultaneously displayed on any one signal face:

CIRCULAR RED with CIRCULAR YELLOW;
CIRCULAR GREEN with CIRCULAR RED; or
Straight-through GREEN ARROW with CIRCULAR RED
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 06, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
It's a Massachusetts thing. They don't concern themselves with that pesky MUTCD when maintaining old installations. They just do what they've done for the last hundred years..........

Are there any flashing green traffic lights still operating in Massachusetts?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: MATraveler128 on September 06, 2022, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 06, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
Are there any flashing green traffic lights still operating in Massachusetts?

There's still a few here and there, mostly along the North Shore. There's one in Stoneham on Pond Street next to the Stone Zoo. Another one on North Avenue in Wakefield was recently taken out of service with recent road work in the area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on September 14, 2022, 10:00:11 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 06, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
It's a Massachusetts thing. They don't concern themselves with that pesky MUTCD when maintaining old installations. They just do what they've done for the last hundred years..........

Are there any flashing green traffic lights still operating in Massachusetts?

The remaining crazy ones with straight green arrows on with red circles and stuff are most often vestiges of past MDC installs.  DCR carried on the craziness and even though the gray paint job ones are slowly going away as seen in the Revere Beach Parkway examples above, the layout and timing stays the same. 

Salem even went so far a few years back as to upgrade an intersection that used to have one or two ground-mount signals (oddly, only one for the main drag and two for the cross street each direction) featuring flashing green and the old red-yellow pedestrian phase to have overhead flashing green signals too. 
And there is the famous new install within the last 5 years in Quincy of flashing greens replacing bottom yellow flashing heads. 
It is sad that the Wakefield ones are gone....they looked like they might last forever.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 14, 2022, 10:53:06 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on September 06, 2022, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 06, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
Are there any flashing green traffic lights still operating in Massachusetts?

There's still a few here and there, mostly along the North Shore. There's one in Stoneham on Pond Street next to the Stone Zoo. Another one on North Avenue in Wakefield was recently taken out of service with recent road work in the area.
Good to know about the North Avenue one. Glad I filmed it once awhile back, but sad I never got back to it


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 14, 2022, 10:55:50 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 14, 2022, 10:53:06 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on September 06, 2022, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 06, 2022, 08:19:35 PM
Are there any flashing green traffic lights still operating in Massachusetts?

There's still a few here and there, mostly along the North Shore. There's one in Stoneham on Pond Street next to the Stone Zoo. Another one on North Avenue in Wakefield was recently taken out of service with recent road work in the area.
Good to know about the North Avenue one. Glad I filmed it once awhile back, but sad I never got back to it


iPhone
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220915/b5b260d9e34644a8cb2a03f2dbba8ca1.jpg)
Sign from Wakefield's installation


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Curious to see if the Brockton (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0636181,-71.0154488,3a,40.1y,172.94h,85.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxrS-y_tt28HP9xCamiN3Tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) one is still active as of the writing of the post. Not a flashing green, but still has the old style R-Y exclusive ped phase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDYL2LW_FEg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 14, 2022, 11:34:59 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Curious to see if the Brockton (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0636181,-71.0154488,3a,40.1y,172.94h,85.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxrS-y_tt28HP9xCamiN3Tw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) one is still active as of the writing of the post. Not a flashing green, but still has the old style R-Y exclusive ped phase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDYL2LW_FEg
Brockton signal looks unchanged on street view (South/Main)

Malden and Everett has a handful of those signals too.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kirbykart on September 15, 2022, 09:57:21 AM
What in the world is the purpose of a flashing green signal?!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 15, 2022, 10:16:06 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on September 15, 2022, 09:57:21 AM
What in the world is the purpose of a flashing green signal?!

Depends where you are when you see it.

1.  In Mexico, it means the light is about to turn yellow.

2.  In some parts of Canada, it means your direction of traffic has a protected left.

3.  In other parts of Canada, it means you're at a crosswalk whose ped phase isn't active at the moment.

4.  In Massachusetts, it isn't defined by law but is similar to (3) above, but could be found anywhere that may require extra caution–not just at crosswalks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kirbykart on September 15, 2022, 01:28:26 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 15, 2022, 10:16:06 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on September 15, 2022, 09:57:21 AM
What in the world is the purpose of a flashing green signal?!
3.  In other parts of Canada, it means you're at a crosswalk whose ped phase isn't active at the moment.

4.  In Massachusetts, it isn't defined by law but is similar to (3) above, but could be found anywhere that may require extra caution–not just at crosswalks.
A flashing yellow should be used in these examples. The bolded portion is literally the definition of where a flashing yellow should be used.
The Mexico one is interesting though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 15, 2022, 04:16:37 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 15, 2022, 10:16:06 AM
Quote from: kirbykart on September 15, 2022, 09:57:21 AM
What in the world is the purpose of a flashing green signal?!

Depends where you are when you see it.

1.  In Mexico, it means the light is about to turn yellow.

2.  In some parts of Canada, it means your direction of traffic has a protected left.

3.  In other parts of Canada, it means you're at a crosswalk whose ped phase isn't active at the moment.

4.  In Massachusetts, it isn't defined by law but is similar to (3) above, but could be found anywhere that may require extra caution–not just at crosswalks.
I think flashing green needs a definition in the US. I'd like to use them anywhere where through traffic has priority but other vehicles may be entering. Flashing yellow now seems more like a yield, bc of the FYA.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 15, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
Yeah, this notion that flashing green should ever be replaced by flashing yellow is nonsense. Canada and Mexico allow flashing green and it's used in very clever and helpful ways. The FHWA, in my opinion, shoots itself in the foot by not allowing it. They would be wise to reconsider.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 15, 2022, 04:16:37 PM
I think flashing green needs a definition in the US. I'd like to use them anywhere where through traffic has priority but other vehicles may be entering.

That's exactly how I'd like to see it used in the US. That's how it's used in British Columbia, even though it's actually a ped-activated crossing (as mentioned above) -- in every case I can think of, there is a cross street with a stop sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 15, 2022, 05:03:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 15, 2022, 04:21:28 PM
Yeah, this notion that flashing green should ever be replaced by flashing yellow is nonsense. Canada and Mexico allow flashing green and it's used in very clever and helpful ways. The FHWA, in my opinion, shoots itself in the foot by not allowing it. They would be wise to reconsider.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on September 15, 2022, 04:16:37 PM
I think flashing green needs a definition in the US. I'd like to use them anywhere where through traffic has priority but other vehicles may be entering.

That's exactly how I'd like to see it used in the US. That's how it's used in British Columbia, even though it's actually a ped-activated crossing (as mentioned above) -- in every case I can think of, there is a cross street with a stop sign.
Exactly. Or even for a bicycle signal with a concurrent phase. Think of a leading bicycle interval:

Solid green for the head start, then flashing green when the conflict begins. Much better than the MUTCD approved flashing yellow bicycle.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on September 15, 2022, 05:42:53 PM
Found a video posted 4 days ago about the more technical details of "smart" (for the lack of a better word) Dutch traffic lights, including their benefits and drawbacks, that some of you may be interested in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KPGVP85WpU
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 08:25:16 PM
The flashing green in the USA is strictly a Massachusetts thing as far as I know. My understanding is that it specifically indicates a pre-emption signal, one that's manually activated by a crosswalk push-button or a fire station signal, as compared to a signal that changes with regular phasing and/or vehicle demand.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 15, 2022, 08:54:28 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 15, 2022, 10:16:06 AM
4.  In Massachusetts, it isn't defined by law but is similar to (3) above, but could be found anywhere that may require extra caution–not just at crosswalks.

Quote from: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 08:25:16 PM
My understanding is that it specifically indicates a pre-emption signal, one that's manually activated by a crosswalk push-button or a fire station signal, as compared to a signal that changes with regular phasing and/or vehicle demand.

Hmm, I think you may be correct.  I can't actually identify one that isn't.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 09:14:46 PM
The one flashing green I remember in Braintree, Ma. was at a crosswalk/intersection at the entrance to Braintree High School. I believe it was converted to steady-green some years back.

And I should add, I actually like flashing green the way Massachusetts uses it, even it's not permitted by the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 15, 2022, 09:32:03 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 08:25:16 PM
The flashing green in the USA is strictly a Massachusetts thing as far as I know. My understanding is that it specifically indicates a pre-emption signal, one that's manually activated by a crosswalk push-button or a fire station signal, as compared to a signal that changes with regular phasing and/or vehicle demand.
Arlington MA had a flashing green fire signal before 2013, so this seems accurate.

It's not a flashing yellow. (Park avenue fire station if anyone is curious)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2022, 10:57:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 08:25:16 PM
The flashing green in the USA is strictly a Massachusetts thing as far as I know. My understanding is that it specifically indicates a pre-emption signal, one that's manually activated by a crosswalk push-button or a fire station signal, as compared to a signal that changes with regular phasing and/or vehicle demand.

Delaware used to have a flashing green.

The main route had a flashing green; the side road had a flashing red. If a vehicle (or vehicles) sat at the flashing red long enough because traffic on the main road was too heavy, eventually the lights would go steady and cycle like a regular signal, then go back in flashing mode.

The lights were around in the 1990's; I'm not sure if any survived into the early 2000's. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 18, 2022, 08:58:50 AM
I drove out to film some flashing green/red yellow signals today in Salem area MA.

On my way up, I checked out the signals on North/Linda in Wakefield. They are bagged.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/f6ab59d3b563d2a1ebb7b57dcc2feca8.jpg)


114/Driscoll-
No sign of changes, operates by resting in FG/FR and will go RY during the walk phase.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/1ba81c36398baa9716ba7737984723df.jpg)

Boston/Rawlins - Signal will be replaced in the next year, but is there now. Pedestrians see a FR, while drivers see a FG. When button pressed, signal goes all red, the red/yellow phase must have been removed.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/f2bff60ada9d27077a4535c1d07072ff.jpg)

114/Ocean flashing green retained, but no RY. I regret not checking the signal at Leach to see if it was similar. Guess I'll need to do another trip out soon.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/6e6e7f737a5cdae65e06e3970f7b199d.jpg)

Loring Ave/Rainbow-

Arguably the most interesting signal of the day. rests in flashing green, when the button pressed after 25-90 seconds (yes, it was different every time), the signal goes all yellow, then red and yellow for 5 seconds; and then solid red for Ped clearance.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/4921964f251c48faf1e8c4313e3c4506.jpg)

Lastly, I filmed a 3M signal at 129/Puritan in Swampscott that turns from a green ball to green arrow. I filmed a video from my car, and took several photos.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220918/6f5c39014041f4d926d1c532cb9d4c9d.jpg)

Lots of interesting stuff left in MA, but sad to see a lot of it go.


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on September 19, 2022, 06:56:16 AM
Thanks for those. MA really does have a lot of kookiness going on with those older signals.

There was another discussion about the 3M signals that changes from orb to arrow somewhere but I can't remember where that was (might have been on this thread).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 19, 2022, 01:02:46 PM
I have to wonder, with those older signals in Massachusetts, were there just fewer rules back then, allowing them to kind of mess around with whatever they wanted? Or were there rules against, say, flashing green, they just didn't care?

I don't know the history of the MUTCD well enough to know if, eg, flashing green was always forbidden. Or if it was permitted for decades and only recently (last thirty years) banned from new installations.

The difference in approaching the meaning of flashing green here in the US is quite interesting compared to Canada. Given that flashing green means one thing in British Columbia, but another thing in Ontario, tells me that Transport Canada never defined the meaning of flashing green, but never banned it. Here in the US, flashing green does not have a meaning, and therefore is banned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on September 19, 2022, 01:11:27 PM
Then again, there are differences in the US, such as right on red arrow, whether entering on yellow is legal or not, Illinois's lack of slip lanes, the legal definition of a signal being dark, and whether a railroad crossing with no gate functions as a flashing red or a solid red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2022, 01:48:21 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 19, 2022, 01:11:27 PM
...and whether a railroad crossing with no gate functions as a flashing red or a solid red.

In either case, you need to stop on red.  The laws generally don't state if there's a malfunction, but if so I would think motorists will eventually go thru after verifying no train is coming.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 19, 2022, 02:37:00 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 19, 2022, 01:11:27 PM
Then again, there are differences in the US, such as right on red arrow, whether entering on yellow is legal or not, Illinois's lack of slip lanes, the legal definition of a signal being dark, and whether a railroad crossing with no gate functions as a flashing red or a solid red.

I was going to mention some of these things but decided not to. Only because these differences are quite minor compared to flashing green in BC vs flashing green in Ontario (pedestrian crossing vs advanced left, respectively). The closest might be the difference in yellow laws in the US, but at least yellow is still roughly the same meaning everywhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 19, 2022, 02:57:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2022, 01:48:21 PM

Quote from: 1 on September 19, 2022, 01:11:27 PM
...and whether a railroad crossing with no gate functions as a flashing red or a solid red.

In either case, you need to stop on red.  The laws generally don't state if there's a malfunction, but if so I would think motorists will eventually go thru after verifying no train is coming.

How could a railroad with no gate function as a solid red?  You'd never be able to go again.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 19, 2022, 03:00:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on September 19, 2022, 02:57:43 PM
How could a railroad with no gate function as a solid red?  You'd never be able to go again.

Wouldn't you be able to go once the railroad lights stopped flashing?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 19, 2022, 03:04:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 19, 2022, 03:00:50 PM

Quote from: kphoger on September 19, 2022, 02:57:43 PM
How could a railroad with no gate function as a solid red?  You'd never be able to go again.

Wouldn't you be able to go once the railroad lights stopped flashing?

Sorry, I was assuming no lights either, for some reason.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on September 21, 2022, 10:04:30 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 15, 2022, 10:57:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 15, 2022, 08:25:16 PM
The flashing green in the USA is strictly a Massachusetts thing as far as I know. My understanding is that it specifically indicates a pre-emption signal, one that's manually activated by a crosswalk push-button or a fire station signal, as compared to a signal that changes with regular phasing and/or vehicle demand.

Delaware used to have a flashing green.

The main route had a flashing green; the side road had a flashing red. If a vehicle (or vehicles) sat at the flashing red long enough because traffic on the main road was too heavy, eventually the lights would go steady and cycle like a regular signal, then go back in flashing mode.

The lights were around in the 1990's; I'm not sure if any survived into the early 2000's. 

I remember those on US 13 in the 1990s too, before the "relief route" was opened fully.  Wish at the time I'd noted exactly where so they could be tracked on later trips.  In fall 2001, I drove US 13 from Greenville NC to northern Del. on the way to UD and don't remember seeing any flashing greens.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on September 22, 2022, 12:52:02 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 19, 2022, 01:11:27 PM
...and whether a railroad crossing with no gate functions as a flashing red or a solid red.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2022, 01:48:21 PM
In either case, you need to stop on red.  The laws generally don't state if there's a malfunction, but if so I would think motorists will eventually go thru after verifying no train is coming.

Discounting all of the confusion above, railroad crossing flashing light signals (FLS) and flashing light signals and gates (FLS&G) are indeed viewed differently by the public as compared to traffic signals.  In general (but not everywhere), most drivers associate the running of a red light with police enforcement.  But in general, most drivers also associate the running of an activated FLS/FLS&G as a way to "beat the train".  But indeed, but types of red signals indicate "stop".

One big difference occurs with timid drivers (or those otherwise prone to intense rules compliance).  Both types of signals will experience folks who get hit with the signal such that they miscalculate a hard stop and land squarely in "The Box".  It is usually safe to "stop in The Box" at a traffic signal (albeit at an aggravation to opposing traffic), whereas it is never safe to stop on the tracks.  We've had plenty of accidents where drivers (truckers and others with manual transmissions) have had plenty of time to cross the tracks safely, yet slammed on the brakes and stalled the engines while stopping on the tracks. 

It sometimes gets more confusing when there are gates.  I was once working at a crossing when a train triggered the FLS&G and the trucker didn't have time to stop.  He came on through the crossing at speed, but the gate came down and got caught between the cab and his trailer.  He (correctly) pulled over and was concerned that we were going to pull his license.  I told him to stay in his cab and I calmed him down; we pulled the gate out and thanked him and sent him on his way.  This gray area happens all of time.  The primary safety issue is to keep trains from colliding with cars/trucks (or conversely, cars/trucks from runnning into the sides of trains).

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2022, 01:48:21 PM
The laws generally don't state if there's a malfunction, but if so I would think motorists will eventually go thru after verifying no train is coming.

Sorry, but that is still against the law.  The driver is supposed to stay put and report the malfunction to the railroad.  In many states, such reporting is also required by law or regulation.  The railroad dispatcher (in some cases, a maintenance dispatcher) should be able to inform the driver when it is safe to cross the railroad.  For many malfunctions, the dispatcher is required to establish a Train Order to protect the crossing (such that trains will need to approach the crossing at restricted speed, prepared to stop in half the sight distance).  But beware, as the first train can't always reduce speed as soon as the Train Order is issued.  If the lights are flashing and no train is coming, one should always assume that a train is coming and stop, then contact the railroad to report a malfunction (never assume that a car ahead has already done so).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 22, 2022, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on September 22, 2022, 12:52:02 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 19, 2022, 01:48:21 PM
The laws generally don't state if there's a malfunction, but if so I would think motorists will eventually go thru after verifying no train is coming.

Sorry, but that is still against the law.  The driver is supposed to stay put and report the malfunction to the railroad.  In many states, such reporting is also required by law or regulation.  The railroad dispatcher (in some cases, a maintenance dispatcher) should be able to inform the driver when it is safe to cross the railroad.  For many malfunctions, the dispatcher is required to establish a Train Order to protect the crossing (such that trains will need to approach the crossing at restricted speed, prepared to stop in half the sight distance).  But beware, as the first train can't always reduce speed as soon as the Train Order is issued.  If the lights are flashing and no train is coming, one should always assume that a train is coming and stop, then contact the railroad to report a malfunction (never assume that a car ahead has already done so).

Hence these little blue signs, I suppose:  https://goo.gl/maps/dBfZYfsgBZvewbgE6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on September 25, 2022, 04:19:45 AM
In the case of stalling on the train tracks and/or getting stuck, I never understood how you're supposed to run away to safety from the impending (or possible) train collision and call the number on that sign at the same time to report it. I'd bet there are many, many people who cannot read the blue signs from more than a few feet away.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on September 25, 2022, 02:59:23 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on September 25, 2022, 04:19:45 AM
In the case of stalling on the train tracks and/or getting stuck, I never understood how you're supposed to run away to safety from the impending (or possible) train collision and call the number on that sign at the same time to report it. I'd bet there are many, many people who cannot read the blue signs from more than a few feet away.

If you do ever see a train about to collide with a stalled vehicle, you should indeed run.  If possible, it is recommended that you run towards the direction that the train is coming from (however, running along the tracks towards the train is not recommended).  Debris and shrapnel from such a collision will likely be thrown out in the other three directions.  Regarding the Malfunction/Emergency Call number, the train crew will attempt to report the stranded vehicle and the emergency before the impact occurs.  But it would be wise for a witness to call 9-1-1 as soon as possible. 

If there is no train coming, using the Malfunction/Emergency Call number is still the best approach.  The train dispatcher (or signal maintenance dispatcher) will attempt to notify the train of the presence of a stranded vehicle.  You will need to be standing close to the sign, as you will need to provide the AAR crossing number (six digits plus one letter) quickly and clearly.  Each railroad has different rules regarding their response to such emergencies, but don't be surprised if that dispatcher asks you to corral enough people to push the stranded vehicle off of the tracks so that they can clear the route for the next train.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on September 25, 2022, 09:16:02 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on September 25, 2022, 02:59:23 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on September 25, 2022, 04:19:45 AM
In the case of stalling on the train tracks and/or getting stuck, I never understood how you're supposed to run away to safety from the impending (or possible) train collision and call the number on that sign at the same time to report it. I'd bet there are many, many people who cannot read the blue signs from more than a few feet away.

If you do ever see a train about to collide with a stalled vehicle, you should indeed run.  If possible, it is recommended that you run towards the direction that the train is coming from (however, running along the tracks towards the train is not recommended).  Debris and shrapnel from such a collision will likely be thrown out in the other three directions.  Regarding the Malfunction/Emergency Call number, the train crew will attempt to report the stranded vehicle and the emergency before the impact occurs.  But it would be wise for a witness to call 9-1-1 as soon as possible. 

If there is no train coming, using the Malfunction/Emergency Call number is still the best approach.  The train dispatcher (or signal maintenance dispatcher) will attempt to notify the train of the presence of a stranded vehicle.  You will need to be standing close to the sign, as you will need to provide the AAR crossing number (six digits plus one letter) quickly and clearly.  Each railroad has different rules regarding their response to such emergencies, but don't be surprised if that dispatcher asks you to corral enough people to push the stranded vehicle off of the tracks so that they can clear the route for the next train.

Yes, at a 45 degree angle towards the direction the train is coming from. If it were a not-too-busy crossing with gates and lights where all trains are required to blow their horn before reaching it, I probably wouldn't mind calling the number on the sign with someone else to look out for a train. I could even take a picture of it and then run to a safe area. Now, if it's not one of those aforementioned crossings, that would be a different story. Especially in the NYC metropolitan area with the Metro North Railroad, a lot of the crossings are activated every 10-15 minutes during peak hours.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 25, 2022, 11:06:18 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/gaJjHYGWFwcr1wzS7
What's up with the vertical right turn signals verses the horizontal straight throughs?

https://goo.gl/maps/usTPaiXrz3k5xS8C6
Again from another direction at same intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/cVTouxPC6A3pCfqd8
Now EB on US 90.

https://goo.gl/maps/UPzaXiQGEvhXHGhKA
Now NB Carrollton Avenue.


All four directions use horizontal mounts, but vertically for the right turn signal.





Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 27, 2022, 11:38:38 AM
My theories on this:

(1) Are the right turn signals rotated because of the mast arm's curve? That depends on how they are being mounted.

(2) Is it because no vehicles go underneath them, therefore mounting them vertically is okay?

(3) It it because someone who works in the DOT/DPW thinks horizontal turn signals are the bogeymen and aren't allowed?

I'm going with number 3, because the other two don't really seem to make sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on September 27, 2022, 07:17:10 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 25, 2022, 11:06:18 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/gaJjHYGWFwcr1wzS7
What's up with the vertical right turn signals verses the horizontal straight throughs?

https://goo.gl/maps/usTPaiXrz3k5xS8C6
Again from another direction at same intersection.

https://goo.gl/maps/cVTouxPC6A3pCfqd8
Now EB on US 90.

https://goo.gl/maps/UPzaXiQGEvhXHGhKA
Now NB Carrollton Avenue.


All four directions use horizontal mounts, but vertically for the right turn signal.
Probably to bring attention to them, as they're using a non standard phasing style (one I really like, because it's extremely safe !)


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on September 28, 2022, 04:24:56 PM
Why is there an all way stop and no traffic signal here? (https://goo.gl/maps/ftFoqcRW5SpT5NYa9) Especially with all the turning cars since the straight-through leads to what appears to be an empty parking lot. This is one of the larger stop sign intersections I've seen. I don't know the AADT but it can't be too low, seeing as it's right next to US-131 and I-96 as well as in Grand Rapids. I'm not used to seeing these outside of rural areas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 28, 2022, 05:50:10 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on September 28, 2022, 04:24:56 PM
Why is there an all way stop and no traffic signal here? (https://goo.gl/maps/ftFoqcRW5SpT5NYa9) Especially with all the turning cars since the straight-through leads to what appears to be an empty parking lot. This is one of the larger stop sign intersections I've seen. I don't know the AADT but it can't be too low, seeing as it's right next to US-131 and I-96 as well as in Grand Rapids. I'm not used to seeing these outside of rural areas.

That intersection doesn't really look too bad. Most of the traffic is probably through on the 5-lane road.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on September 28, 2022, 06:22:46 PM
Is there anything in the 2009 MUTCD that prohibits or discourages installing a traffic signal at a toll plaza (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4791175,-70.4971943,3a,42.1y,315.37h,87.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sguau5mafO5GFEJJrfe6qMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)? Since 2012, ever since the Maine Turnpike Authority have reconstructed numerous toll plazas, I've been noticing that the MTA is installing new toll plaza equipment with traffic signals, Patron Fare Displays and the VES cameras, with the latest installation being in 2022 at the soon to be reconstructed Exit 45. I remember reading that the MUTCD only wants the Patron Fare Display as the traffic control device, but I can't recall where I found that.

The MTA did replace the traffic signals on the toll plaza canopies (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4789203,-70.4969906,3a,75y,309.43h,83.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sFhgwAUxP8l0XZ0KdC_bwbw!2e0!5s20151001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) serving as lane control devices with actual units (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.478961,-70.496956,3a,75y,316.81h,85.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxkCuqeGYelUblow4DmqHPA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) as needed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on September 28, 2022, 09:31:23 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 28, 2022, 05:50:10 PM
That intersection doesn't really look too bad. Most of the traffic is probably through on the 5-lane road.

Also, do you think the three turning lanes on the cross road is because of the small volume of straight-through traffic or to prevent possible backups over the railroad crossing behind?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on September 29, 2022, 11:28:46 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on September 28, 2022, 09:31:23 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 28, 2022, 05:50:10 PM
That intersection doesn't really look too bad. Most of the traffic is probably through on the 5-lane road.

Also, do you think the three turning lanes on the cross road is because of the small volume of straight-through traffic or to prevent possible backups over the railroad crossing behind?

I didn't even notice that lane configuration, sorry. I think it's probably a combination of both. It's still an odd design choice here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 02, 2022, 03:23:58 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 28, 2022, 06:22:46 PM
Is there anything in the 2009 MUTCD that prohibits or discourages installing a traffic signal at a toll plaza (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4791175,-70.4971943,3a,42.1y,315.37h,87.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sguau5mafO5GFEJJrfe6qMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)? Since 2012, ever since the Maine Turnpike Authority have reconstructed numerous toll plazas, I've been noticing that the MTA is installing new toll plaza equipment with traffic signals, Patron Fare Displays and the VES cameras, with the latest installation being in 2022 at the soon to be reconstructed Exit 45. I remember reading that the MUTCD only wants the Patron Fare Display as the traffic control device, but I can't recall where I found that.

The MTA did replace the traffic signals on the toll plaza canopies (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4789203,-70.4969906,3a,75y,309.43h,83.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sFhgwAUxP8l0XZ0KdC_bwbw!2e0!5s20151001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) serving as lane control devices with actual units (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.478961,-70.496956,3a,75y,316.81h,85.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxkCuqeGYelUblow4DmqHPA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) as needed.

Yes. See Part 4K (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/part4/part4k.htm).
Quote
Section 4K.01 Traffic Signals at Toll Plazas

Standard:
01 Traffic control signals or devices that closely resemble traffic control signals that use red or green circular indications shall not be used at toll plazas to indicate the open or closed status of the toll plaza lanes.

Guidance:
02 Traffic control signals or devices that closely resemble traffic control signals that use red or green circular indications should not be used for new or reconstructed installations at toll plazas to indicate the success or failure of electronic toll payments or to alternately direct drivers making cash toll payments to stop and then proceed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 08, 2022, 11:02:36 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/WMcRXHuuvQg3D8C9A
Check out the faded green signal head.

Looks like three one section heads mounted together.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 11:26:42 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/sKtEfX3nQP3hqq4FA
Ohio seems to have what Florida used to use for drawbridges.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on October 16, 2022, 12:44:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 11:26:42 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/sKtEfX3nQP3hqq4FA
Ohio seems to have what Florida used to use for drawbridges.

It was quite surprising (a pleasant surprise) that with all the work building the Glass City Skyway and moving I-280 onto it from that drawbridge, and all the work around the drawbridge connecting it to local streets instead of it being part of 280 and so on, that they left the button copy signs for Maumee River and the old signals/signs in both directions.  I might have thought that replacing those (at least the signs) would have been included, but nope.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 01:52:34 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 16, 2022, 12:44:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 16, 2022, 11:26:42 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/sKtEfX3nQP3hqq4FA
Ohio seems to have what Florida used to use for drawbridges.

It was quite surprising (a pleasant surprise) that with all the work building the Glass City Skyway and moving I-280 onto it from that drawbridge, and all the work around the drawbridge connecting it to local streets instead of it being part of 280 and so on, that they left the button copy signs for Maumee River and the old signals/signs in both directions.  I might have thought that replacing those (at least the signs) would have been included, but nope.
Looks like they extended OH 65 to make the old bridge part of the state road system. OH 65 seems to end on Front Street at the ramp to I-280:NB.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 27, 2022, 05:12:16 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ozLGCRvW89M5zi8r8

This I've never seen.  OUT OF SERVICE on the coverings for a non functional signal.

Closer look.
https://goo.gl/maps/CQji53Q8sHRRefiy9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 30, 2022, 02:44:58 AM
^^
I don't have a picture, but I remember Renton, WA using signal bags with "Out of Service" written on them. In the example I saw, it was a signal that had been operating but was disabled due to a traffic shift. So it could be reserved for that kind of situation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on October 30, 2022, 04:12:58 PM
^^^
NCDOT uses them here in District 7 (Guilford/Rockingham/Alamance/Caswell/Orange), but I can't say that I've seen them used elsewhere in the state.  There's a famous set of faded ones at the intersection of US-70 and Third Street in downtown Mebane where the traffic signal is awaiting changes involving railroad preemption circuitry.  Those new signal heads were installed back in 2020 and many of them have faded beyond recognition, or have been ripped so badly that they needed to be replaced with bags. 

GSV came through recently:
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0967455,-79.2693491,3a,15y,287.01h,92.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTO4Wom3z2VtfRNnUuyTfQQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

It looks like the main purpose of this signal head replacement is to eliminate the NLT/NRT blank out signs that illuminate with oncoming trains.  Not sure why this is taking so long, because even the railroad (Norfolk Southern) tends to be quite responsive to NCDOT projects along the North Carolina Rail Road (NCRR) corridor.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 31, 2022, 12:43:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/SKDLDBnMyVqLcqp39
https://goo.gl/maps/KCCp81gJyT6vskTE7

Interesting FYRA in NYC.

I'm guessing it's to alert motorists of the crosswalk.  However unusual it's not the tower 5 section but an additional 12-12-12 to a 8-8-8.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 01, 2022, 09:26:24 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 27, 2022, 05:12:16 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ozLGCRvW89M5zi8r8

This I've never seen.  OUT OF SERVICE on the coverings for a non functional signal.

Closer look.
https://goo.gl/maps/CQji53Q8sHRRefiy9

I have seen them used more frequently in Illinois. They used to use a variety of other coverings. I remember seeing tan coverings that looked like they were used for some kind of sod or bagging trees or something else. Now, pretty much anytime I see signals covered, they have Out of Service on the front of them.

Quote from: roadman65 on October 31, 2022, 12:43:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/SKDLDBnMyVqLcqp39
https://goo.gl/maps/KCCp81gJyT6vskTE7

Interesting FYRA in NYC.

I'm guessing it's to alert motorists of the crosswalk.  However unusual it's not the tower 5 section but an additional 12-12-12 to a 8-8-8.


I've seen this a couple times in Wisconsin, except with the full 4-light version. I believe the sequence is to flash yellow during the normal green, and give a green arrow when the conflicting traffic is turning left.

There's also this example in the Wisconsin Dells which I may or may not have posted before. (https://goo.gl/maps/HmdXbPDCcMuCvhXP6)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 01, 2022, 10:44:58 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/x1BPB1PhKNgVZm2VA
https://goo.gl/maps/vEJjTi9RGEr5nMtJ8

Caught a signal in flash mode in Barnegate Light, NJ.  The STOP sign and date confirm is indefinitely flashing during non peak tourists season.

https://goo.gl/maps/rVSyuN2R1ncxttrd8 In Summer it shows STOP sign removed and operational.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 01, 2022, 04:39:49 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 31, 2022, 12:43:23 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/SKDLDBnMyVqLcqp39
https://goo.gl/maps/KCCp81gJyT6vskTE7

Interesting FYRA in NYC.

I'm guessing it's to alert motorists of the crosswalk.  However unusual it's not the tower 5 section but an additional 12-12-12 to a 8-8-8.
That's for a super LPI (LPI +) (Split concurrent phasing). Allows for a leading pedestrian interval of 8-14 seconds while through traffic is uninterrupted. In this case, it also helps with the bike lane.

Here's a NYCDOT video about it: https://youtu.be/nCvfPUnpaww


iPhone
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 01, 2022, 10:23:45 PM
Well Lakeland, FL sets the white Person walk icon to activate three seconds before the light turns green.  No flashing arrow set up though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 02, 2022, 03:21:00 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9

You posted the link facing the wrong way.

I think it looks good, reminds me of what I've seen Texas do. I would move it below the yellow backplate though so the yellow is the same border around the entire signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 02, 2022, 03:36:29 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/2zDA551pNX7xEyJu5
This is an oddity in Ontario.  Usually signals are mounted on opposite mast arms unlike the US, but this assembly with multiple signal heads is more like the states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 02, 2022, 03:47:15 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 02, 2022, 03:21:00 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9

You posted the link facing the wrong way.

I think it looks good, reminds me of what I've seen Texas do. I would move it below the yellow backplate though so the yellow is the same border around the entire signal.

I'm on my phone and it took me directly to the signal. Not sure why it was in the wrong direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 02, 2022, 05:20:54 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 03:47:15 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 02, 2022, 03:21:00 PM

Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9

You posted the link facing the wrong way.

I think it looks good, reminds me of what I've seen Texas do. I would move it below the yellow backplate though so the yellow is the same border around the entire signal.

I'm on my phone and it took me directly to the signal. Not sure why it was in the wrong direction.

I'm on my PC, and the link goes to a closeup of the exact signal you're referring to.  Don't know what |JoePCool14| is talking about.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on November 02, 2022, 06:51:01 PM
Huh. The first time I clicked on the link it was facing the opposite direction, but the second time I clicked it was facing the right direction! Never had that problem before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 02, 2022, 07:00:04 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on November 02, 2022, 06:51:01 PM
Huh. The first time I clicked on the link it was facing the opposite direction, but the second time I clicked it was facing the right direction! Never had that problem before.

Trippy!  It just did it to me too.  I tried four times:  the first time, it faced the wrong direction;  the other three, the right direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 02, 2022, 09:23:24 PM
I was on the phone when I first linked it. There still might be a problem in me doing so, apologies to everyone who is experiencing viewing the link. Most of the time I'm not using my laptop
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on November 03, 2022, 12:16:59 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 02, 2022, 03:21:00 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9

You posted the link facing the wrong way.

I think it looks good, reminds me of what I've seen Texas do. I would move it below the yellow backplate though so the yellow is the same border around the entire signal.

I'm not really a fan of needing a "Left Turn Signal" sign, when red arrows are a thing that exists...

But if you have to have a sign, this is a perfectly reasonable way to do it. I'm guessing it was done this way because there isn't much space between the signal heads to allow for a freestanding sign without it causing confusion as to which signal heads the sign applied to.  I also would have had the sign a bit more below the backplate, and would also reverse the color scheme (at least for use in the U.S.).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on November 03, 2022, 03:04:12 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9
Looks like something Michigan would do.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 03, 2022, 04:34:25 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 02, 2022, 07:00:04 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on November 02, 2022, 06:51:01 PM
Huh. The first time I clicked on the link it was facing the opposite direction, but the second time I clicked it was facing the right direction! Never had that problem before.

Trippy!  It just did it to me too.  I tried four times:  the first time, it faced the wrong direction;  the other three, the right direction.

And you all thought I was crazy...  :-D For the record, I clicked it a couple times today, and it was facing the right way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 03, 2022, 04:42:51 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 03, 2022, 04:34:25 PM
And you all thought I was crazy...  :-D For the record, I clicked it a couple times today, and it was facing the right way.

Just tried it twice.  First time, right direction;  second time, wrong direction.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 04, 2022, 10:28:41 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on November 03, 2022, 03:04:12 PM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2022, 02:28:47 PM
I'm not really a fan of having the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signage mounted on the backplate.

Calgary, AB
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fzejRnfXzoBsqxQX9
Looks like something Michigan would do.

Yeah with LEFT above the signal head.  Come to think of it, does Michigan use back plates?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 05, 2022, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 04, 2022, 10:28:41 PM

Yeah with LEFT above the signal head.  Come to think of it, does Michigan use back plates?
They are not common, but can be found in Michigan.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 07, 2022, 08:54:21 AM
Quote from: Big John on November 05, 2022, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 04, 2022, 10:28:41 PM

Yeah with LEFT above the signal head.  Come to think of it, does Michigan use back plates?
They are not common, but can be found in Michigan.

They are becoming more common. New Michigan signal installs, whether span wire or mast arm, generally use backplates.

Slightly related, I have to say, I miss the classic Michigan signals with diagonal span wires. Now they just do a similar thing to the other Midwestern states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 14, 2022, 12:14:20 AM
I'm hoping to get some more photos and videos up, but I wanted to write a bit about Japanese traffic signal operations.

First, I want to talk about the design. Japan primarily uses horizontal signals outside of two situations: (1) snowy areas, or (2) signals placed in tight spots for additional visibility. Otherwise, signals are always horizontal. Because Japan drives on the left, the horizontal signals are opposite from what you'd see in the right-hand traffic countries. So, red is on the far right, closest to the inside of the road, with green on the outside. Arrows are also used, and are placed below the main lenses at horizontal signals, and to the right at vertical signals. The arrows are always green, no yellow arrows to be found here. Most four way intersections will have a right-facing green arrow, some with left turn lanes also have a left turn filter signal. T intersections never have green arrows, the protected phase has oncoming traffic stop on red, but there is no indication of this to turning traffic; Japanese law does not seem to allow a green arrow and green orb to be lit simultaneously. The signals themselves are either grey or dark brown. There have been three design "ages": incandescent signals, then LED signals with visors, and (presently) LED signals without a visor. The non-visor signals are single units, rather than individual signal faces.

Next, I want to talk about operations. Japan is...not the most creative when it comes to signal phasing. The standard phasing is very simple: through traffic and pedestrians have green simultaneous, turning traffic yields; this is followed by a green arrow for right turning traffic. The right turn green arrows always come on at the same time, for both directions, no matter what. Most four-way intersections with turn lanes will have this operation, though some do not have any protected phase (example here with a double right turn (https://goo.gl/maps/8vXWWRD3bmxsLXLz9)). Three-way intersections, for traffic turning right off the top of the T, also typically get a protected phase, but as mentioned above, there is no green arrow; traffic has to deduce that it's their turn based on oncoming traffic having stopped. Regardless of the number of turn lanes, these operations described above are the same (double left turns, double right turns, everything is always a yield). Advanced left turns are exceedingly rare. I have only seen one, and it is shown with a green right, up, and left arrows and a red orb (example on my Flickr (https://flic.kr/p/2nZ4fYE)). Green phases of any kind always end with the yellow orb, even green arrows (so the main three-section signal will go from red to yellow if a green arrow phase is ending, kind of confusing if you only look for a split second).

Importantly: all traffic signals are timed. There are no actuated signals in Japan, that I've seen at least. I think they have time of day phasing, but that may be it. Pedestrian walk signals always activate with through traffic. Left on red is prohibited except on military installations.

I don't know if anyone here cares about Japan, or were curious. Hopefully this sums things up pretty well. Eventually I'll get some videos, since I know some of what I'm describing is pretty unusual.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on November 14, 2022, 07:10:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 14, 2022, 12:14:20 AM
I'm hoping to get some more photos and videos up, but I wanted to write a bit about Japanese traffic signal operations.

First, I want to talk about the design. Japan primarily uses horizontal signals outside of two situations: (1) snowy areas, or (2) signals placed in tight spots for additional visibility. Otherwise, signals are always horizontal. Because Japan drives on the left, the horizontal signals are opposite from what you'd see in the right-hand traffic countries. So, red is on the far right, closest to the inside of the road, with green on the outside. Arrows are also used, and are placed below the main lenses at horizontal signals, and to the right at vertical signals. The arrows are always green, no yellow arrows to be found here. Most four way intersections will have a right-facing green arrow, some with left turn lanes also have a left turn filter signal. T intersections never have green arrows, the protected phase has oncoming traffic stop on red, but there is no indication of this to turning traffic; Japanese law does not seem to allow a green arrow and green orb to be lit simultaneously. The signals themselves are either grey or dark brown. There have been three design "ages": incandescent signals, then LED signals with visors, and (presently) LED signals without a visor. The non-visor signals are single units, rather than individual signal faces.

Next, I want to talk about operations. Japan is...not the most creative when it comes to signal phasing. The standard phasing is very simple: through traffic and pedestrians have green simultaneous, turning traffic yields; this is followed by a green arrow for right turning traffic. The right turn green arrows always come on at the same time, for both directions, no matter what. Most four-way intersections with turn lanes will have this operation, though some do not have any protected phase (example here with a double right turn (https://goo.gl/maps/8vXWWRD3bmxsLXLz9)). Three-way intersections, for traffic turning right off the top of the T, also typically get a protected phase, but as mentioned above, there is no green arrow; traffic has to deduce that it's their turn based on oncoming traffic having stopped. Regardless of the number of turn lanes, these operations described above are the same (double left turns, double right turns, everything is always a yield). Advanced left turns are exceedingly rare. I have only seen one, and it is shown with a green right, up, and left arrows and a red orb (example on my Flickr (https://flic.kr/p/2nZ4fYE)). Green phases of any kind always end with the yellow orb, even green arrows (so the main three-section signal will go from red to yellow if a green arrow phase is ending, kind of confusing if you only look for a split second).

Importantly: all traffic signals are timed. There are no actuated signals in Japan, that I've seen at least. I think they have time of day phasing, but that may be it. Pedestrian walk signals always activate with through traffic. Left on red is prohibited except on military installations.

I don't know if anyone here cares about Japan, or were curious. Hopefully this sums things up pretty well. Eventually I'll get some videos, since I know some of what I'm describing is pretty unusual.

How much of an adjustment was it from driving in the United States for you? Japan's on my bucket list, but it seems very different compared to much of what I've seen.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on November 15, 2022, 12:07:12 AM
A...very strange pedestrian (?) signal in Denver:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7382907,-104.9254345,3a,75y,97.41h,89.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBhLm7DMrgtRp7QYNwzUJdA!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192

No crosswalk lights at all, no pedestrian waiting area, only cross street is a beat-up alleyway. Go back to earlier street view and it gets even weirder...not even a crosswalk:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.738287,-104.9254023,3a,75y,81.45h,87.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqGJQnASnRidFCgGqxOfWWA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 15, 2022, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Hobart on November 14, 2022, 07:10:29 PM
How much of an adjustment was it from driving in the United States for you? Japan's on my bucket list, but it seems very different compared to much of what I've seen.

The Japanese are very forgiving drivers. Almost too forgiving. But it makes it easy to drive here. They don't go too fast, they don't take too many chances, etc. But otherwise, they're pretty liberal with intersection operations (no waiting for a green arrow), so things feel pretty high capacity for the most part. Driving on the left isn't too unusual, for me it was sitting on the right side of the car that took some getting used to.

Overall, I like driving here more than back in the United States or Canada.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 15, 2022, 12:41:09 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on November 15, 2022, 12:07:12 AM
A...very strange pedestrian (?) signal in Denver:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7382907,-104.9254345,3a,75y,97.41h,89.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBhLm7DMrgtRp7QYNwzUJdA!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192

No crosswalk lights at all, no pedestrian waiting area, only cross street is a beat-up alleyway. Go back to earlier street view and it gets even weirder...not even a crosswalk:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.738287,-104.9254023,3a,75y,81.45h,87.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqGJQnASnRidFCgGqxOfWWA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656

That is very strange indeed. It would appear to be timed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on November 15, 2022, 06:33:33 AM
Quote from: Caps81943 on November 15, 2022, 12:07:12 AM
A...very strange pedestrian (?) signal in Denver:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7382907,-104.9254345,3a,75y,97.41h,89.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sBhLm7DMrgtRp7QYNwzUJdA!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192

No crosswalk lights at all, no pedestrian waiting area, only cross street is a beat-up alleyway. Go back to earlier street view and it gets even weirder...not even a crosswalk:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.738287,-104.9254023,3a,75y,81.45h,87.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqGJQnASnRidFCgGqxOfWWA!2e0!5s20110901T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Very odd. My only guess is that it is there to create gaps in traffic to create opportunities for drivers crossing/entering at the intersections further downstream, without needing to fully signalise those intersections. Two blocks down, you can see detector loops in the pavement on one of the side roads:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7381104,-104.9234199,3a,39.4y,358.86h,82.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDDhFopHx_eurPiTiUxdzOg!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7381104,-104.9234199,3a,39.4y,358.86h,82.3t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDDhFopHx_eurPiTiUxdzOg!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

So my guess is that if a vehicle is detected waiting for too long at one of these side streets, the signals turn red to create a gap in the traffic.

There is a similar arrangement on the other road in this one-way couplet, with what seem to be detector loops at the downstream intersection:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7367774,-104.9198352,3a,75y,264.59h,89.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg70jYjxnB6uvYdbi4a8QoA!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7367774,-104.9198352,3a,75y,264.59h,89.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg70jYjxnB6uvYdbi4a8QoA!2e0!5s20211101T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7369429,-104.9216755,3a,48.9y,201.53h,74.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssyKAzXvAgwWGDYTGTAA0Fw!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7369429,-104.9216755,3a,48.9y,201.53h,74.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssyKAzXvAgwWGDYTGTAA0Fw!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: riiga on November 15, 2022, 11:55:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 15, 2022, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Hobart on November 14, 2022, 07:10:29 PM
How much of an adjustment was it from driving in the United States for you? Japan's on my bucket list, but it seems very different compared to much of what I've seen.

The Japanese are very forgiving drivers. Almost too forgiving. But it makes it easy to drive here. They don't go too fast, they don't take too many chances, etc. But otherwise, they're pretty liberal with intersection operations (no waiting for a green arrow), so things feel pretty high capacity for the most part. Driving on the left isn't too unusual, for me it was sitting on the right side of the car that took some getting used to.

Overall, I like driving here more than back in the United States or Canada.

What about the signage? Apart from directional signs, it's Vienna Convention-style with the occasional deviation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 15, 2022, 06:46:10 PM
Quote from: riiga on November 15, 2022, 11:55:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 15, 2022, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Hobart on November 14, 2022, 07:10:29 PM
How much of an adjustment was it from driving in the United States for you? Japan's on my bucket list, but it seems very different compared to much of what I've seen.

The Japanese are very forgiving drivers. Almost too forgiving. But it makes it easy to drive here. They don't go too fast, they don't take too many chances, etc. But otherwise, they're pretty liberal with intersection operations (no waiting for a green arrow), so things feel pretty high capacity for the most part. Driving on the left isn't too unusual, for me it was sitting on the right side of the car that took some getting used to.

Overall, I like driving here more than back in the United States or Canada.

What about the signage? Apart from directional signs, it's Vienna Convention-style with the occasional deviation.

The signage is quite interesting. It is largely Vienna for regulatory signage. For example: red on blue diagonal line for no parking, white on blue left arrow for left-only turning, pedestrian-only zones show two people walking on a blue background, sometimes with a time regulation below it.

Warning signs are American style, although they include rounded corners that I don't see in the US. Overall, warning signs aren't that common though.

The stop sign is the weird one, using a red inverted triangle with "止まる" or "止まる / STOP" (with english) for newer signs. I heard that they were considering adopting the red octagon, but decided adding English to the existing design was sufficient. Largely I would agree. Yield signs don't say yield, rather reading "徐行" (literally "going slowly") or "徐行 / SLOW" on newer signs, but it's effectively the same thing as a yield. Sometimes you actually see a blue on white rectangle, which actually permits left on red, though I've never seen these used outside of slip lanes where drivers would yield anyway, even so far as yielding to traffic turning right despite not having that "slow" sign.

I don't see street name signs anywhere. The closest you see is at intersections, some of which have names. Eg, "Rycom (https://goo.gl/maps/bY8PKBXHqwEPigyv5)", "Hiyagon (https://goo.gl/maps/JEtTn3jKFTUpVZ4U6)", "Awase (https://goo.gl/maps/FCyoNMAUK24EAHP87)". But then Japanese addresses don't seem to include street names...at least not as westerners might recognize them.

Most intersections do have junction signs approaching them. They are usually simple white-on-blue legends with lines corresponding to upcoming intersection layout. It will show the cross-route and route number if applicable, and the destinations for all directions. Example in Rycom area (https://goo.gl/maps/cq27AZSzqtTjgRkF8) showing route numbers, which are overlaid on the arrows, and expressway signage which is white-on-green, regardless if there is a toll.

I won't speak too much to expressways; the Okinawa Expressway dates to the 80s, as does much of its signage. I think there are newer standards seen on the mainland. There is new expressway construction occurring in a couple spots that I need to check out, there may be some newer signage along those stretches.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on November 19, 2022, 11:24:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 14, 2022, 12:14:20 AM
I'm hoping to get some more photos and videos up, but I wanted to write a bit about Japanese traffic signal operations.

First, I want to talk about the design. Japan primarily uses horizontal signals outside of two situations: (1) snowy areas, or (2) signals placed in tight spots for additional visibility. Otherwise, signals are always horizontal. Because Japan drives on the left, the horizontal signals are opposite from what you'd see in the right-hand traffic countries. So, red is on the far right, closest to the inside of the road, with green on the outside. Arrows are also used, and are placed below the main lenses at horizontal signals, and to the right at vertical signals. The arrows are always green, no yellow arrows to be found here. Most four way intersections will have a right-facing green arrow, some with left turn lanes also have a left turn filter signal. T intersections never have green arrows, the protected phase has oncoming traffic stop on red, but there is no indication of this to turning traffic; Japanese law does not seem to allow a green arrow and green orb to be lit simultaneously. The signals themselves are either grey or dark brown. There have been three design "ages": incandescent signals, then LED signals with visors, and (presently) LED signals without a visor. The non-visor signals are single units, rather than individual signal faces.

Next, I want to talk about operations. Japan is...not the most creative when it comes to signal phasing. The standard phasing is very simple: through traffic and pedestrians have green simultaneous, turning traffic yields; this is followed by a green arrow for right turning traffic. The right turn green arrows always come on at the same time, for both directions, no matter what. Most four-way intersections with turn lanes will have this operation, though some do not have any protected phase (example here with a double right turn (https://goo.gl/maps/8vXWWRD3bmxsLXLz9)). Three-way intersections, for traffic turning right off the top of the T, also typically get a protected phase, but as mentioned above, there is no green arrow; traffic has to deduce that it's their turn based on oncoming traffic having stopped. Regardless of the number of turn lanes, these operations described above are the same (double left turns, double right turns, everything is always a yield). Advanced left turns are exceedingly rare. I have only seen one, and it is shown with a green right, up, and left arrows and a red orb (example on my Flickr (https://flic.kr/p/2nZ4fYE)). Green phases of any kind always end with the yellow orb, even green arrows (so the main three-section signal will go from red to yellow if a green arrow phase is ending, kind of confusing if you only look for a split second).

Importantly: all traffic signals are timed. There are no actuated signals in Japan, that I've seen at least. I think they have time of day phasing, but that may be it. Pedestrian walk signals always activate with through traffic. Left on red is prohibited except on military installations.

I don't know if anyone here cares about Japan, or were curious. Hopefully this sums things up pretty well. Eventually I'll get some videos, since I know some of what I'm describing is pretty unusual.
Since you wrote a detailed traffic light article about Japan, I guess I'll also write a detailed traffic light article about Russia, because why not?
Regarding the design, most signals are vertically-arranged, although the standards permit horizontally-arranged signals. And indeed a few signals in my city are horizontal. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.988959,92.9070634,3a,42.6y,274.77h,99.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUXhf9tuzWwFtJ9CJVp9BUw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Regarding the operation, there are a few differences in the sequence from how it is in America.
Most traffic lights display "red+yellow" for 1 to 2 seconds before green, although the standards also permit "red straight to green" if the intersection is not coordinated with other intersections. The latter sequence is common in and around Moscow, and in a few cities such as Perm and Yekaterinburg.
Most traffic lights also flash green for 3 seconds before changing to yellow, although the standards merely recommend this. The yellow light is always 3 seconds long. Many intersections omit the "all-red" clearance period, and instead change at the same time. On that note, I've never seen any accidents caused by that.
These "red+yellow" and "flashing green" aspects are actually only recent additions; in the Soviet Union the traffic lights used to cycle "red->yellow->green->yellow".
Traffic lights often have "additional sections" on the side of the main green light, which are generally used to control turning movements, but some T-intersections may have straight additional sections. https://www.google.com/maps/@56.0452431,92.7755264,3a,15y,343.09h,91.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNVsoI4_chSf86JEey4w0Pw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
The main green light will have an arrow outline on top, indicating the directions in which it applies, while the additional sections are full arrows.
If the traffic light is green, and the additional section is off, you must wait for the additional section to come on to proceed in it's direction. Some intersections display a red ring when the additional section is off to emphasise this. Most protected left turns are signalled in this way.
If the traffic light is red, and the additional section is on, you must give way to other road users before proceeding in it's direction. This is often used to permit "right turn on red".
There's also an experimental "yield to everyone before turning right" sign permitting right turns on red, that some cities have installed at intersections with low pedestrian volumes, in order to save costs on additional sections. https://www.google.com/maps/@56.0629359,92.682687,3a,15y,66.29h,91.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szj4OOLwRWdT1PkBvXQTIeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Some traffic lights may use arrows instead of circles, this means that they only apply in the direction the arrows point. Generally this will be where you can't proceed in any other direction, other than in the direction of the arrows.
Historically, the traffic lights have been fixed-time, with traffic cops manually controlling the lights at busy intersections, for which they had special huts. However, the latter is not practiced anymore.
Today, most traffic lights are still fixed-time, with some intersections having different plans for different times of day, and different days.
To reduce delays, at night many traffic lights flash yellow in all directions, meaning that road users must obey the priority signs posted alongside the traffic lights, or yield to the right if there aren't any. However, this practice is slowly falling out of favour, as research at the Moscow Road Traffic Organisation Centre had shown that keeping the lights on at night reduced accidents by up to 38%. My city got rid of flashing yellow at night as early as 2013.
Countdown timers have been introduced in some cities (mine included) about 15 years ago, initially being a separate signal section on top of the red light. With the advent of LED traffic lights, the countdown timer is now commonly incorporated into the yellow light section, with the colour of the numbers either being white, or according to the colour of the traffic light. Countdown timers are also often incorporated into pedestrian signals. If the number is too big to be displayed, two dashes "--" will instead flash until the number gets down to 99. The countdown timers may also display two dashes at the end of the countdown, if for some reason the phase is continued.
Although fixed-time is the predominant form of control, things are moving, and in 2017, the first actuated traffic light was installed in the city of Zelenograd, at the intersection of Panfilovsky and Generala Alekseyeva avenues. Since then, all traffic lights in Zelenograd have been upgraded to be actuated. An interesting detail is that due to the Russian climate, with the roads needing to be resurfaced every year, the inductive loops are buried much deeper (15-17 m) than in most of the world (5-8 m).
This technology is locally known as a "smart intersection", and belongs to a company called "SpetsDorProject". On that note, they have a YouTube channel where they show off these traffic lights, and their installation, if anyone is interested. They also have a website with a cool map of all the "smart intersections" in Russia. https://www.youtube.com/c/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%94%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82/videos
https://xn--e1aakgahhmflcmnd6jpe.xn--p1ai/
For obvious reasons, actuated traffic lights do not display countdowns. However, some intersections run fixed-time plans at certain times of day (to allow coordination I suppose), and are actuated at other times of day. During these times, it instead displays "АУ", which stands for "Адаптивное Управление/Actuated Control". This is most common in St Petersburg and Belgorod, where this is often used for transit priority.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 21, 2022, 12:50:07 PM
Thanks for all the details on both the Russian and Japanese signals. My biggest dislike on the most modern signals in both those countries is the lack of visors. The LED signals look so skinny, they look like toys to me. I think visors would make them standout more.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM
What color signal head is this supposed to be?
https://goo.gl/maps/P7D1EMCbJdkzwmfq7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 21, 2022, 05:18:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM
What color signal head is this supposed to be?
https://goo.gl/maps/P7D1EMCbJdkzwmfq7
Silver, like in DC?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on November 21, 2022, 07:59:41 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 21, 2022, 05:18:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM
What color signal head is this supposed to be?
https://goo.gl/maps/P7D1EMCbJdkzwmfq7
Silver, like in DC?

The legacy MDC roads (then DCR) have had gray signal poles for quite some time.  Before that, they were a forest green.  The newest replacement ones on roads like Revere Beach Parkway (MA 16) are the standard MassDOT (DPW/MassHighway predecessor) yellow poles, so they seem to be going away from the gray. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on November 21, 2022, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 21, 2022, 12:50:07 PM
Thanks for all the details on both the Russian and Japanese signals. My biggest dislike on the most modern signals in both those countries is the lack of visors. The LED signals look so skinny, they look like toys to me. I think visors would make them standout more.
I forgot to mention that. The lack of visors is especially bad on a sunny day. There is a mix of various kinds of traffic signal models in my city, with some of them being LED signals with visors, but the "skinny signals" remain predominant.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on November 22, 2022, 01:51:32 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM
What color signal head is this supposed to be?
https://goo.gl/maps/P7D1EMCbJdkzwmfq7

I imagine it's supposed to be precisely the color it is.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on November 23, 2022, 06:32:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM
What color signal head is this supposed to be?
https://goo.gl/maps/P7D1EMCbJdkzwmfq7

Official color is gun metal grey. Standard color of MassDCR in Massachusetts
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on November 30, 2022, 02:43:37 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.

Here's one: You own a button-actuated signal company.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on November 30, 2022, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 30, 2022, 02:43:37 PM
Here's one: You own a button-actuated signal company.

Or there is snow on the road and the camera more than half of the year.   :coffee:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on December 01, 2022, 04:12:30 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.

It miiiight be useful if you had a shared turn/through lane with permissive/protected arrows, so you can skip the turn phase unless a driver presses the button to indicate that they want to turn. But still not likely to be worth the confusion it would cause.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on December 01, 2022, 12:52:57 PM
An unlatched calling detector with a delay of a few seconds would still be the best solution to such situations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 05, 2022, 10:48:51 PM
Old Caltrans mast arm.
https://goo.gl/maps/E89UXfEtUWrb9CgU9

Though I'm quite curious to the signal head on the mast arm.  Each are independently round and not square.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on December 05, 2022, 11:03:48 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.

I actually just thought of one potentially useful case. A button might be easier for private driveways that are signalized at an intersection. That way if the homeowner needs to change the surface of their driveway, they don't need to replace the coil. And they'd get used to pressing it as well, so less confusion.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 06, 2022, 12:47:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 05, 2022, 10:48:51 PM
Old Caltrans mast arm.
https://goo.gl/maps/E89UXfEtUWrb9CgU9

Though I'm quite curious to the signal head on the mast arm.  Each are independently round and not square.

From my layman's perspective, they appear to be Econolite Bullseye signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 06, 2022, 04:47:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/q95kij3w7akRQVVL6
This is an odd two section signal in Ocean City.

Here is a CA rarity to not only see a horizontal mount, but a straight mono tube mast arm in Los Angeles.
https://goo.gl/maps/pQGhAQ2ZHHDoX1eW6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: signalman on December 06, 2022, 05:59:13 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on December 05, 2022, 11:03:48 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 30, 2022, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on November 30, 2022, 12:47:54 AM
In Kaluga, Russia, there is a button-actuated traffic signal, but for cars..
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/proboknet/38346966/1932780/1932780_900.jpg)
The sign says: Attention! Press the button for the green light to turn on.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5209373,36.1963995,3a,16.2y,291.27h,87.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9NLdCVeuxvxkDHxIuepZXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Now that's interesting. I'm trying to find a scenario where something like this would genuinely be more beneficial than a typical in-pavement or camera actuator.

I actually just thought of one potentially useful case. A button might be easier for private driveways that are signalized at an intersection. That way if the homeowner needs to change the surface of their driveway, they don't need to replace the coil. And they'd get used to pressing it as well, so less confusion.
Or a vehicle parked in what would be the detection zone wouldn't trigger the signal either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: zachary_amaryllis on December 06, 2022, 12:06:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 02, 2022, 07:00:04 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on November 02, 2022, 06:51:01 PM
Huh. The first time I clicked on the link it was facing the opposite direction, but the second time I clicked it was facing the right direction! Never had that problem before.

Trippy!  It just did it to me too.  I tried four times:  the first time, it faced the wrong direction;  the other three, the right direction.
I got an abandoned TV repair shop in Coolidge, Kansas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 06, 2022, 12:30:39 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 06, 2022, 04:47:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/q95kij3w7akRQVVL6
This is an odd two section signal in Ocean City.

This is bizarre. First, it doesn't even need signalization since there's no pedestrian crossing (although one could argue that it could be beneficial to have a ped crossing here to connect the corners). But second, if you're going to signalize it and channelized with no potential vehicular conflict, you don't need the solid red indications.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 06, 2022, 10:10:33 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 06, 2022, 12:30:39 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 06, 2022, 04:47:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/q95kij3w7akRQVVL6
This is an odd two section signal in Ocean City.

This is bizarre. First, it doesn't even need signalization since there's no pedestrian crossing (although one could argue that it could be beneficial to have a ped crossing here to connect the corners). But second, if you're going to signalize it and channelized with no potential vehicular conflict, you don't need the solid red indications.

The only plausible explanation for this would be the drawbridge after the turn, where maybe the green arrow disappears when the bridge is up. But even then, a standard RYG arrow signal would be way less confusing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 07, 2022, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 06, 2022, 10:10:33 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 06, 2022, 12:30:39 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 06, 2022, 04:47:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/q95kij3w7akRQVVL6
This is an odd two section signal in Ocean City.

This is bizarre. First, it doesn't even need signalization since there's no pedestrian crossing (although one could argue that it could be beneficial to have a ped crossing here to connect the corners). But second, if you're going to signalize it and channelized with no potential vehicular conflict, you don't need the solid red indications.

The only plausible explanation for this would be the drawbridge after the turn, where maybe the green arrow disappears when the bridge is up. But even then, a standard RYG arrow signal would be way less confusing.

Maybe... but even then there's a separate drawbridge signal and plenty of storage on the bridge downstream of this right turn.

A standard RYG arrow signal would be good here as an alternative...and would allow for pedestrian crossings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2022, 02:48:54 PM
Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
I don't understand why they would have the red ord and green up arrow illuminated at the same time. Is that normal there?

Took a trip to London earlier in the week and saw some more strange circular red and green thru arrow instances in Central London:

1. This one is for a protected only right turn, starts off with circular red and green thru arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5050973,-0.1231371,3a,23.6y,179.41h,87.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm9ET25E4Zyb_YzQC43UNGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), then when the protected right is active, the opposing traffic is held with a red and the side with the protected right has a circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5049576,-0.1230536,3a,75y,195.41h,84.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sC0PoBYeeU4qEYrVQgSRRbA!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656). Not sure why they wouldn't use a green right arrow here for the protected phase. Believe this is the normal configuration for a protected only right turn... (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096379,-0.073912,3a,62y,163.96h,86.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7U2Pw-wixRTIpDtbtCF5vg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

2. This one is for a Leading Bicycle (Not sure about Pedestrian) Interval... the signal starts with a green bicycle for cyclists, green thru arrow for the thru traffic and a circular red for the left turn for motor vehicles (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096379,-0.0867492,3a,36.9y,97.97h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7FxuWh_T8TAZ-AkujeDqfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), then goes to a circular green for the motor vehicle traffic permissive phase (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096926,-0.0869465,3a,27.7y,101.73h,89.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTKeXkixcJ6Z3yUnopdtaFw!2e0!5s20170301T000000!7i13312!8i6656) still with a green bicycle signal for cyclists.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on December 12, 2022, 05:27:06 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2022, 02:48:54 PM
Quote from: plain on August 29, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
I don't understand why they would have the red ord and green up arrow illuminated at the same time. Is that normal there?
Took a trip to London earlier in the week and saw some more strange circular red and green thru arrow instances in Central London:
London has a very specific approach to traffic signals. These things that may be unusual to you, are actually standard practice there.
The most striking thing, is that unlike the rest of the UK, the traffic signal heads don't have white borders around them. This is mainly because the TSRGD only requires white borders on roads where the speed limit is 40 mph or above, so that allows TfL to save a little money on a signal head. Another reason is to save a few millimeters from a traffic island, which as it turns out makes a big difference.

Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2022, 02:48:54 PM
1. This one is for a protected only right turn, starts off with circular red and green thru arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5050973,-0.1231371,3a,23.6y,179.41h,87.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm9ET25E4Zyb_YzQC43UNGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), then when the protected right is active, the opposing traffic is held with a red and the side with the protected right has a circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5049576,-0.1230536,3a,75y,195.41h,84.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sC0PoBYeeU4qEYrVQgSRRbA!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656). Not sure why they wouldn't use a green right arrow here for the protected phase. Believe this is the normal configuration for a protected only right turn... (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096379,-0.073912,3a,62y,163.96h,86.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7U2Pw-wixRTIpDtbtCF5vg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
This is common in London. It's likely that this traffic light is second-hand, either being a leftover, or recycled from another intersection. Installing an arrow-shaped filter would mean that TfL would need to spend extra money, which is something that they won't do if they have the choice not to, which they do.
Protected-only right turns in the UK are known as "separately-signalled right turns", and much like in the US, they are avoided if possible.
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 09, 2022, 02:48:54 PM
2. This one is for a Leading Bicycle (Not sure about Pedestrian) Interval... the signal starts with a green bicycle for cyclists, green thru arrow for the thru traffic and a circular red for the left turn for motor vehicles (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096379,-0.0867492,3a,36.9y,97.97h,89.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7FxuWh_T8TAZ-AkujeDqfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), then goes to a circular green for the motor vehicle traffic permissive phase (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5096926,-0.0869465,3a,27.7y,101.73h,89.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTKeXkixcJ6Z3yUnopdtaFw!2e0!5s20170301T000000!7i13312!8i6656) still with a green bicycle signal for cyclists.
This is known as "early release". It's most definitely not a LPI, because turning vehicle conflicts with pedestrians are not permitted in the UK.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 23, 2022, 05:29:12 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/RYU9DgKPDYjGU2hx7
I see Anderson uses double red signals on CA Route 273.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 27, 2022, 09:56:37 PM
Well I went out to see some other red/yellow pedestrian signals today with some time off from work.

I discovered two new signals, and wanted to check them out.

The first one is right in front of St. Ann's church on Lynn street in Peabody. This one wasn't flashing green and red for some reason, and only rested in solid green for cars and solid red for pedestrians. When I activated the signal, the signal turned yellow for 6.5 seconds and then red and yellow. The signal then went to an all red, and then returned to what it rested in. The strange thing was that when I crossed the street here, a driver rear ended the first car stopped in line. I guess that's why it's important to not over signalize pedestrian crossings. I'm sure that guy had no idea the light was even there.

The second signal I checked out was at the corner of Wilson and Jefferson in Salem. New signs were placed for pedestrians indicating to push the button, and cross on Red and Yellow.

Signal compliance was abysmal. The red and yellow should mean a super red. No entering or exiting the intersection. No turn on red. And if you're in the middle of the intersection to turn left, stay there (funny they assumed any MA driver would do this XD ). Basically no one waited. Some people got the message that it was a red light, but no one I saw picked up that it was a super red.

The placement on these signals is also pretty bad. I'd like to see how they'd do with better signage and placement, but they're not MUTCD compliant, so it looks like it's the end of the road for these legends. Too bad.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 29, 2022, 12:50:47 AM
Regarding the "not allowed to move" concept of the red/yellow pedestrian light, that would make sense for cars that haven't yet crossed the stop line, but for those who were beyond the stop line or waiting to turn left, I would have thought finishing your maneuver/exiting the intersection would still be permitted, if not legally required. Seems odd that a signal could apply to those already beyond the stop/limit line, at least to the effect of requiring drivers to make a full stop.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 29, 2022, 08:42:08 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2022, 12:50:47 AM
Regarding the "not allowed to move" concept of the red/yellow pedestrian light, that would make sense for cars that haven't yet crossed the stop line, but for those who were beyond the stop line or waiting to turn left, I would have thought finishing your maneuver/exiting the intersection would still be permitted, if not legally required. Seems odd that a signal could apply to those already beyond the stop/limit line, at least to the effect of requiring drivers to make a full stop.

Possibly, but when it's a pedestrian only signal, I think that policy makes sense.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 29, 2022, 07:38:51 PM
Isn't having the red and yellow lit at the same time (as well as flashing green lights) not permitted by the MUTCD? Yeah I know (LOL); it's Massachusetts.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 29, 2022, 09:17:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 29, 2022, 07:38:51 PM
Isn't having the red and yellow lit at the same time (as well as flashing green lights) not permitted by the MUTCD? Yeah I know (LOL); it's Massachusetts.

Haha, they say it's grandfathered in (LOL)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on December 30, 2022, 10:45:06 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 27, 2022, 09:56:37 PM
Signal compliance was abysmal. ... Basically no one waited. Some people got the message that it was a red light, but no one I saw picked up that it was a super red.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 29, 2022, 09:17:57 PM
Haha, they say it's grandfathered in (LOL)

It seems to me, something should only be grandfathered in if locals actually understand what it means.  Apparently, that's not the case.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2022, 07:32:26 PM
I'm guessing "grandfathered", in this case, just means "no money has been set aside to replace it".

I love weird signals, but this one might be a little too weird to me. With the odd requirement to basically slam on your brakes, to pedestrians somehow needing to understand that red and yellow means "go"? lol. Definitely a signal design that will forever need signage (so no better than a HAWK...that definitely isn't a compliment).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2022, 07:55:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2022, 07:32:26 PM
I'm guessing "grandfathered", in this case, just means "no money has been set aside to replace it".

I love weird signals, but this one might be a little too weird to me. With the odd requirement to basically slam on your brakes, to pedestrians somehow needing to understand that red and yellow means "go"? lol. Definitely a signal design that will forever need signage (so no better than a HAWK...that definitely isn't a compliment).

Where does it require you to slam on your breaks ? The signal turns yellow first, before going red and yellow. The stop in the middle of the intersection requirement is really for turning vehicles clearing the intersection, to prevent them for finishing that turn. However, most non pedestrian only RY signals give an all red, before going R and Y.

These signals will probably all be replaced soon so I doubt signage would be a good investment. Many cities have already removed the RY, but they often don't add no turn on red signs after doing that, which is upsetting in a pedestrian perspective.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 31, 2022, 08:51:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2022, 07:55:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2022, 07:32:26 PM
I'm guessing "grandfathered", in this case, just means "no money has been set aside to replace it".

I love weird signals, but this one might be a little too weird to me. With the odd requirement to basically slam on your brakes, to pedestrians somehow needing to understand that red and yellow means "go"? lol. Definitely a signal design that will forever need signage (so no better than a HAWK...that definitely isn't a compliment).

Where does it require you to slam on your breaks ? The signal turns yellow first, before going red and yellow. The stop in the middle of the intersection requirement is really for turning vehicles clearing the intersection, to prevent them for finishing that turn. However, most non pedestrian only RY signals give an all red, before going R and Y.

These signals will probably all be replaced soon so I doubt signage would be a good investment. Many cities have already removed the RY, but they often don't add no turn on red signs after doing that, which is upsetting in a pedestrian perspective.

Oh oh, gotcha. I misunderstood your description of the rule, I thought the rules prevented drivers from crossing the crosswalk after it goes to yellow-red; normally, as long as you cross the limit line, you can clear the intersection regardless of the state of the signal. I thought you were saying before that you absolutely couldn't, ergo, drivers had to be especially cautious not to accidentally enter when it was yellow-red.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 01, 2023, 12:53:16 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 31, 2022, 08:51:08 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2022, 07:55:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2022, 07:32:26 PM
I'm guessing "grandfathered", in this case, just means "no money has been set aside to replace it".

I love weird signals, but this one might be a little too weird to me. With the odd requirement to basically slam on your brakes, to pedestrians somehow needing to understand that red and yellow means "go"? lol. Definitely a signal design that will forever need signage (so no better than a HAWK...that definitely isn't a compliment).

Where does it require you to slam on your breaks ? The signal turns yellow first, before going red and yellow. The stop in the middle of the intersection requirement is really for turning vehicles clearing the intersection, to prevent them for finishing that turn. However, most non pedestrian only RY signals give an all red, before going R and Y.

These signals will probably all be replaced soon so I doubt signage would be a good investment. Many cities have already removed the RY, but they often don't add no turn on red signs after doing that, which is upsetting in a pedestrian perspective.

Oh oh, gotcha. I misunderstood your description of the rule, I thought the rules prevented drivers from crossing the crosswalk after it goes to yellow-red; normally, as long as you cross the limit line, you can clear the intersection regardless of the state of the signal. I thought you were saying before that you absolutely couldn't, ergo, drivers had to be especially cautious not to accidentally enter when it was yellow-red.

That's on me for quoting the MassDOT explanation. The concern was mostly about drivers exiting the intersection not checking for pedestrians crossing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
Two interesting things I recently found on Google Street View:

1. It appears like both red and green lights were lit at the same time at this traffic signal (https://goo.gl/maps/7WJfo5auyhBTfg7e8). However, I think it's likely the Street View car snapped a photo really fast and the signal didn't have any all-red clearance time. Regardless of the situation, it is a bizarre thing to see.

2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 03, 2023, 09:08:03 AM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".

I just like that they finally are using supplemental signals on the corners. Texas historically does not use supplemental traffic signals, only in downtown areas of some major cities if I recall correctly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on January 03, 2023, 12:09:46 PM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
Two interesting things I recently found on Google Street View:

1. It appears like both red and green lights were lit at the same time at this traffic signal (https://goo.gl/maps/7WJfo5auyhBTfg7e8). However, I think it's likely the Street View car snapped a photo really fast and the signal didn't have any all-red clearance time. Regardless of the situation, it is a bizarre thing to see.

2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".

Thank god for those supplemental in Texas... I think every state should have them everywhere. I'm not a huge fan of the oval backplates though, I feel like they look kinda tacky and weird now and won't age well in the future. The New Mexico installation is really old, but it feels timeless... like the Buick Century!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on January 03, 2023, 04:01:04 PM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".

I saw those signals (before the bus lane addition) in-person when I was an 11-year old. I hated them then, and I hate them now.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on January 04, 2023, 01:36:56 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on December 31, 2022, 07:55:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2022, 07:32:26 PM
I'm guessing "grandfathered", in this case, just means "no money has been set aside to replace it".

I love weird signals, but this one might be a little too weird to me. With the odd requirement to basically slam on your brakes, to pedestrians somehow needing to understand that red and yellow means "go"? lol. Definitely a signal design that will forever need signage (so no better than a HAWK...that definitely isn't a compliment).

Where does it require you to slam on your breaks ? The signal turns yellow first, before going red and yellow. The stop in the middle of the intersection requirement is really for turning vehicles clearing the intersection, to prevent them for finishing that turn. However, most non pedestrian only RY signals give an all red, before going R and Y.

These signals will probably all be replaced soon so I doubt signage would be a good investment. Many cities have already removed the RY, but they often don't add no turn on red signs after doing that, which is upsetting in a pedestrian perspective.

Slamming on the brakes was something that was mentioned in drivers' ed when I took it in high school in Massachusetts so many years ago...the instructor said that flashing green means "subject to change" and if a kid on the corner wants to see the Corvette coming down the street stand on end, he will push the pedestrian button just at the right time to make the light turn red.  Indeed many flashing green signals had basically no delay between the button push making the call and the signals changing, so people could trigger a red light just for kicks if they wanted to.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on January 05, 2023, 11:43:47 AM

2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".
[/quote]
well that was the easiest easter egg hunt ive ever done
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on January 05, 2023, 09:25:31 PM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
Two interesting things I recently found on Google Street View:

1. It appears like both red and green lights were lit at the same time at this traffic signal (https://goo.gl/maps/7WJfo5auyhBTfg7e8). However, I think it's likely the Street View car snapped a photo really fast and the signal didn't have any all-red clearance time. Regardless of the situation, it is a bizarre thing to see.

It looks like an incandescent bulb. Those always had some overlap time because it takes a second or two for the filament to cool off after the power's cut.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: connroadgeek on January 06, 2023, 08:27:36 AM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".
Biggest issue I have with this is the signals are on the opposite side of the intersection, and look to be about 100 ft from the stop line. Even with 12 inch lenses it seems like they would be hard to see by approaching traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on January 06, 2023, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".

Quote from: connroadgeek on January 06, 2023, 08:27:36 AM
Biggest issue I have with this is the signals are on the opposite side of the intersection, and look to be about 100 ft from the stop line. Even with 12 inch lenses it seems like they would be hard to see by approaching traffic.

Wow!  The only way I could see this working for some folks is if that set of signals is programmed as "all phase green/all phase yellow/all phase red" so as not to confuse drivers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 06, 2023, 11:25:33 AM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on January 06, 2023, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: jtespi on January 03, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
2. These new traffic signals (https://goo.gl/maps/8Ba1bpAqeJ8vJooEA) in Houston look amazing! I like how futuristic the design looks with the oval backplates. It reminds me on traffic signal designs I've seen internationally. Also it's interesting to see street suffixes spelled out in full - especially "boulevard".

Quote from: connroadgeek on January 06, 2023, 08:27:36 AM
Biggest issue I have with this is the signals are on the opposite side of the intersection, and look to be about 100 ft from the stop line. Even with 12 inch lenses it seems like they would be hard to see by approaching traffic.

Wow!  The only way I could see this working for some folks is if that set of signals is programmed as "all phase green/all phase yellow/all phase red" so as not to confuse drivers.

How is that signal placement any different or less visible than any other big intersections in Texas?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CovalenceSTU on January 07, 2023, 07:27:55 PM
Old Oregon drawbridges used to use these single horizontal signals - the first one was green in the center with yellow on both ends (which flashed when the bridge was up) and the second one had red on the left, green in the middle, and yellow on the right. All 3 bridges connecting Astoria and Warrenton, OR on US 101 used to have them, but they were slowly phased out with the last one being removed around 2016.
(https://i.imgur.com/0jzO1Gz.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/ZT3GKmr.png)

(Best pictures I could find on Street View, I don't have any of my own and can't find others that show the color of the signals.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2023, 08:27:10 PM
Interesting. Horizontal signals, painted grey ... these must have floated across the ocean from Japan!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Jet380 on January 08, 2023, 07:14:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2023, 08:27:10 PM
Interesting. Horizontal signals, painted grey ... these must have floated across the ocean from Japan!

It's not just the physical design that seems to have been imported. Some areas in Japan also use a yellow - green - yellow arrangement to warn of a red light further ahead:

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 08, 2023, 08:18:57 PM
Interesting! I have not seen anything like that here on the island. Couple spots have some signals way out ahead of the actual signal, like here (https://goo.gl/maps/eU55uUFFPX1YYr8q7). And I see traffic signals used on top of matrix displays for the expressway interchanges, like here (https://goo.gl/maps/iiKemWyzTw83j85H6), which do have a yellow center signal, but I haven't the faintest clue what the outer colors are.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 10, 2023, 10:33:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/EbwJUpCz6utZkgTR8
I still find NYC left turn signals on one way streets as well as bike signals fascinating.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 11, 2023, 07:36:30 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 10, 2023, 10:33:08 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/EbwJUpCz6utZkgTR8
I still find NYC left turn signals on one way streets as well as bike signals fascinating.

Me too!

They're getting common now. Here's a map of almost all the bike signals in the US: http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~monserec/bicycle_signals.htm
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on January 18, 2023, 01:34:46 PM
This is something I've never seen or known about before: a permanent span-wire signal in Wisconsin. This one is on WI-167 in Mequon, north of Milwaukee.

https://goo.gl/maps/HCkeY1rFgC6b3sWc6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 18, 2023, 03:15:50 PM
^^ That goes against WisDOT policy that only temporary signals  may use span wires.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on January 19, 2023, 01:00:28 AM
i remember when I used to think traffic signals with square visors and flush lenses looked futuristic. At some point, I found out they were older than me.



Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fillup420 on January 20, 2023, 09:01:29 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 03, 2022, 05:40:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 03, 2022, 03:36:54 PM
I saw this weird one in person in San Francisco last week walking back to my uncle's place just up the street. This is Vermont St at 16th St. When the light changes off the red, the bottom 2 lights flash yellow arrows. Vermont St becomes a one way street south of 16th heading north.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7661193,-122.4046944,3a,19.7y,175.32h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6atbRrC8knASjKzRRARyKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is incredibly strange. But I love it!

that is similar to this setup (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.9914234,-78.905818,3a,40.4y,125.87h,89.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su3N9Gl-IC_VmGAKHGs3xzA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) in Durham NC. I was slightly confused by it at first, until i realized the opposing street was one way inbound.

edit: Kinda hard to see, but the doghouse has flashing yellow arrows on both bottom aspects.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on January 22, 2023, 04:30:31 AM
The traffic signals at Railway Ave and Bow Valley Trail in Canmore, Alberta are very interesting. (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0879986,-115.3474588,3a,75y,145.54h,83.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sEp3FZ6BRy5XAPBsDc-k7og!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

This intersection was redesigned by a Dutch company in 2019. It has Dutch-style bike lanes with separate bike signals. (https://www.rmotoday.com/canmore/canmores-busiest-intersection-to-be-redesigned-1574108)

The primary overhead signals are all near-side. The through lane has double red balls, which is usually reserved for protected left turn signals in Alberta (and Texas at some point). The right and left turn lanes both feature red arrows (right and left turns are both protected only). I have never seen red arrows outside of Quebec in Canada before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 22, 2023, 08:39:48 AM
Thanks for posting this. Yes this does indeed confirm that there's red arrows outside of Quebec. Even the NTOR signs have red arrows!

https://maps.app.goo.gl/4nUcU1cnzoKoK98UA


Western Alberta seems to have all sorts of wackiness going on (as far as Alberta and Canada in general goes).

This 3-section left turn signal, while it doesn't have the red arrow, has double reds and a bimodal yellow/green

https://maps.app.goo.gl/7GwJzCbSN5ri5oA96



But I do see this recently installed 5-section tower in Banff which does have a red arrow, but in a very weird place: in the 4th aspect (where a yellow arrow would normally be). Below it is what I would assume is a typical bimodal yellow/green arrow, but I can't find a single angle where a green arrow is actually on, even when thru traffic has a green. Could it be an FYA??

https://maps.app.goo.gl/xA1XSZN2J2GHS3MC9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on January 22, 2023, 08:44:31 AM
Belvidere must have some tall pedestrians. This photo doesn't quite convey it, but that ped signal is way taller than normal. It's taller than the vehicle signals to the right!

(https://i.imgur.com/Tk4Mwg2.jpg)

IL-76 at US-20 Bus near Belvidere, IL.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 22, 2023, 08:51:30 AM
Quote from: plain on January 22, 2023, 08:39:48 AM
But I do see this recently installed 5-section tower in Banff which does have a red arrow, but in a very weird place: in the 4th aspect (where a yellow arrow would normally be). Below it is what I would assume is a typical bimodal yellow/green arrow, but I can't find a single angle where a green arrow is actually on, even when thru traffic has a green. Could it be an FYA??

https://maps.app.goo.gl/xA1XSZN2J2GHS3MC9

I think that may indeed be a flashing yellow arrow. Very, very odd!! Great spot.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on January 22, 2023, 08:01:44 PM
What Traffic Light Is This https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9527809,-120.4003198,3a,17.8y,247.22h,102.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svqq5Eud1IWDg9P3veg3HIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 22, 2023, 10:44:52 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on January 22, 2023, 08:01:44 PM
What Traffic Light Is This https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9527809,-120.4003198,3a,17.8y,247.22h,102.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svqq5Eud1IWDg9P3veg3HIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I believe it's a DuraSig.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2023, 01:52:41 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/PjXghur5dJJyEwFz9
A signal added in the late seventies or early eighties was allowed one signal head operation.

https://goo.gl/maps/pZQbmCfeKJD54NMMA
This one is an oddity. Three left turn signal heads but only two straight through heads.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on January 23, 2023, 04:08:41 AM
^^ For the first link, panning over shows a stop sign on the left side.   For the second link I saw one like that in Georgia all in the same cable for a triple left turn.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 23, 2023, 07:25:05 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2023, 01:52:41 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/PjXghur5dJJyEwFz9
A signal added in the late seventies or early eighties was allowed one signal head operation.

https://goo.gl/maps/pZQbmCfeKJD54NMMA
This one is an oddity. Three left turn signal heads but only two straight through heads.
Quote from: Big John on January 23, 2023, 04:08:41 AM
^^ For the first link, panning over shows a stop sign on the left side.   For the second link I saw one like that in Georgia all in the same cable for a triple left turn.

For the first link: you can go back in historic street view and see the old setup, where there were extra signal heads that have since been removed.

Regarding Georgia: having three left turn signal heads all in a row for a triple left turn would be pretty standard. The trick is three left turn signal heads for a single left turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on January 24, 2023, 11:29:27 AM
Yellow traffic lights in Russia. Very very rare to see.
https://www.google.com/maps/@64.433535,76.4840061,3a,35.6y,272.73h,89.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRHCEHwJlJCnyf4yPlg1N6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 25, 2023, 12:03:26 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on January 24, 2023, 11:29:27 AM
Yellow traffic lights in Russia. Very very rare to see.
https://www.google.com/maps/@64.433535,76.4840061,3a,35.6y,272.73h,89.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRHCEHwJlJCnyf4yPlg1N6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They look pretty new, any idea what the story is here? All-yellow signals are pretty rare in Europe and Asia, period.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on January 25, 2023, 12:42:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2023, 12:03:26 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on January 24, 2023, 11:29:27 AM
Yellow traffic lights in Russia. Very very rare to see.
https://www.google.com/maps/@64.433535,76.4840061,3a,35.6y,272.73h,89.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRHCEHwJlJCnyf4yPlg1N6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They look pretty new, any idea what the story is here? All-yellow signals are pretty rare in Europe and Asia, period.
I couldn't find much information about them on the web, but it seems that these yellow traffic lights can only be found in the town of Gubkinskiy.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:24:28 AM
Quote from: Big John on January 23, 2023, 04:08:41 AM
^^ For the first link, panning over shows a stop sign on the left side.   For the second link I saw one like that in Georgia all in the same cable for a triple left turn.

Not complaining about the set up. Just pointing out the irony here.  Plus no triple left turn set up here either.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:33:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/n17Be2pVJWuL83eW8
This tower set up defies the MUTCD.  The yellow left arrow is supposed to be second from the bottom. The second from the top is the standard yellow ball, with number three down the green ball, and the bottom two are yellow arrow over green arrow.

As you can see the left yellow arrow is second down.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 25, 2023, 02:20:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:33:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/n17Be2pVJWuL83eW8
This tower set up defies the MUTCD.  The yellow left arrow is supposed to be second from the bottom. The second from the top is the standard yellow ball, with number three down the green ball, and the bottom two are yellow arrow over green arrow.

As you can see the left yellow arrow is second down.

That's a red arrow, not yellow. Newark has been known to throw red arrows in questionable positions.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on January 25, 2023, 02:27:44 AM
Quote from: plain on January 25, 2023, 02:20:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:33:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/n17Be2pVJWuL83eW8
This tower set up defies the MUTCD.  The yellow left arrow is supposed to be second from the bottom. The second from the top is the standard yellow ball, with number three down the green ball, and the bottom two are yellow arrow over green arrow.

As you can see the left yellow arrow is second down.

That's a red arrow, not yellow. Newark has been known to throw red arrows in questionable positions.

The rest of the setup is still bewildering. Green orb second to the bottom?

https://goo.gl/maps/32ftZbF77hXzMWTT6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 03:58:04 AM
Quote from: plain on January 25, 2023, 02:20:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:33:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/n17Be2pVJWuL83eW8
This tower set up defies the MUTCD.  The yellow left arrow is supposed to be second from the bottom. The second from the top is the standard yellow ball, with number three down the green ball, and the bottom two are yellow arrow over green arrow.

As you can see the left yellow arrow is second down.

That's a red arrow, not yellow. Newark has been known to throw red arrows in questionable positions.

Even worse yet.  There is supposed to be no red arrow second from the top. A left turn signal is not supposed to be five section either, but typical three section.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 11:21:37 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/d3aKLAaoD878PE6y5
I found this interesting. The signal heads seem to appear lifeless as if the signal was out, but the crosswalk signals are totally operational.

Must of captured it during the split second the signal changed phases, or another technical issue.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on January 25, 2023, 10:46:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2023, 02:27:44 AM
Quote from: plain on January 25, 2023, 02:20:22 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 25, 2023, 01:33:44 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/n17Be2pVJWuL83eW8
This tower set up defies the MUTCD.  The yellow left arrow is supposed to be second from the bottom. The second from the top is the standard yellow ball, with number three down the green ball, and the bottom two are yellow arrow over green arrow.

As you can see the left yellow arrow is second down.

That's a red arrow, not yellow. Newark has been known to throw red arrows in questionable positions.

The rest of the setup is still bewildering. Green orb second to the bottom?

https://goo.gl/maps/32ftZbF77hXzMWTT6

Lol yeah it's crazy alright. You gotta remember, this is the same place that does dumb shit like this:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/8U47z8e74zop7Jrv7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on February 01, 2023, 08:09:13 PM
Here's a neat signal setup that I recorded a few years ago in Flushing, Michigan.
https://youtu.be/0PWU_cesNRs
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2023, 04:12:12 PM
At least they've gotten free from NYC click box controllers. ^^^^
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:55:26 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2023, 04:12:12 PM
At least they've gotten free from NYC click box controllers. ^^^^
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76

That is quite a surprise! I haven't driven to LGA since the reconstruction and didn't know they had used other types of mast-arms and configurations. Never seen that before at a Port Authority facility. Those curved mast-arms look like NYS DOT spec and the signal on the right is a NYC style mast-arm/guy wire. Very interesting!
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 02, 2023, 05:35:24 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/1FYKvDtEVw7ZzADm7
It gets even better. Side mounted signal heads at another location in LGA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 07:24:29 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 02, 2023, 05:35:24 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/1FYKvDtEVw7ZzADm7
It gets even better. Side mounted signal heads at another location in LGA.

That set of signals is less than 500 feet from runway 4, you're basically right next to planes landing or taking off so that makes sense.

Meanwhile at JFK near the uber lot, NJ style signals on a NY style spanwire

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6117objvFkvi9Jqo9

JFK is littered with mix and match signal configurations everywhere on airport property
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 03, 2023, 04:43:56 PM
Traffic signals mounted on a building in New Orleans.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6KS2oz9NTZzB7MVbA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on February 03, 2023, 06:23:12 PM
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for? (https://goo.gl/maps/5UR13g2Z7bedUVdA7)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 03, 2023, 09:56:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 03, 2023, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on February 03, 2023, 06:23:12 PM
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for? (https://goo.gl/maps/5UR13g2Z7bedUVdA7)

Do these signals go on overnight flash at all? The top coloured signal is a circular yellow, which makes me think that in either emergency or overnight flash, insteady of a steady circular green, it would go to a flashing yellow ball in flash operation. I think there's a few other examples in New York State, like this one in Tuxedo Park NY (from the "Stangest Traffic Lights" thread):

Quote from: Ian on April 25, 2016, 11:11:26 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 25, 2016, 10:13:09 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 25, 2016, 09:18:13 PM
The only (to my knowledge) two-phase lights in CT.  Always found it unique.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.658349,-72.8668603,3a,75y,16.09h,80.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWgb9u0JkerFxI_OF4EbfxA!2e0!5s20121001T000000!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.658349,-72.8668603,3a,75y,16.09h,80.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWgb9u0JkerFxI_OF4EbfxA!2e0!5s20121001T000000!7i13312!8i6656)
When would it ever turn to the other color, if ever?

Probably when the intersection is on flash mode, and when it is, the top section will flash yellow. Here's a similar set up along NY 17 at NY 17A in Tuxedo Park:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6020/5992209883_3f647fe150_z.jpg)

Honestly, since that direction doesn't have any conflicting traffic at all, the signals in that direction should just be removed completely.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 03, 2023, 10:01:27 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

While vehicle drivers do have to exercise caution, pedestrians certainly do not have the right of way just because they jump into the road whenever they damn well please.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 03, 2023, 09:56:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.

That's typical ageism. I in-fact do have a license, and drive, walk, take transit, and drive. Just because I'm younger, doesn't mean my viewpoint is less valid. I have a lot of experience in roadway design, and my opinions should be valued, rather than dismissed.

It's also typical of this form to have a windshield's perspective, which is very frustrating. This isn't a driver's form, it's a roadgeek form.

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

Furthermore, if you look at any article of a crash, they say "car hits pedestrian", instead of the driver. I find it extremely ironic that you assume the media is biased against car drivers. It's not only ironic, it's idiotic.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form. It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 05, 2023, 09:03:55 AM
I'm very familiar with crossing as a pedestrian in Massachusetts. While I don't always wait for the signal to change, I always cross when it's clear. I don't walk in front of cars and force them to stop. However, at locations not at an intersection, sometimes I'll step into the bike lane and wait for them to stop if there's clearly not going to be a gap soon.

Not everyone is like this. Some people cross in front of cars, forcing them to slam on their brakes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 05, 2023, 12:01:55 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

It's illegal to hit a pedestrian. Duh. Don't kill people. That doesn't mean the pedestrian is allowed or supposed to be there in the first place.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Cars existed before airplanes. Cars should therefore be allowed to cross taxiways and runways whenever they want, and if pilots are not expecting that, then they are bad pilots.

Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.

Might do you well to look in the mirror. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it a terrible perspective. I'd actually bet the vast majority of people on this forum, myself included, are open to hearing about ways we can maybe make our roads safer for modes of transportation that aren't cars. But when you come at it in such a condescending manner, it isn't going to win you any favors. If you want people to be open-minded, they generally are going to expect some in return.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JoePCool14 on February 05, 2023, 02:50:21 PM
Interesting that the individual arguing peds should be able to cross wherever, whenever has a train-themed name and profile picture. Should peds be able to cross on train tracks wherever they please and trains must stop? I know it's not a 1-to-1 analogy, but there are some places peds just shouldn't be crossing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 05, 2023, 05:18:28 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76

In NYC, when a four section FYA is used in a cluster in that setup, is it common for the single segment to have a steady green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6132621,-74.1226142,3a,38.8y,170.59h,95.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbTAqTexRg7SH6svEFw_lpQ!2e0!5s20191001T000000!7i16384!8i8192) or a flashing yellow arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7715361,-73.8760908,3a,15y,6.74h,88.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO4QX4V0ZA5CYX_iTy8yQBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 05, 2023, 06:16:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from.  There is absolutely nothing within the state statutes that say pedestrians in the roadway always have the right of way.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/720-cmr-9-driving-on-state-highways/download . See Page 15, Section 9.09 (4) and (5), among others.

Motorists have a duty to avoid hitting a pedestrian in the roadway, whether they should be there or not, but pedestrians certainly do not always have the right of way. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 05, 2023, 09:41:54 PM
Quote from: plain on February 03, 2023, 04:43:56 PM
Traffic signals mounted on a building in New Orleans.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6KS2oz9NTZzB7MVbA

I'm really curious the story behind these, because there appears to be perfectly good light poles to mount those signals on such that those signal heads could be mounted in almost the exact same locations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 06, 2023, 12:50:05 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 05, 2023, 06:16:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from.  There is absolutely nothing within the state statutes that say pedestrians in the roadway always have the right of way.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/720-cmr-9-driving-on-state-highways/download . See Page 15, Section 9.09 (4) and (5), among others.

Motorists have a duty to avoid hitting a pedestrian in the roadway, whether they should be there or not, but pedestrians certainly do not always have the right of way.

I think those laws are just to help determine fault for legal reasons. Practically speaking, since hitting a pedestrian on purpose is obviously illegal, pedestrians effectively have the right of way at all times. If you see a pedestrian in the road and intentionally run them down, more than likely you'll be the one charged.

Quote from: US 89 on February 05, 2023, 12:01:55 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Cars existed before airplanes. Cars should therefore be allowed to cross taxiways and runways whenever they want, and if pilots are not expecting that, then they are bad pilots.

Isn't that a strawman argument? Cars versus planes is clearly a different situation than pedestrians versus cars.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 07, 2023, 08:48:26 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 05, 2023, 05:18:28 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 02, 2023, 04:32:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 02, 2023, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 02, 2023, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 01, 2023, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 01, 2023, 04:39:54 PM
Relatively new signal at LaGuardia airport, left lane is option right lane is right turn only. 4 section ball and right arrow signal to the left of a standard RYG signal, with another 4 section behind the camera, move back to see the intersection. Sleek but sloppy and not MUTCD compliant

https://maps.app.goo.gl/pc1SNuzHWswkoK9K9

I completely understand what they were going for here, but indeed, not compliant. "Easy" fix though, just swap the signals.

Alternatively, they could keep the signal as-is, change the right signal to all arrows, and add a third all-orb RYG signal on the far left pole.

The second option would be more in line with MUTCD standards and recommendations. There shouldn't be a ball over the rightmost lane on this approach because it's a dedicated turn lane.

Worth noting here is that the Port Authority's traffic signals at JFK and LGA Airports are New Jersey style signals even though they're in New York State. Same type mast-arms and configurations that exist in most of New Jersey. Not sure if that's relevant to this case, but still an interesting point of info.

The signals are split phase on all sides so second option makes the most sense. And yes its a PANYNJ setup, but they're not always consistent. Case in point next signal over has curved mast arms, one NYC guy wire, and NYC style right turn FYA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eXkPMSTC2LNGHYX76

In NYC, when a four section FYA is used in a cluster in that setup, is it common for the single segment to have a steady green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6132621,-74.1226142,3a,38.8y,170.59h,95.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sbTAqTexRg7SH6svEFw_lpQ!2e0!5s20191001T000000!7i16384!8i8192) or a flashing yellow arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7715361,-73.8760908,3a,15y,6.74h,88.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO4QX4V0ZA5CYX_iTy8yQBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)?

The single segment is usually a green arrow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 07, 2023, 09:58:34 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on February 07, 2023, 10:13:09 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on February 03, 2023, 06:23:12 PM
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for? (https://goo.gl/maps/5UR13g2Z7bedUVdA7)

There is a signal in the opposite direction with the onramp that merges in, so maybe they thought a permanent green light would remove confusion for those traveling in the opposite direction. I see that the top section is yellow; I am assuming that's for a flashing yellow?  What would make them choose flashing yellow instead of a steady green? EVP or battery backup, maybe?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 07, 2023, 11:35:33 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 07, 2023, 09:58:34 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.
I've seen a solid green right arrow and a flashing yellow left arrow in that situation.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 07, 2023, 12:20:36 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 07, 2023, 11:35:33 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 07, 2023, 09:58:34 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/tniB52SsTDx4r8U46
Use of 8 inch arrows in Hillside, NJ.  Also, using a left and right arrow to denote one way street beyond intersection.

It's a good idea to alert motorists of the one way configuration, but the green left arrow can be confused for a protected left turn and therefore forget to yield to oncoming traffic.
I've seen a solid green right arrow and a flashing yellow left arrow in that situation.

Those should probably be flashing arrows, due to potential conflicts with both the oncoming traffic and pedestrian crossings.

Also interesting is the far side signal has the left arrow below the right arrow, but the signal in the foreground has left arrow above the right arrow (the latter being the correct orientation).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: royo6022 on February 07, 2023, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 03, 2023, 09:56:46 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 03, 2023, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on January 25, 2023, 08:02:10 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 25, 2023, 07:12:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2023, 11:29:19 AM
I spent two years looking at intersections in eastern Massachusetts. There is no split second. When a light appears to be off in GSV, it's almost always a flashing yellow/red (whether it's that way naturally or because of a power outage).

I can't figure out this one, though.

Probably because it's dangerous for signals to be completely dark. I've seen it happen, but it's only for emergencies, and it's never meant to function that way.

Crossing a 4 lane DCR road at a Ped signal where the signal is dark is, extremely scary.

A lot of pedestrians are so reckless when they cross that they wouldn't know the difference...........

Typical victim blaming.

Pedestrians are the vulnerable road user, and have the right of way even if they're crossing not at a crosswalk or against a don't walk sign if they're in the roadway. I've never seen a pedestrian cross against the light at this location.

Amtrakprod, you're a young guy and there is a lot you don't know and haven't seen yet. Are you even a licensed driver?

I don't know how the laws read in Massachusetts, but in New York at least, pedestrians do not legally have the right-of-way if facing a red light or don't walk signal. And are also prohibited from crossing even in a marked crosswalk if an approaching vehicle is so close as to be reasonably unable to stop before reaching the crosswalk.

Looking at the larger picture of pedestrian fatalities, the tendency in the media is to usually blame drivers and road design. In fact, I have personally witnessed many pedestrians including mothers with kids in strollers crossing recklessly and illegally. Like crossing a five-lane county road in mid-block when there was a signalized intersection less than a hundred feet away. Or crossing the very wide Queens Blvd. in NYC (dubbed in the media as the boulevard of death) against the traffic signal as I was approaching a green light.

So don't tell me about pedestrians being so vulnerable when they are at fault at least as often as drivers are.

That's typical ageism. I in-fact do have a license, and drive, walk, take transit, and drive. Just because I'm younger, doesn't mean my viewpoint is less valid. I have a lot of experience in roadway design, and my opinions should be valued, rather than dismissed.

It's also typical of this form to have a windshield's perspective, which is very frustrating. This isn't a driver's form, it's a roadgeek form.

In MA, if a pedestrian is in the roadway they have the right of way, and you are at fault for hitting them. It's still jaywalking, but you can't just hit them.

Furthermore, if you look at any article of a crash, they say "car hits pedestrian", instead of the driver. I find it extremely ironic that you assume the media is biased against car drivers. It's not only ironic, it's idiotic.

Pedestrians existed before cars. They should be able to cross where they want, and if drivers are not expecting that, then they are bad drivers.

Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form. It's impossible to deal with so many of you with these terrible perspectives, and your close-mindedness.  Very frustrating. Thanks.

Did you mean to say forum* ?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: interstatefan990 on February 07, 2023, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 03, 2023, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on February 03, 2023, 06:23:12 PM
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what the heck are these for? (https://goo.gl/maps/5UR13g2Z7bedUVdA7)

Do these signals go on overnight flash at all? The top coloured signal is a circular yellow, which makes me think that in either emergency or overnight flash, insteady of a steady circular green, it would go to a flashing yellow ball in flash operation. I think there's a few other examples in New York State, like this one in Tuxedo Park NY (from the "Stangest Traffic Lights" thread):

They've been green every time I've drove past them. Also I wonder why the Tuxedo Park example has green arrows, while this has a green ball, assuming it was a choice.

Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 07, 2023, 10:13:09 AM
There is a signal in the opposite direction with the onramp that merges in, so maybe they thought a permanent green light would remove confusion for those traveling in the opposite direction. I see that the top section is yellow; I am assuming that's for a flashing yellow?  What would make them choose flashing yellow instead of a steady green? EVP or battery backup, maybe?

There's a built-up median barrier with trees, so there shouldn't be any confusion, but I'd maybe be able to understand the signal if there were a smaller median or just paint. You're right though, maybe there's a remote possibility that a driver would see stopped traffic in the opposing direction and get confused, but at that point it's on them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 07, 2023, 06:01:52 PM
Quote from: royo6022 on February 07, 2023, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
Honestly, maybe I'm done with this form.

Did you mean to say forum* ?

Honestly, dealing with some of the people on this forum is about as fun as filling out forms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 07, 2023, 08:35:48 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/G7CwmgwawQMubic49

Speaking of the post referring to LaGuardia Airport's odd signals being in NYC, the land of double guy masts, here is one in North Merrick, NY with the same mast arms as the airport signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 07, 2023, 08:45:43 PM
That's a Nassau County DPW installed signal. They have been using those style mast-arms for about fifty years and now use longer ones also. More recently New York State DOT has been using longer versions of that style mast-arm too. The State's installations are clumsy looking compared to the County's, the result of using different mounting hardware.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 07, 2023, 11:52:18 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/bGBZakzVVXpxFhje7
Yeah I seen more of them on NY 106 in Nassau as I did a virtual drive through North Merrick.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 14, 2023, 06:29:56 PM
At the southbound off-ramp from WA-3 to Kitsap Way in Bremerton, the original 12-8-12-12 signal was replaced by a 12-8-8-8 signal sometime in early 2018. Yes, an 8-inch green arrow replaced a 12-inch green arrow:

Before: https://goo.gl/maps/GPfm3VQWb5PBoW6F7

After: https://goo.gl/maps/KgsTX7dL5hDuGxH28

The entire intersection was resignalized in the last year.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Scott5114 on February 14, 2023, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on February 05, 2023, 08:59:59 AM
I have a lot of experience in roadway design

Not until your signature and PE seal appear in the chopblocks of a plan sheet, you don't.

I literally get paid to draw road signs for a living and I wouldn't say "I have a lot of experience in traffic sign design" because mine aren't meant to be used as official traffic control devices. There's a big difference between coming up with ideas at home and actually having lives on the line and being the one that will be held accountable if something goes wrong.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 15, 2023, 09:30:34 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wcJjvTYXtpLwr7x77
Couldn't help notice that Puerto Rico is adopting the yellow border back plates on their traffic signals like many states are now using.

I'm guessing that the MUTCD applies not only in the fifty states but in US Territories as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 15, 2023, 11:56:28 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 14, 2023, 06:29:56 PM
At the southbound off-ramp from WA-3 to Kitsap Way in Bremerton, the original 12-8-12-12 signal was replaced by a 12-8-8-8 signal sometime in early 2018. Yes, an 8-inch green arrow replaced a 12-inch green arrow:

Before: https://goo.gl/maps/GPfm3VQWb5PBoW6F7

After: https://goo.gl/maps/KgsTX7dL5hDuGxH28

The entire intersection was resignalized in the last year.

Interesting. I didn't think 8-inch arrows were allowed anymore...even 8-inch signal heads aren't allowed except for very specific circumstances outlined in the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 15, 2023, 04:29:32 PM
^^I believe 8" arrows were disallowed with the 1971 MUTCD. That looks like a patch-up setup with an 8" 3-section head.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 15, 2023, 08:13:18 PM
Roadfro, 8" heads are generally still permitted by the 2009 MUTCD. What very specific circumstances are you talking about?

Regrettably Nassau County, NY DPW and NYS DOT still use them facing side streets at intersections with main roads.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on February 15, 2023, 08:25:46 PM
MUTCD 4D.07

Quote03 Eight-inch circular signal indications may be used in new signal faces only for:

The green or flashing yellow signal indications in an emergency-vehicle traffic control signal (see Section 4G.02);
The circular indications in signal faces controlling the approach to the downstream location where two adjacent signalized locations are close to each other and it is not practical because of factors such as high approach speeds, horizontal or vertical curves, or other geometric factors to install visibility-limited signal faces for the downstream approach;
The circular indications in a signal face that is located less than 120 feet from the stop line on a roadway with a posted or statutory speed limit of 30 mph or less;
The circular indications in a supplemental near-side signal face:
The circular indications in a supplemental signal face installed for the sole purpose of controlling pedestrian movements (see Section 4D.03) rather than vehicular movements; and
The circular indications in a signal face installed for the sole purpose of controlling a bikeway or a bicycle movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 15, 2023, 08:43:58 PM
Thanks Big John. Some of those very specific circumstances that Roadfro alluded to cover a lot of side streets intersecting main roads such as I mentioned. Specifically where it says signals heads less than 120 ft. from the stop line (which describes most signals) on roads with speed limits no higher than 30mph. (most side streets). Those rules would also apply in urban areas where two intersecting streets only have one lane in each direction with a 25 or 30mph speed limit.

So that actually allows 8" heads at thousands of intersections nationwide and so they are still widely permitted. I'm not defending their continued use; just clarifying what's allowed by the Manual. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on February 16, 2023, 02:07:30 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 15, 2023, 08:43:58 PM
Thanks Big John. Some of those very specific circumstances that Roadfro alluded to cover a lot of side streets intersecting main roads such as I mentioned. Specifically where it says signals heads less than 120 ft. from the stop line (which describes most signals) on roads with speed limits no higher than 30mph. (most side streets). Those rules would also apply in urban areas where two intersecting streets only have one lane in each direction with a 25 or 30mph speed limit.

So that actually allows 8" heads at thousands of intersections nationwide and so they are still widely permitted. I'm not defending their continued use; just clarifying what's allowed by the Manual. 

8-inch heads are definitely useful on roads with lower speeds where these days' ultra-bright LEDs in 12-inch size are overkill.  Down the street on my 25-mph street where it intersects another 25-mph street there is a signal due to school and park pedestrian volume.  The quite old 12-8-8s in all directions (on a single diagonal spanwire) were to be "upgraded" in 2022 along with two other similar intersections nearby.  The city slammed the brakes on it after two pairs (northbound and eastbound) were replaced, as the new 12-12-12s in bright LED bathe nearby houses in light all night.  You can see them through the thick arborvitaes at my house 6 houses away whereas the old ones, which had some incandescents still and some 8-inch replacement LEDS, were not so shrill.  It didn't help that the city was having the old signals "upgraded" with the help of the county who is known for crappy-looking signals--mismatched visors, mismatched paint jobs, etc. and that is exactly what the beautiful old Crouse-Hinds 12-8-8s were replaced with--mishmashes of different brands so the backs are all different, some black and some yellow housings, and some with cutaway and some with tunnel visors, all on the same assemblies.  Between the general crap appearance and the signals bathing several houses with light they never used to get (think Jerry Seinfeld trying to sleep with Kenny Rogers Roasters sign shining through the curtains), I can see why the city slammed the brakes on the "upgrade" and is keeping the rest of the 12-8-8s for now at this and the other intersections.  8-inch signals still have a place in all the spots the MUTCD lists.  Suitable for high-speed approaces? Nope.  Slower streets?  Fine.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 21, 2023, 09:13:30 PM
This "stem" approach to a T-intersection in Tucson, AZ has a near-side green orb, but the far-side signals are all-arrow left and right turn displays:

https://goo.gl/maps/whYKvRfJrsjngEEt9

Definitely left-over from the old setup where all signals were RYG orbs.

Technically not compliant because it's a shared left-right turn lane, and the near-side display doesn't match the far-side displays. I suppose the best option would be a 5-section near-side signal with left and right arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 24, 2023, 12:04:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 21, 2023, 09:13:30 PM
This "stem" approach to a T-intersection in Tucson, AZ has a near-side green orb, but the far-side signals are all-arrow left and right turn displays:

https://goo.gl/maps/whYKvRfJrsjngEEt9

Definitely left-over from the old setup where all signals were RYG orbs.

Technically not compliant because it's a shared left-right turn lane, and the near-side display doesn't match the far-side displays. I suppose the best option would be a 5-section near-side signal with left and right arrows.

Maybe that was kept for visibility in case a driver is following a light rail vehicle and can't see the far side arrows. Keeping RYG orbs IMO would be better than stuffing 2 near side signals on that one pole
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 24, 2023, 07:40:15 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on February 24, 2023, 12:04:34 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 21, 2023, 09:13:30 PM
This "stem" approach to a T-intersection in Tucson, AZ has a near-side green orb, but the far-side signals are all-arrow left and right turn displays:

https://goo.gl/maps/whYKvRfJrsjngEEt9

Definitely left-over from the old setup where all signals were RYG orbs.

Technically not compliant because it's a shared left-right turn lane, and the near-side display doesn't match the far-side displays. I suppose the best option would be a 5-section near-side signal with left and right arrows.

Maybe that was kept for visibility in case a driver is following a light rail vehicle and can't see the far side arrows. Keeping RYG orbs IMO would be better than stuffing 2 near side signals on that one pole

Definitely, I'm sure that's why it kept.

What I was thinking was a 5-section tower, with a red orb up top but left and right arrows below (in whatever order they need to be), likely bimodal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on March 01, 2023, 11:15:11 AM
Spotted these this morning. The back plates on these have a lime green/yellow stripe instead of the normal shade of yellow.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1060819,-77.5769019,3a,15y,186.1h,97.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLz02QPU2UoKzfYbYC8ZK2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on March 02, 2023, 02:17:55 PM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on January 25, 2023, 12:42:27 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2023, 12:03:26 AM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on January 24, 2023, 11:29:27 AM
Yellow traffic lights in Russia. Very very rare to see.
https://www.google.com/maps/@64.433535,76.4840061,3a,35.6y,272.73h,89.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRHCEHwJlJCnyf4yPlg1N6g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They look pretty new, any idea what the story is here? All-yellow signals are pretty rare in Europe and Asia, period.
I couldn't find much information about them on the web, but it seems that these yellow traffic lights can only be found in the town of Gubkinskiy.
Actually I was wrong. In June 2022, they installed yellow signal heads at a few intersections in the city of Ivanovo
https://yandex.ru/maps/5/ivanovo/?l=mrc&ll=40.971935%2C57.016266&mrc%5Bid%5D=850226306&z=17.08
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 03, 2023, 08:15:04 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/gKmdWrEPd3fPYAXk7
The base of a former traffic signal.

Instead of removing everything, they kept the base and put a cap over where the pole was once attached.

Cheesy I must say.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 03, 2023, 09:07:47 AM
^^Tripping hazard in a sidewalk.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on March 03, 2023, 11:13:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 03, 2023, 08:15:04 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/gKmdWrEPd3fPYAXk7
The base of a former traffic signal.

Instead of removing everything, they kept the base and put a cap over where the pole was once attached.

Cheesy I must say.
Why was there a traffic signal in the first place? At a quiet intersection in the middle of a residential area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 03, 2023, 08:16:00 PM
Those look like thru streets to me, even if they are in a residential area.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 03, 2023, 08:55:06 PM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on March 03, 2023, 11:13:38 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 03, 2023, 08:15:04 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/gKmdWrEPd3fPYAXk7
The base of a former traffic signal.

Instead of removing everything, they kept the base and put a cap over where the pole was once attached.

Cheesy I must say.
Why was there a traffic signal in the first place? At a quiet intersection in the middle of a residential area.

There is/was a Middle school one bock away...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: BuildTheRussian on March 05, 2023, 07:14:29 PM
I thought the normal practice in that case was to have a 4-way stop, not a traffic light.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 05, 2023, 07:19:10 PM
Quote from: BuildTheRussian on March 05, 2023, 07:14:29 PM
I thought the normal practice in that case was to have a 4-way stop, not a traffic light.
For traffic signal warrants, there is a more lenient school warrant for school zones but a crossing guard is needed if utilized on its own. 50th
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CovalenceSTU on March 06, 2023, 03:54:05 PM
Red and yellow straight arrows on WA-4 in Longview/Kelso, which appeared during an intersection redesign in 2014:

(https://i.imgur.com/wDEaBjC.png)
Left turns aren't allowed here but the sign mentioning that was removed (to make room for the 3rd signal) and never replaced, so these arrows are now the only thing suggesting you can't turn left.

(https://i.imgur.com/m0RabOR.png)(https://i.imgur.com/RfvYPzs.png)
This one is rather pointless as both left and right turns are allowed from here, but Catlin St (the road straight ahead) has since been widened so it's likely not there anymore.

https://goo.gl/maps/oAUjduG773FdadT99

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 06, 2023, 05:05:04 PM
They were probably trying to emphasize that particular lane is thru only (based on the 5-section tower to the right of it for right turns).

WA seems to be the state with the most red up arrows still left around.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 06, 2023, 06:39:15 PM
Totally unrelated to the discussion above, I find these signals in Dayton rather weird.

I used to see 8-8-12 signals a lot (especially in Baltimore) but they were always used for turn signals. Here, they have them as thru signals with green up arrows.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4MWsyFzXZh14McdG8

At the same intersection, an 8-12-12 right turn signal
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SryKwtuSQYoaqXS56
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:44:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/BiJuuH9VMt8ePGSA7
Here is one in Surrey, BC that I find most interesting. A left, a through, and right turn signal at one direction of an intersection.  Because the long queues from truck traffic entering the US, the local or provincial road agency developed this unusual traffic configuration.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:55:19 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nJJDxgGPAZUhSRU59
At the same intersection above^ I got a more closeup look at the opposing sides left turn signal assembly. Never have i seen two mast arms welded together like this.  Growing up in NJ it's more than common to see two mast arms attached to the same pole, but not like this equally spurring away from each other. In New Jersey they're bolted to the top of the pole.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CovalenceSTU on March 06, 2023, 11:11:43 PM
Quote from: plain on March 06, 2023, 05:05:04 PM
They were probably trying to emphasize that particular lane is thru only (based on the 5-section tower to the right of it for right turns).

WA seems to be the state with the most red up arrows still left around.
That's what I figured, as it has one lane for each direction (and a neutral zone intended to be a future lane). I found it interesting they were installed so recently though - the previous setup (as seen on 2012 Street View) had no red or yellow arrows at all, even when it was an MUTCD violation of its own:
(https://i.imgur.com/AcbVJnz.png)

Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:44:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/BiJuuH9VMt8ePGSA7
Here is one in Surrey, BC that I find most interesting. A left, a through, and right turn signal at one direction of an intersection.  Because the long queues from truck traffic entering the US, the local or provincial road agency developed this unusual traffic configuration.
Also using arrows for thru traffic and circles for the turns, that has to be an uncommon setup.

While it's a different scenario, it reminds me of an intersection in China with an entrance too close so (in addition to the main road's left turn lane) the entrance had a left turn lane in-between the thru lanes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: 7/8 on March 07, 2023, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: CovalenceSTU on March 06, 2023, 11:11:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:44:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/BiJuuH9VMt8ePGSA7
Here is one in Surrey, BC that I find most interesting. A left, a through, and right turn signal at one direction of an intersection.  Because the long queues from truck traffic entering the US, the local or provincial road agency developed this unusual traffic configuration.
Also using arrows for thru traffic and circles for the turns, that has to be an uncommon setup.
I suspect that for all the signals, the green light is an arrow, and the yellow and red lights are circles. In this 2018 street view (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.0099323,-122.7353931,3a,15.1y,183.69h,91.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sA0OIS-i3NMddHWMbX_GP_A!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i13312!8i6656), you can see the thru signal is a yellow ball. In Ontario, protected-only left turn signals are from top to bottom: red circle, yellow circle, green left arrow (beside a "left turn signal" sign), and I think BC is the same.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 07, 2023, 10:48:04 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 15, 2023, 09:30:34 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wcJjvTYXtpLwr7x77
Couldn't help notice that Puerto Rico is adopting the yellow border back plates on their traffic signals like many states are now using.

I'm guessing that the MUTCD applies not only in the fifty states but in US Territories as well.
Oh my, you haven't seen how the MUTCD works in the US VI, have you?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 12:01:26 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 07, 2023, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: CovalenceSTU on March 06, 2023, 11:11:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:44:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/BiJuuH9VMt8ePGSA7
Here is one in Surrey, BC that I find most interesting. A left, a through, and right turn signal at one direction of an intersection.  Because the long queues from truck traffic entering the US, the local or provincial road agency developed this unusual traffic configuration.
Also using arrows for thru traffic and circles for the turns, that has to be an uncommon setup.
I suspect that for all the signals, the green light is an arrow, and the yellow and red lights are circles. In this 2018 street view (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.0099323,-122.7353931,3a,15.1y,183.69h,91.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sA0OIS-i3NMddHWMbX_GP_A!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i13312!8i6656), you can see the thru signal is a yellow ball. In Ontario, protected-only left turn signals are from top to bottom: red circle, yellow circle, green left arrow (beside a "left turn signal" sign), and I think BC is the same.

This is correct, the left turn signals in BC, like most of Canada, use red orbs with "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs. This definitely makes it more common to see green arrows to differ them from turn signals (as in the BC/WA border example above), but you always see the "...TURN SIGNAL" signs no matter what.

Richmond uses a bimodal green and yellow bottom arrow, and a yellow orb in the middle. Not sure anywhere else in Canada does this: https://goo.gl/maps/dB9vhW8WiogJubXPA
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: KEK Inc. on March 08, 2023, 08:54:10 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 12:01:26 AM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 07, 2023, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: CovalenceSTU on March 06, 2023, 11:11:43 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 06:44:50 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/BiJuuH9VMt8ePGSA7
Here is one in Surrey, BC that I find most interesting. A left, a through, and right turn signal at one direction of an intersection.  Because the long queues from truck traffic entering the US, the local or provincial road agency developed this unusual traffic configuration.
Also using arrows for thru traffic and circles for the turns, that has to be an uncommon setup.
I suspect that for all the signals, the green light is an arrow, and the yellow and red lights are circles. In this 2018 street view (https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.0099323,-122.7353931,3a,15.1y,183.69h,91.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sA0OIS-i3NMddHWMbX_GP_A!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i13312!8i6656), you can see the thru signal is a yellow ball. In Ontario, protected-only left turn signals are from top to bottom: red circle, yellow circle, green left arrow (beside a "left turn signal" sign), and I think BC is the same.

This is correct, the left turn signals in BC, like most of Canada, use red orbs with "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" signs. This definitely makes it more common to see green arrows to differ them from turn signals (as in the BC/WA border example above), but you always see the "...TURN SIGNAL" signs no matter what.

Richmond uses a bimodal green and yellow bottom arrow, and a yellow orb in the middle. Not sure anywhere else in Canada does this: https://goo.gl/maps/dB9vhW8WiogJubXPA

The mast arm on those signals in Richmond reminds me of the signals near Bellevue Mall.

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6160947,-122.2016222,3a,75y,308.14h,103.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s85GpVxnCCY-PYfK_rxLb6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6174959,-122.2001573,3a,41.2y,217.38h,102.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss3ww1644Cv1ho8M1cMKu4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 08, 2023, 10:22:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 12:01:26 AM
Richmond uses a bimodal green and yellow bottom arrow, and a yellow orb in the middle. Not sure anywhere else in Canada does this: https://goo.gl/maps/dB9vhW8WiogJubXPA

That is a very strange operation. Seriously, why is that necessary? A shared signal doesn't even function like that. And these are what's supposed to be straight up left turn signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 11:19:58 PM
Quote from: plain on March 08, 2023, 10:22:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 12:01:26 AM
Richmond uses a bimodal green and yellow bottom arrow, and a yellow orb in the middle. Not sure anywhere else in Canada does this: https://goo.gl/maps/dB9vhW8WiogJubXPA

That is a very strange operation. Seriously, why is that necessary? A shared signal doesn't even function like that. And these are what's supposed to be straight up left turn signals.

I wouldn't overthink or question too much of what you see in Canada...there is very little federal oversight and most decisions are made locally. It doesn't take more than one or two engineers thinking "hey this would be cool" for something to happen. There are "rules" per se but they can be ignored much more readily than in the US.

Now, why did they decide to double up on the yellows here? Cannot say for sure, though from my time in Vancouver, drivers will quite readily push yellows and reds more than what I'm used to seeing elsewhere. Perhaps the double yellow is their way of begging drivers to consider stopping earlier than they might normally.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on March 12, 2023, 09:12:57 PM
There are 3 lamp signals like this on Enola Rd NB near my home in Morganton NC. I think you may be misinterpreting this.  Here, the bottom is a flashing yellow arrow, the middle is a non flahing  yellow arrow alerting you the signal is about to go red, the top a slid red. It is a 2017 install.  I think the Google image caught a phase overlap.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on March 12, 2023, 10:50:49 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 12, 2023, 09:12:57 PM
There are 3 lamp signals like this on Enola Rd NB near my home in Morganton NC. I think you may be misinterpreting this.  Here, the bottom is a flashing yellow arrow, the middle is a non flahing  yellow arrow alerting you the signal is about to go red, the top a slid red. It is a 2017 install.  I think the Google image caught a phase overlap.

I don't think the FYA has made it over to Canada yet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 12, 2023, 11:25:06 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on March 12, 2023, 09:12:57 PM
There are 3 lamp signals like this on Enola Rd NB near my home in Morganton NC. I think you may be misinterpreting this.  Here, the bottom is a flashing yellow arrow, the middle is a non flahing  yellow arrow alerting you the signal is about to go red, the top a slid red. It is a 2017 install.  I think the Google image caught a phase overlap.

My location is "Japan" but I've spent lots of time in the Vancouver area. I assure you, it's just as shown in Street View. Solid yellow arrow and solid yellow orb at the end.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on March 18, 2023, 05:46:52 AM
I was looking at Streetview in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia and noticed that a green right turn arrow was illuminated at the same time as a conflicting walk signal. (https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.5891112,-62.643753,3a,29.9y,38.32h,98.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNeEfso-k31By1aTmcOVUnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

This would never be allowed in BC or the US. A green arrow always means you have the right of way.

I was about to email the city about how dangerous this is, but checked the Nova Scotia Motor Vehicle Act and found this:

"green arrow light - all vehicular traffic facing this signal may proceed but only in a direction indicated by an arrow unless
otherwise directed by a peace officer but shall yield the right of way
to pedestrians lawfully in a crosswalk and other vehicles lawfully in
an intersection, and pedestrians may proceed only in a crosswalk
towards the signal unless otherwise directed by a traffic sign or signal"

WTF.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 18, 2023, 07:50:29 AM
^^ That used to be the case in the US, and can still be found in places.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 18, 2023, 07:46:01 PM
I've never seen an installation like that in the U.S. that I can remember.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 19, 2023, 12:16:33 AM
It's not even that old of a setup, how unusual!

Here in Japan, at protected-only signals (which are very rare), green up and left arrow are used during the through phase, meaning that a green left arrow is almost always pointing at an active walk signal:

https://goo.gl/maps/3nhtb9rpybNNJiBe9

I'm not keen on this setup, but it's pretty much the only way for things to work when you refuse to use dedicated turn signals... :poke:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Troubleshooter on March 20, 2023, 10:42:39 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 18, 2023, 05:46:52 AM
I was looking at Streetview in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia and noticed that a green right turn arrow was illuminated at the same time as a conflicting walk signal. (https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.5891112,-62.643753,3a,29.9y,38.32h,98.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNeEfso-k31By1aTmcOVUnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

This would never be allowed in BC or the US. A green arrow always means you have the right of way.

I was about to email the city about how dangerous this is, but checked the Nova Scotia Motor Vehicle Act and found this:

"green arrow light - all vehicular traffic facing this signal may proceed but only in a direction indicated by an arrow unless
otherwise directed by a peace officer but shall yield the right of way
to pedestrians lawfully in a crosswalk and other vehicles lawfully in
an intersection, and pedestrians may proceed only in a crosswalk
towards the signal unless otherwise directed by a traffic sign or signal"

WTF.

I can explain this. When Canada started using protected phases and arrow signal lights, they did things differently:

The first use of green arrows was in Toronto, and it was used in conjunction with a computer to direct traffic around obstructions.

- The steady green arrow required all traffic on the road to turn in the direction of the arrow.

- A flashing green ball gave a protected left turn. There was no way to have a protected turn in both directions except for split-phase.

- Later Canada used a flashing green arrow to display a protected left turn.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 01, 2023, 09:37:18 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Actually, this is the norm in Maryland. Delaware too, I believe. It predates the flashing yellow arrow, and they've stuck with it.

My favorite example of a flashing red left arrow is this double left turn (https://goo.gl/maps/cmnuWZjZGDAfZtkm9) onto Columbia Pike in Silver Spring, for no reason other than it is two lanes turning left whilst yielding.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on April 01, 2023, 11:02:46 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 01, 2023, 09:37:18 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Actually, this is the norm in Maryland. Delaware too, I believe. It predates the flashing yellow arrow, and they've stuck with it.

My favorite example of a flashing red left arrow is this double left turn (https://goo.gl/maps/cmnuWZjZGDAfZtkm9) onto Columbia Pike in Silver Spring, for no reason other than it is two lanes turning left whilst yielding.
There is one in Upstate NY that I know of. NY 104 at Furnace Rd. in Ontario.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2273522,-77.2820007,3a,37.5y,69.03h,102.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3-kkbgbf5rhPSylz1Uq9rw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0

Notice there are separate indications for flashing and steady red arrows here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 01, 2023, 12:29:45 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 01, 2023, 09:37:18 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Actually, this is the norm in Maryland. Delaware too, I believe. It predates the flashing yellow arrow, and they've stuck with it.

My favorite example of a flashing red left arrow is this double left turn (https://goo.gl/maps/cmnuWZjZGDAfZtkm9) onto Columbia Pike in Silver Spring, for no reason other than it is two lanes turning left whilst yielding.

Not only is it the norm in Delaware and Maryland, and predates the FYA, it predates the FYA by upwards of two decades.  They were in DE and MD in 1993 when I started school in Delaware. MD using the standard 3 segment traffic light with a flashing red arrow, and Delaware using a "T" style where the right light is generally a red bulb or arrow that'll always remain steady, and the left light is generally a red arrow that'll flash when appropriate.

Delaware now has at least one flashing yellow arrow combined with a flashing yellowing bicycle light in the University of Delaware complex which I need to try to get some video of soon...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on April 01, 2023, 04:06:14 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I know this used to come up in Michigan a lot on older installations, back when they were using the red ball for left turn signals. They switched over to FYA at least a decade ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jay8g on April 02, 2023, 03:13:56 AM
Seattle has been using flashing yellow left turn signals for decades (originally flashing yellow balls before switching to arrows when the FYA was standardized), but still has three locations that function like this -- one (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7176038,-122.2961478,3a,75y,15.74h,91.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syolQR1eobAMBgtb-ySp1mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) with a flashing red ball and two (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6454353,-122.3045787,3a,85.6y,16.55h,87.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6-Lu3dLOiGehd4JjZ26Zcg!2e0!5s20221101T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) others (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6561946,-122.3179263,3a,40y,159.13h,86.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_nt2t2nTcJQIU1bTdLwlBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) have solid red arrows with signs encouraging left turns on red. (I swear the Montlake one was a flashing red arrow at some point, but I can't find any evidence of that.) I've never been sure why these didn't use Seattle's standard flashing yellow.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 02, 2023, 06:05:26 AM
Quote from: jay8g on April 02, 2023, 03:13:56 AM
Seattle has been using flashing yellow left turn signals for decades (originally flashing yellow balls before switching to arrows when the FYA was standardized), but still has three locations that function like this -- one (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7176038,-122.2961478,3a,75y,15.74h,91.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syolQR1eobAMBgtb-ySp1mQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) with a flashing red ball and two (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6454353,-122.3045787,3a,85.6y,16.55h,87.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6-Lu3dLOiGehd4JjZ26Zcg!2e0!5s20221101T000000!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) others (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6561946,-122.3179263,3a,40y,159.13h,86.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_nt2t2nTcJQIU1bTdLwlBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en) have solid red arrows with signs encouraging left turns on red. (I swear the Montlake one was a flashing red arrow at some point, but I can't find any evidence of that.) I've never been sure why these didn't use Seattle's standard flashing yellow.

I also find it interesting that, at least in the Montlake example, they doubled-down on it by reinstalling the signs. Of course, with it being a one-way (also the Eastlake example), a sign isn't necessary at all. But still, no interest in adopting the FYA apparently.

There is still one remaining flashing yellow orb (https://goo.gl/maps/1tYcfa3NoiwoqdmG9), northbound on Boylston at Roanoke. I also remember one leaving the UW campus on the eastside, turning left onto 25th Ave NE, but I see it was replaced with an FYA a number of years ago. I think I have a video of it somewhere.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on April 02, 2023, 05:11:04 PM
Quote from: Hobart on April 01, 2023, 04:06:14 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on April 01, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Well, this is certainly an interesting alternative to a flashing yellow arrow. "YIELD ON FLASHING RED ARROW AFTER STOP" next to a left turn signal on a busy 6-lane road in Silver Spring, MD: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0470976,-77.0520118,3a,21y,5.4h,97.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxux-rhSdeGycXOVLEU2D-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I know this used to come up in Michigan a lot on older installations, back when they were using the red ball for left turn signals. They switched over to FYA at least a decade ago.

I never saw such a sign on any signal with a flashing left-turn red ball.  (And some of those older signals still exist here.)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on April 04, 2023, 02:26:47 PM
Here's an unusual (?) box-span setup near my parents' home in Walled Lake, MI.  In each direction, the signals are spread across the road instead of only over the lanes for that direction.  I haven't seen this anywhere else.

https://goo.gl/maps/5XfqnjBdhKHN4qSG7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 04, 2023, 08:23:03 PM
Until a few years ago that was a common practice by County DPW in Long Island's Nassau County, N.Y. But they used a single diagonal span wire, or diagonally positioned mast-arms. Now they've adopted the standard practice recommended in the MUTCD of putting the two required heads over the right half of the road.

Both configurations have their pros and cons. Among other things, the widespread spacing reduces the chance of both heads being obscured for following vehicles by a large truck. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 05, 2023, 03:51:34 AM
That's a very interesting setup! It didn't strike me as unusual at first; it wasn't until I read your whole post that I realized what was going on.

SignBridge, I would agree that the wider spacing would certainly help prevent the chance of the signal heads being obscured...that may be the only advantage, but it seems like a relatively significant one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on April 05, 2023, 10:41:53 PM
the two intersections in these links got new traffic lights today but it hasn't been updated on Google Maps yet

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1226759,-85.2978307,3a,75y,113.69h,83.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAi18bpBWr9fRRAXCoQfVUQ!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1219056,-85.2964732,3a,48.9y,100.84h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sd_hAIG9-RRG37gKWmv99Eg!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on April 06, 2023, 04:44:20 AM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on April 05, 2023, 10:41:53 PM
the two intersections in these links got new traffic lights today but it hasn't been updated on Google Maps yet

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1226759,-85.2978307,3a,75y,113.69h,83.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAi18bpBWr9fRRAXCoQfVUQ!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1219056,-85.2964732,3a,48.9y,100.84h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sd_hAIG9-RRG37gKWmv99Eg!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192

They just got them today? Ummmm.... it's probably gonna be a while before they show up on Street View.

What were the changes?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on April 06, 2023, 12:10:15 PM
both of the traffic lights were replaced with the yellow reflective border traffic lights you see nowadays except for the two doghouse traffic signals which doesn't have the yellow reflective border
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on April 07, 2023, 03:21:37 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on April 04, 2023, 02:26:47 PM
Here's an unusual (?) box-span setup near my parents' home in Walled Lake, MI.  In each direction, the signals are spread across the road instead of only over the lanes for that direction.  I haven't seen this anywhere else.

https://goo.gl/maps/5XfqnjBdhKHN4qSG7

This is very similar to Ontario's temporary span-wire setups: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7963112,-79.5364757,3a,71.6y,219.72h,86.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7rwaMdSVK0EqK3AkOu8qYQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on April 11, 2023, 10:47:50 AM
https://youtu.be/sXbHdKJ1D78
Interesting video on horizontally mounted stoplights I found.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on April 11, 2023, 08:12:46 PM
Notice how some of the horizontal heads in the video were wrongly configured with the left turn arrow to the right of the green ball instead of to the left of it? I recently saw that error in New Jersey also.

The MUTCD specifies the order from left-to-right as: red ball, yellow ball, yellow (left)arrow, green (left) arrow, green ball, yellow (right) arrow, green (right) arrow. That's all folks.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 01, 2023, 07:07:48 AM
Wrote this for the Japan thread, but it's relevant here too:



Thought I might make another quick post about the traffic signals in Japan, this time just about the signals themselves.

There are at least three major manufacturers for signals in Japan: Koito Denko, Nippon Signal, and Shingo. Nippon Signal apparently has quite a presence outside Japan as well.

The major difference in products is that Nippon Signal and Shingo mostly make signals with visors, whereas Koito Denko primarily produces visorless displays. According to Koito Denko, their research into visorless ("hoodless") signals was prompted by concerns over wind and snow. Wind can damage the visors and cause them to go flying off, and snow can get caught inside the visors and get stuck. From my experience, the flat faces have not been an issue in bright settings, and the wind thing certainly may be helpful in windy areas. But the snow issue may not have been perfected, as I have found examples online where the entire face of the traffic light (https://kuruma-news.jp/post/466714) becomes a white sheet of snow; the downward angle of the signal face should normally prevent this, though.

Fun fact: traffic signals in Japan are 250mm, or 10 inches.

The vast majority, if not all traffic lights in Japan, are entirely timed. The only time pedestrian activation buttons are used are at traffic lights that have the pedestrian feature disabled, used only when there is an all-way walk, or when the signal is specifically for a pedestrian crossing.



Pedestrians signals used to be reverse colors, where the human figure was white and the background was either red or green. Nowadays, the background is black and the human figure itself is green or red. Countdowns are sometimes used these days as well, with the countdown being a series of blocks on either side of the signal slowly counting down from the beginning of the phase to the end. The same process occurs during the red light, helping pedestrians to know how long until they get a green light. The countdowns are helpful as you typically don't get more than about six seconds of warning before a red signal.

As I mentioned in the prior section, signals in Japan are entirely timed, so you don't find activation buttons except at some all-way walks or pedestrian-specific signals.

These images are from Koito Denko's website showing modern pedestrian signals:

(https://www.koito-ind.co.jp/product/img/traffic/pedestrian_signal/img3.jpg)

(https://www.koito-ind.co.jp/product/img/traffic/pedestrian_signal/img4.jpg)



Here are some pictures:

Old traffic signal showing inverted pedestrian displays and incandescent bulbs:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52497719572_e5159061f2_h.jpg)
Incandescent Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2nZ3x35) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

Newer traffic light. Note the extra signal below for a right turn arrow (used after the through phase):

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52860376427_c98b8d9e40_h.jpg)
Modern Japanese Traffic Signal (https://flic.kr/p/2ox6fht) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: wanderer2575 on May 01, 2023, 01:36:28 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on April 05, 2023, 10:41:53 PM
the two intersections in these links got new traffic lights today but it hasn't been updated on Google Maps yet

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1226759,-85.2978307,3a,75y,113.69h,83.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAi18bpBWr9fRRAXCoQfVUQ!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1219056,-85.2964732,3a,48.9y,100.84h,84.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sd_hAIG9-RRG37gKWmv99Eg!2e0!5s20211001T000000!7i16384!8i8192

That's some really sloppy attachment of the cables to the span wires.  I hate when installers do that.

Quote from: bcroadguy on April 07, 2023, 03:21:37 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on April 04, 2023, 02:26:47 PM
Here's an unusual (?) box-span setup near my parents' home in Walled Lake, MI.  In each direction, the signals are spread across the road instead of only over the lanes for that direction.  I haven't seen this anywhere else.

https://goo.gl/maps/5XfqnjBdhKHN4qSG7

This is very similar to Ontario's temporary span-wire setups: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7963112,-79.5364757,3a,71.6y,219.72h,86.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7rwaMdSVK0EqK3AkOu8qYQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Even more interesting is the "installation" of the temporary pedestrian signals.  I've never seen that before.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 03:36:46 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/F8FM61PVw3nx5zBw8
NJ like CA, IL, AZ, and I think MN uses left corner signal heads for an additional left turn signal head, though here it not only has just that but also another straight through signal head mounted to the left of it for the crosswalk.  Growing up in NJ I can attest that the Garden State would use a regular signal head for crosswalks instead of the traditional crosswalk heads.  Also to note that it would appear confusing having these side by side, however in many cases like these panels onside the visors would be placed so that the orientation can only be seen from standing directly in front of the pedestrian signal.
https://goo.gl/maps/A6TsgTkA78y1xuwB9
You can see those panels deterring the signal lights from the street in the closeup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
What amazes me is that no other state than New Jersey uses four section permissive phased signal heads where both the green and yellow arrow appear out of the same lens. With LED lighting that is possible to achieve giving the signal head less bulk than the doghouse, yet the doghouse or tower is still most common.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on May 01, 2023, 09:59:46 PM
I never liked that New Jersey set-up of the arrows in the same lens. It's better to have separate lenses for the green and yellow arrows so you can see the light change position as well as changing color. Better for drivers with any kind of color blindness too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 01, 2023, 10:41:44 PM
There are other states that use bimodal lenses.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 01, 2023, 10:42:27 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
What amazes me is that no other state than New Jersey uses four section permissive phased signal heads where both the green and yellow arrow appear out of the same lens. With LED lighting that is possible to achieve giving the signal head less bulk than the doghouse, yet the doghouse or tower is still most common.

Maine has been using four section bi-modal permissive phased signal heads frequently in the past along with doghouses (1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.623938,-70.3466355,3a,82.1y,82.84h,102.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjz8qmE7pO2MneRD_vPm-LA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6359927,-70.3297913,3a,25.1y,231.41h,90.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAgk0xPEHatHSuFgjDB7ucw!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192),3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6305324,-70.3111481,3a,27.5y,259.58h,89.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNcSN3wRvxpy58G1lS1k5FQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),4 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6542844,-70.2726409,3a,28.7y,210.05h,99.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s32CtgTMRyrJBvczuRUeHuA!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192)) before FYA was the standard, and a plethora of new 4-section left and right turn signals today (GA (https://i.ibb.co/9yfrLhj/DSC01007.jpg),YA (https://i.ibb.co/ZHT4S2m/DSC01008.jpg)) have been appearing with the BUILD GRANT and other new signal installations (though the 5-section doghouse is also used frequently in tandem as well). I'm not sure what the criteria is for using such signals for PPRT operations is since it can vary from intersection to intersection.

NHDOT also likes to uses this kind of signal more frequently than Maine, though this usually is with right turn signals (1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.094081,-70.7942332,3a,27.8y,45.25h,92.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgFNaidwl6wfB3fVkRkm7XQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8935333,-70.8728099,3a,75y,195.41h,87.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPCUgI1kJoouBg_9E_67RBw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) - left turn YoG PPLT installations (1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0450955,-70.7727786,3a,33.9y,108.82h,95.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjXqYDUOjobcoWk0u2qedFw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2160066,-70.8806415,3a,90y,294.95h,84.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9ssybrmjglJ_kEb9p6xhZA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) are rare in NH.

I also know Rhode Island (1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5660638,-71.463882,3a,75y,23.08h,86.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCD6V_3MiqP64M7LPC0kvoA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.799969,-71.4056146,3a,42.9y,279.28h,87.47t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIfFyn-Uqo_9ct9HouTirXA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIfFyn-Uqo_9ct9HouTirXA%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D300.9138%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)) and Ontario (Canada) (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0121359,-74.7391788,3a,36.5y,158.2h,91.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq8YFnwy2buZCUvyq2IHLog!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) like to use them frequently for shared people/RT operations as well. Massachusetts and Connecticut sometimes use them, but doghouses are more common than 4-section bimodal signals. I am not aware of any 4-section shared bimodal signal installation in the State of Vermont.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 02, 2023, 01:16:53 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
What amazes me is that no other state than New Jersey uses four section permissive phased signal heads where both the green and yellow arrow appear out of the same lens. With LED lighting that is possible to achieve giving the signal head less bulk than the doghouse, yet the doghouse or tower is still most common.

Outside of District 1 (Chicagoland), IDOT used to install these sorts of signals from time to time. Here's an example in Peru: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3302785,-89.0943384,3a,41.2y,348.82h,95.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH0H4TUr3ixAHwhIqG9n9AQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I picked this one in particular, because it's operating in tandem with a normal 5-section signal. Nowadays, Illinois sticks to towers of 5.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on May 02, 2023, 02:32:35 AM
^^ Off-topic but why the offset of the arrows and the US 6 sign?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on May 02, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2023, 07:07:48 AM
There are at least three major manufacturers for signals in Japan: Koito Denko, Nippon Signal, and Shingo. Nippon Signal apparently has quite a presence outside Japan as well.

Nippon Signal is also a major supplier of Japanese railway signalling and switching equipment, some of which is used in other areas of rail transit.  I had no idea that they were also a major supplier of traffic signals.  Here in the states, the traffic signal suppliers are split between suppliers of: (A) controllers; (B) mast arms; and (C) signal heads.  (a number of the "suppliers of controllers" are actually NEMA cabinet manufacturers that add the control equipment and programming to their products).  In railway signalling, there are a number of suppliers that can provide all three of these (plus lots of the other gizmos that you might find in railroading).

Have you been able to determine how this splits up for Japanese traffic signals?  (Ergo, does Nippon Signal supply the entire traffic signal layout?)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 02, 2023, 09:01:04 PM
Reply to post 5012, VT had a two section bimodal yellow/ green in Bennington at the main E- W and N-S intersection ( MSR 9 & US 7). It was for the left turn signal at that location.
https://goo.gl/maps/GKNHTNfbQv5ALoKE7 Last GSV. Shows standard three section.
https://goo.gl/maps/u1jTkVDi2Jnz1xmU8 In 2012 it was there still.

https://goo.gl/maps/jRXC1wZ3L5h8ofW46 Closeup of former two section protected left.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CovalenceSTU on May 03, 2023, 02:55:47 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
What amazes me is that no other state than New Jersey uses four section permissive phased signal heads where both the green and yellow arrow appear out of the same lens. With LED lighting that is possible to achieve giving the signal head less bulk than the doghouse, yet the doghouse or tower is still most common.
There's one that popped up in Longview, WA a while back (https://goo.gl/maps/we2Dd5i7pAPXDZGH9), although I can't find any street view of the yellow arrow in action.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on May 03, 2023, 04:35:04 AM
Quote from: CovalenceSTU on May 03, 2023, 02:55:47 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 01, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
What amazes me is that no other state than New Jersey uses four section permissive phased signal heads where both the green and yellow arrow appear out of the same lens. With LED lighting that is possible to achieve giving the signal head less bulk than the doghouse, yet the doghouse or tower is still most common.
There's one that popped up in Longview, WA a while back (https://goo.gl/maps/we2Dd5i7pAPXDZGH9), although I can't find any street view of the yellow arrow in action.
Rochester, NY is full of bi modal arrows, mostly on signals owned by Monroe County.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on May 03, 2023, 12:05:49 PM
4-section bimodal are common in Canada for protected-permissive left turns iirc. Seen them everyhwere in Ontario, and looking at GSV for some other provinces, looks like it's widely used there too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 03, 2023, 12:16:58 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 01, 2023, 09:59:46 PM
I never liked that New Jersey set-up of the arrows in the same lens. It's better to have separate lenses for the green and yellow arrows so you can see the light change position as well as changing color. Better for drivers with any kind of color blindness too.

NJ has used this light for 4 or 5 decades and the only people have complained about it are those that aren't colorblind.

NJDOT is often on the forefront of upgrading intersections to be complaint with current ADA standards, especially with walk signal push buttons and ramps to street level access. Bimodal arrows have never come up as an issue to those that people believe they should be an issue with. There aren't any known stats to show accidents or even traffic stops are an issue with these lights either.
Title: Re: Traffic sign
Post by: roadman65 on May 03, 2023, 12:36:58 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 03, 2023, 12:16:58 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on May 01, 2023, 09:59:46 PM
I never liked that New Jersey set-up of the arrows in the same lens. It's better to have separate lenses for the green and yellow arrows so you can see the light change position as well as changing color. Better for drivers with any kind of color blindness too.

NJ has used this light for 4 or 5 decades and the only people have complained about it are those that aren't colorblind.

NJDOT is often on the forefront of upgrading intersections to be complaint with current ADA standards, especially with walk signal push buttons and ramps to street level access. Bimodal arrows have never come up as an issue to those that people believe they should be an issue with. There aren't any known stats to show accidents or even traffic stops are an issue with these lights either.

It’s just like the Redskins having to change their name. It appears that it was more so people who weren’t Native Americans saying it was offensive to Native Americans than the party themselves. Even one forum user here who had some Native blood in him, stated that he and his relatives in that race, had no issues with that at all. In addition in that one thread he commented on he said for those particular complainers to basically shut up.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 03, 2023, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on May 02, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 01, 2023, 07:07:48 AM
There are at least three major manufacturers for signals in Japan: Koito Denko, Nippon Signal, and Shingo. Nippon Signal apparently has quite a presence outside Japan as well.

Nippon Signal is also a major supplier of Japanese railway signalling and switching equipment, some of which is used in other areas of rail transit.  I had no idea that they were also a major supplier of traffic signals.  Here in the states, the traffic signal suppliers are split between suppliers of: (A) controllers; (B) mast arms; and (C) signal heads.  (a number of the "suppliers of controllers" are actually NEMA cabinet manufacturers that add the control equipment and programming to their products).  In railway signalling, there are a number of suppliers that can provide all three of these (plus lots of the other gizmos that you might find in railroading).

It's funny, the Nippon Signal homepage actually has a picture of the 1972-built Latah Creek rail bridge in Spokane, WA; I recognized the city immediately which led me down a rabbit-hole. This lead to the discovery that they do indeed manufacture signals outside Japan, though from what you're telling me and what I was able to read online, it's just railway signalling equipment. While Japanese companies having presence outside Japan is hardly groundbreaking, they do seem to be the only one that offers signals outside Japan. Pretty neat!

Quote from: Dirt Roads on May 02, 2023, 04:16:22 PM
Have you been able to determine how this splits up for Japanese traffic signals?  (Ergo, does Nippon Signal supply the entire traffic signal layout?)

It seems that everything but the mast arm is manufactured by the signal provider. I can see on the websites of the manufacturers that power supplies, controllers, and the signals themselves are all products they offer. But no one makes any mention of the signal mast arms.

From my personal observations, signal mast arms in Japan are very standardized. There is almost no variation in length or design, apart from the color. And even then, there are only two colors to pick from: very light grey (standard color), or a brownish color (example (https://goo.gl/maps/4D2ib7PkPR4ZC6An9)).

Also note that, in Japan, it appears that design approvals come from the National Police Agency. Both on plaques and online, "police code" or "police spec" seem to be terms used a lot, which would tell me that these manufacturers have to meet certain requirements, at least in terms of luminance, operations/phasing, etc.

Here in Japan, virtually all pedestrian and vehicle signals have a small plaque on the outside stating facts about the device, like voltage, model number, manufacturer:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52868598659_f4f1c3d6ef_o.jpg)
Shingo Denzai Ped Signal ID Plate (https://flic.kr/p/2oxPot6) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 07, 2023, 06:22:16 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/i9seQSqjXViAeHgE6
Here is a left turn signal using both a green ball and green arrow
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: DrSmith on May 07, 2023, 10:18:12 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2023, 06:22:16 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/i9seQSqjXViAeHgE6
Here is a left turn signal using both a green ball and green arrow

On the right side in the link above you can see an old mast arm still in use
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 07, 2023, 01:13:23 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on May 07, 2023, 10:18:12 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2023, 06:22:16 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/i9seQSqjXViAeHgE6
Here is a left turn signal using both a green ball and green arrow

On the right side in the link above you can see an old mast arm still in use

Yeah. Morristown was one of the last municipalities in New Jersey to use them.  They also used the two section crosswalk heads as in the seventies they were everywhere in that town.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 07, 2023, 07:48:54 PM
That mast arm reminds me of a similar mast arm in Spokane, I think it's the oldest signal in the city (W Broadway & N Lincoln):

https://goo.gl/maps/qmLzadsDa1xBNaQ68

I think they are called double-guy or something? I always thought they were neat.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 08, 2023, 03:33:06 AM
I love the guy wire style mast arms and it seems like NYC is the only place left that uses them at all. I wonder if they meet modern structural codes and if not how NYC gets away with it? They're much "lighter"  looking than most american mast arms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 08, 2023, 07:58:25 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on May 08, 2023, 03:33:06 AM
I love the guy wire style mast arms and it seems like NYC is the only place left that uses them at all. I wonder if they meet modern structural codes and if not how NYC gets away with it? They're much "lighter"  looking than most american mast arms.

NYC still uses analog controllers and none of their intersections have loops because of them. All signals are timed and change orientation whether traffic is there or not. Heck no call buttons for crosswalks either. Every minute or two the walk icon comes even if no one is walking by.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on May 08, 2023, 05:38:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 07, 2023, 07:48:54 PM
That mast arm reminds me of a similar mast arm in Spokane, I think it's the oldest signal in the city (W Broadway & N Lincoln):

https://goo.gl/maps/qmLzadsDa1xBNaQ68

I think they are called double-guy or something? I always thought they were neat.

Wow, there are a bunch of "double guys" associated with that particular intersection.  Indeed, the mast arms are attached with "double guys", but there are also two sets of signal wires crossing North Lincoln Street and we call those "double guys" as well.  The term "guy wire" is a nautical term adopted by railroads and their telegraph partners during the advent of telegraphy and electrified signalling.  The term refers to the use of cables to support "riggings".  So technically, the aerial support of a cable span is not a "rigging" and the only reason we call them "guy wires" is that we originally used the same type of cable as the "down guys" (guy wires used to either back-brace the pole to the ground, or in your case, guy wires used as true riggings to support a side mast).

There are actually six sets of "double guys" at this location: four "double guy" signal mast arms, another for signal wires crossing North Lincoln Street shown here, and another on the right crossing West Broadway.  But one of those "guy wires" isn't supporting anything.  If you look carefully, it is the newer of the two guy wires crossing the street (you can tell because it is self-supporting cable where the jacketed cable is twisted along with the guy wire).  (If I want to get technical here, the set crossing North Lincoln Street is actually a "triple guy" with a little flimsy self-supporting cable hanging just a few inches under the top one and not supported by the top one).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 09, 2023, 02:56:51 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/NuYXNz9cK5C8oUYa7
Why bother with backplates if the signal head is mounted to the beam of the bridge. The bridge blocks out the light that the back plates are designed to block out in the first place.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on May 09, 2023, 12:23:30 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2023, 02:56:51 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/NuYXNz9cK5C8oUYa7
Why bother with backplates if the signal head is mounted to the beam of the bridge. The bridge blocks out the light that the back plates are designed to block out in the first place.

Target value for the signal head. The backplate provides greater contrast against the side of the bridge, making it easier to recognize that a signal is there at a distance, perhaps more important in case of power outage at night.

I feel more agencies are beginning to employ backplates as a standard practice in part for this reason (it's been standard in Nevada as long as I can remember). Some agencies are also embracing the optional yellow reflective border around the backplate as a defacto standard...in the Reno area, all signals within NDOT ROW have had the borders applied to existing backplates, and the cities/RTC are using them on all new signal installs/retrofits as of a couple years ago--it does help signals stand out.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 09, 2023, 07:13:39 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on May 08, 2023, 05:38:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 07, 2023, 07:48:54 PM
That mast arm reminds me of a similar mast arm in Spokane, I think it's the oldest signal in the city (W Broadway & N Lincoln):

https://goo.gl/maps/qmLzadsDa1xBNaQ68

I think they are called double-guy or something? I always thought they were neat.

Wow, there are a bunch of "double guys" associated with that particular intersection.  Indeed, the mast arms are attached with "double guys", but there are also two sets of signal wires crossing North Lincoln Street and we call those "double guys" as well.  The term "guy wire" is a nautical term adopted by railroads and their telegraph partners during the advent of telegraphy and electrified signalling.  The term refers to the use of cables to support "riggings".  So technically, the aerial support of a cable span is not a "rigging" and the only reason we call them "guy wires" is that we originally used the same type of cable as the "down guys" (guy wires used to either back-brace the pole to the ground, or in your case, guy wires used as true riggings to support a side mast).

There are actually six sets of "double guys" at this location: four "double guy" signal mast arms, another for signal wires crossing North Lincoln Street shown here, and another on the right crossing West Broadway.  But one of those "guy wires" isn't supporting anything.  If you look carefully, it is the newer of the two guy wires crossing the street (you can tell because it is self-supporting cable where the jacketed cable is twisted along with the guy wire).  (If I want to get technical here, the set crossing North Lincoln Street is actually a "triple guy" with a little flimsy self-supporting cable hanging just a few inches under the top one and not supported by the top one).

Thank you for the detail! I was interested to know where that term came from (I guess if I was really interested, I would have consulted Google, but still -- thank you).

I notice that the mast lighting on the northwest and southwest corner also use guy-wire supporting, is this what you are referring to?

As an aside, I really like how the mast arm is at a fully right angle to the mast; almost all traffic signal mast arms these days are at a very slight angle. I don't know if this is afforded to it being a double-guy mast arm design, which are no doubt long out of production, but I still like it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on May 09, 2023, 09:55:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2023, 07:13:39 PM
I notice that the mast lighting on the northwest and southwest corner also use guy-wire supporting, is this what you are referring to?

Nice.  Didn't even notice those.  No, I'm referring to the guy wire used to support the signal cables between the various masts.  That cable is strictly there to support the weight of the cable beneath.  We railroaders use the term "messenger cable" (and I believe that term has spread amongst some within the telephone cable industry and cable television industry).  It is my impression that the "messenger cable" was originally called a "guy wire" because part of the purpose is truly related to "rigging", that is keeping the distance between the masts (or poles) at a relatively fixed maximum length that will prevent the supported cable beneath from snapping.  You've probably seen places in "curves" on power lines where a pole is mounted on the opposite side of the road for no apparent reason.  The two poles are connected with a true guy wire that prevents the powerline pole from bending into the curve.  That second pole also gets a one or more "down guys" as structural support to deal with the additional forces placed on both poles due to wind (on the powerlines themselves).


Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2023, 07:13:39 PM
As an aside, I really like how the mast arm is at a fully right angle to the mast; almost all traffic signal mast arms these days are at a very slight angle. I don't know if this is afforded to it being a double-guy mast arm design, which are no doubt long out of production, but I still like it.

That's a great physics problem.  It takes a much stronger cantilever structure to support a perpendicular mast than it does when the mast is bent at a slight angle.  But these guys solved that problem with "down guys".  Nifty and thrifty.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 10, 2023, 08:10:16 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on May 09, 2023, 09:55:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2023, 07:13:39 PM
I notice that the mast lighting on the northwest and southwest corner also use guy-wire supporting, is this what you are referring to?

Nice.  Didn't even notice those.  No, I'm referring to the guy wire used to support the signal cables between the various masts.  That cable is strictly there to support the weight of the cable beneath.  We railroaders use the term "messenger cable" (and I believe that term has spread amongst some within the telephone cable industry and cable television industry).  It is my impression that the "messenger cable" was originally called a "guy wire" because part of the purpose is truly related to "rigging", that is keeping the distance between the masts (or poles) at a relatively fixed maximum length that will prevent the supported cable beneath from snapping.  You've probably seen places in "curves" on power lines where a pole is mounted on the opposite side of the road for no apparent reason.  The two poles are connected with a true guy wire that prevents the powerline pole from bending into the curve.  That second pole also gets a one or more "down guys" as structural support to deal with the additional forces placed on both poles due to wind (on the powerlines themselves).

Thank you for the extra information, I was having some issues parsing what you were describing. But then of course I was, because I've never heard of a messenger cable, that is awesome. Just looking at it, I thought those were two separate cables.

Quote from: Dirt Roads on May 09, 2023, 09:55:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 09, 2023, 07:13:39 PM
As an aside, I really like how the mast arm is at a fully right angle to the mast; almost all traffic signal mast arms these days are at a very slight angle. I don't know if this is afforded to it being a double-guy mast arm design, which are no doubt long out of production, but I still like it.

That's a great physics problem.  It takes a much stronger cantilever structure to support a perpendicular mast than it does when the mast is bent at a slight angle.  But these guys solved that problem with "down guys".  Nifty and thrifty.

I suppose it helps that they only had to hang one signal, since the supplemental signals are on the left and right poles. Though I'm sure down guys would have been strong enough with a right-angle signal to support more than one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 17, 2023, 05:14:34 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Kfb1yUuCFJfnXDHJ7
The pedestrian signal head in Vandalia, IL uses the standard housing of a normal 12 inch signal section here.  That is very strange.

https://goo.gl/maps/kgJg17CQGok9Yy6F8
Here's the front side.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on May 17, 2023, 07:03:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 17, 2023, 05:14:34 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/Kfb1yUuCFJfnXDHJ7
The pedestrian signal head in Vandalia, IL uses the standard housing of a normal 12 inch signal section here.  That is very strange.

https://goo.gl/maps/kgJg17CQGok9Yy6F8
Here's the front side.

As far as I know, not strange at all. Where I come from (WA), it's very rare. But some places use them a lot. Washington DC (https://goo.gl/maps/GtheNH7kBrvUmMtz6) is a well known user of this exact type of pedestrian signal housing.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on May 22, 2023, 11:27:31 PM
Well I found one that is only unique to NJ.  I posted it in another thread but one of the resident trolls here, was the only response. He said my GSV image of last Summer was years old, and from past experiences has no clue how New Jersey operates signals despite being a road enthusiast and living in New Jersey which my image pointed out.

Anyway looks like no other user found a state besides New Jersey that fails to use green arrows on split phases, so that is a Jersey thing. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 23, 2023, 02:02:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2023, 11:27:31 PM
Well I found one that is only unique to NJ.  I posted it in another thread but one of the resident trolls here, was the only response. He said my GSV image of last Summer was years old, and from past experiences has no clue how New Jersey operates signals despite being a road enthusiast and living in New Jersey which my image pointed out.

Anyway looks like no other user found a state besides New Jersey that fails to use green arrows on split phases, so that is a Jersey thing. 

It sometimes happens at some older installs at some Maine (1* (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8357206,-68.7424263,3a,75y,170.41h,82.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stGpZPj6i6TJkDFGHnCUKiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8668337,-68.684071,3a,90y,210.32h,87.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s82n4u1rJcDeW8XmlIUmBlg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192),3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8298696,-68.7537694,3a,75y,301.63h,77.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOGFJ3uMnEDIwoSp7ubB7Xg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)) and New Hampshire (1^ (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2357735,-70.8808331,3a,78.9y,295.56h,87.12t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7aubBq4LVYX6jr9-9XFzVw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D7aubBq4LVYX6jr9-9XFzVw%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D304.90588%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192),2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.707919,-71.4556876,3a,75y,195.17h,86.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svouW37xVyOXFfdbKhhVEBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) intersections, though this is starting to be less of an issue when signals are being replaced (NH: Old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0889028,-70.7906422,3a,75y,74.8h,85.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3Utb9zBmNeIXqU7eY8wIUg!2e0!5s20161001T000000!7i13312!8i6656), New (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0889146,-70.7908461,3a,24.4y,87.44h,89.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suxOHrgNOY2Pz19Am3mnM8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) or retrofitted (Maine: Old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6286842,-70.2812823,3a,75y,207.46h,82.2t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCkOgEv8lK-h9yjPC5xu0uQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DCkOgEv8lK-h9yjPC5xu0uQ%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D195.4168%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), New (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6285769,-70.281374,3a,75y,175.06h,94.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMO_cX4w16kFdt8FpRgxoxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)). In the cases of Maine and NH, the approaches may have initally be permissive only when it was installed and then some situation required the intersection to be changed to split.

*This is a fully split-phased intersection. Only the Bangor Mall Rd approach has this issue - the left turn signal has circular RYG indications.
^This intersection is getting new signals and phasing in the near future - it has been phased and set up this way since the mid 80s or 90s from when this signal was first installed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on May 25, 2023, 10:34:13 AM
Also happens at this intersection in Virginia:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1681231,-78.0047146,3a,75y,351.58h,88.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scfjVyTiOW5xoFeo8w89s4g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

Oddly enough, the light at the other end of town is basically an identical intersection, but has typical split phasing signalization.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on May 28, 2023, 12:41:51 AM
So I'm back in Chicagoland for the weekend, and my family was driving home from an Italian restaurant in Tinley Park, when I noticed these doohickeys mounted over the red signal lenses on 183rd and Harlem:
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/576638889838772234/1112194729426296912/IMG_6409.jpg)

Does anybody know what these are for or why they put them on? My two suspicions are to either somehow focus the red light towards the direction the signal controls, or to prevent ice and snow buildup.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 02:34:31 PM
Quote from: Hobart on May 28, 2023, 12:41:51 AM
So I'm back in Chicagoland for the weekend, and my family was driving home from an Italian restaurant in Tinley Park, when I noticed these doohickeys mounted over the red signal lenses on 183rd and Harlem:

(Image snipped)

Does anybody know what these are for or why they put them on? My two suspicions are to either somehow focus the red light towards the direction the signal controls, or to prevent ice and snow buildup.

I think they are for preventing ice and snow buildup on the signals (Sources: 1 (https://snowproofsignals.com/our-design/), 2 (https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/led-snow-traffic-lights-cdot/))
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
I got to see Montréal's way of displaying an LPI (or LTI, Leading Thru Interval) (https://videopress.com/v/1okP7f37) when I went to Montréal two weeks ago in person and it reminded me of another signal sequence that is very similar around the Los Angeles area (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg307484;topicseen#msg307484) for LTIs.

This is for a permissive and/or permissive/protected setup. For the LTI:
- In Montreal, the signal starts with a upward-facing green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5087602,-73.5614619,3a,22.4y,294.7h,90.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYat7ZIPja1P_ijitNaw2zA!2e0!5s20150501T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5088756,-73.5616226,3a,75y,293.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9ey6vJkWmmHlPsAo1rzRKg!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). There is a 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5360357,-73.5612888,3a,40.2y,214.64h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D196.43172%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) and 6-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5692721,-73.5662114,3a,62.1y,18.52h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syMHWN0b5sQ-LLvqhzgjwdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) version of this signal, with the indications being (R-Y-G-UfGA-LtYA-LtFGA). LtYA is omitted in the 5 section version and it also could have a transit bypass signal as well on the top (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5786206,-73.559898,3a,27.4y,310.73h,90.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srYN9829KAVzZUoiqTZnDYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) instead of LFGA. The ones with left turn phasing were all lagging left.

- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

Obviously, having separate signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7560465,-73.9909366,3a,23.1y,110.28h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjNSfLKBmtscmJbMX1867RA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) (and dedicated turn lanes) for each movement with FYA works a lot better for signalling this operation. Besides this, I'm curious to see which one is better for signalling this operation: Montréal or Los Angeles?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on June 01, 2023, 04:53:47 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
I got to see Montréal's way of displaying an LPI (or LTI, Leading Thru Interval) (https://videopress.com/v/1okP7f37) when I went to Montréal two weeks ago in person and it reminded me of another signal sequence that is very similar around the Los Angeles area (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg307484;topicseen#msg307484) for LTIs.

This is for a permissive and/or permissive/protected setup. For the LTI:
- In Montreal, the signal starts with a upward-facing green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5087602,-73.5614619,3a,22.4y,294.7h,90.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYat7ZIPja1P_ijitNaw2zA!2e0!5s20150501T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5088756,-73.5616226,3a,75y,293.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9ey6vJkWmmHlPsAo1rzRKg!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). There is a 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5360357,-73.5612888,3a,40.2y,214.64h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D196.43172%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) and 6-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5692721,-73.5662114,3a,62.1y,18.52h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syMHWN0b5sQ-LLvqhzgjwdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) version of this signal, with the indications being (R-Y-G-UfGA-LtYA-LtFGA). LtYA is omitted in the 5 section version and it also could have a transit bypass signal as well on the top (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5786206,-73.559898,3a,27.4y,310.73h,90.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srYN9829KAVzZUoiqTZnDYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) instead of LFGA. The ones with left turn phasing were all lagging left.

- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

Obviously, having separate signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7560465,-73.9909366,3a,23.1y,110.28h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjNSfLKBmtscmJbMX1867RA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) (and dedicated turn lanes) for each movement with FYA works a lot better for signalling this operation. Besides this, I'm curious to see which one is better for signalling this operation: Montréal or Los Angeles?

The LA one has something the Montreal one lacks--an explicit indication against left turns while straight is allowed. Something about the straight green arrow but nothing at all about lefts makes me worry that people might think either the signal is "broken" and lefts are allowed but dark, or that there is no signal phase at all relating to left turns (go whenever).  The red arrow seems good to say "we didn't forget left turns--don't do it right now."
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 01, 2023, 06:25:20 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

That setup is identical to this current LPI in Spokane, WA. Red arrow at the beginning (https://goo.gl/maps/6kh9Asoyn3vYFh8g8) during the LPI, before being extinguished and only a green orb is displayed (https://goo.gl/maps/hEFrAgVZ7jY5wYkB7).

Unfortunately, I cannot find a GSV showing a green orb + red arrow. And, investigating GSV for a bit, there is some evidence that the LPI may not always be active: these cars are setting off at a freshly green light (https://goo.gl/maps/h7vSZiKP2uvQfDNMA), but there is only green orbs, and the "Don't Walk" sign is displayed.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on June 02, 2023, 06:37:36 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on June 01, 2023, 04:53:47 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
I got to see Montréal's way of displaying an LPI (or LTI, Leading Thru Interval) (https://videopress.com/v/1okP7f37) when I went to Montréal two weeks ago in person and it reminded me of another signal sequence that is very similar around the Los Angeles area (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg307484;topicseen#msg307484) for LTIs.

This is for a permissive and/or permissive/protected setup. For the LTI:
- In Montreal, the signal starts with a upward-facing green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5087602,-73.5614619,3a,22.4y,294.7h,90.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYat7ZIPja1P_ijitNaw2zA!2e0!5s20150501T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5088756,-73.5616226,3a,75y,293.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9ey6vJkWmmHlPsAo1rzRKg!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). There is a 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5360357,-73.5612888,3a,40.2y,214.64h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D196.43172%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) and 6-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5692721,-73.5662114,3a,62.1y,18.52h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syMHWN0b5sQ-LLvqhzgjwdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) version of this signal, with the indications being (R-Y-G-UfGA-LtYA-LtFGA). LtYA is omitted in the 5 section version and it also could have a transit bypass signal as well on the top (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5786206,-73.559898,3a,27.4y,310.73h,90.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srYN9829KAVzZUoiqTZnDYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) instead of LFGA. The ones with left turn phasing were all lagging left.

- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

Obviously, having separate signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7560465,-73.9909366,3a,23.1y,110.28h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjNSfLKBmtscmJbMX1867RA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) (and dedicated turn lanes) for each movement with FYA works a lot better for signalling this operation. Besides this, I'm curious to see which one is better for signalling this operation: Montréal or Los Angeles?

The LA one has something the Montreal one lacks--an explicit indication against left turns while straight is allowed. Something about the straight green arrow but nothing at all about lefts makes me worry that people might think either the signal is "broken" and lefts are allowed but dark, or that there is no signal phase at all relating to left turns (go whenever).  The red arrow seems good to say "we didn't forget left turns--don't do it right now."

I agree.  From a US perspective, we prefer to see a NO indication as opposed to understanding that a straight arrow implies no turns.  In the US, the Montreal signal is a no-go.  I don't know how the Montreal signal is interpreted in Canada.  It seems that Quebec allows for right on red, except on the island of Montreal.

And it seems like its common there.

Take a look at this sign.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5785795,-73.5600436,3a,75y,224.68h,98.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJboCjJvi8r4o3peU5iRFCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu

It is striaght and right in a green circle.  Can you turn left here?  Since only straight and right are in the green circle, left turns are prohibited.  In the US, the would have a no left turn sign instead.

Quote from: jakeroot on June 01, 2023, 06:25:20 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

That setup is identical to this current LPI in Spokane, WA. Red arrow at the beginning (https://goo.gl/maps/6kh9Asoyn3vYFh8g8) during the LPI, before being extinguished and only a green orb is displayed (https://goo.gl/maps/hEFrAgVZ7jY5wYkB7).

Unfortunately, I cannot find a GSV showing a green orb + red arrow. And, investigating GSV for a bit, there is some evidence that the LPI may not always be active: these cars are setting off at a freshly green light (https://goo.gl/maps/h7vSZiKP2uvQfDNMA), but there is only green orbs, and the "Don't Walk" sign is displayed.

And that is a good thing.  As there are pedestrian activation buttons, the LPI should only be operational when the WALK signal is operational.  If no pedestrian pushes the button, there is no need for an LPI.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 05, 2023, 02:46:28 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2023, 03:01:19 PM
I got to see Montréal's way of displaying an LPI (or LTI, Leading Thru Interval) (https://videopress.com/v/1okP7f37) when I went to Montréal two weeks ago in person and it reminded me of another signal sequence that is very similar around the Los Angeles area (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5944.msg307484;topicseen#msg307484) for LTIs.

This is for a permissive and/or permissive/protected setup. For the LTI:
- In Montreal, the signal starts with a upward-facing green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5087602,-73.5614619,3a,22.4y,294.7h,90.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYat7ZIPja1P_ijitNaw2zA!2e0!5s20150501T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5088756,-73.5616226,3a,75y,293.82h,88.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9ey6vJkWmmHlPsAo1rzRKg!2e0!5s20170801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). There is a 5 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5360357,-73.5612888,3a,40.2y,214.64h,89.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DqRgNepNZ7ulDCVj35MRf4w%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D196.43172%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) and 6-section (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5692721,-73.5662114,3a,62.1y,18.52h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syMHWN0b5sQ-LLvqhzgjwdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) version of this signal, with the indications being (R-Y-G-UfGA-LtYA-LtFGA). LtYA is omitted in the 5 section version and it also could have a transit bypass signal as well on the top (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5786206,-73.559898,3a,27.4y,310.73h,90.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srYN9829KAVzZUoiqTZnDYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu) instead of LFGA. The ones with left turn phasing were all lagging left.

- In Los Angeles (circular red-red arrow signal), the signal starts with both a red arrow AND circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462517,-118.2629269,3a,15y,91.46h,92.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7c96j8uMYwOTiaB45zF48w!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu) when "WALK" is displayed. It changes to a circular green after the LTI ends (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0462495,-118.2627991,3a,75y,101.99h,74.31t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxn56Z_6wVtDgid11gIAXgQ!2e0!5s20151101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&entry=ttu). (The LA setup shown here was changed to a fully protected setup with seperate signals)

Obviously, having separate signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7560465,-73.9909366,3a,23.1y,110.28h,90.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjNSfLKBmtscmJbMX1867RA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) (and dedicated turn lanes) for each movement with FYA works a lot better for signalling this operation. Besides this, I'm curious to see which one is better for signalling this operation: Montréal or Los Angeles?
There's also this LPI near where I live, which has protected turn movements and a variable sign that lights up "No Turn on Red" or "Turning Vehicles YIELD to pedestrians" when the crosswalk signal is activated.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8061236,-72.5548704,3a,75y,28.4h,87.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVkdqPgietaeuEezH6uz7mQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DVkdqPgietaeuEezH6uz7mQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D336.40787%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8061236,-72.5548704,3a,75y,28.4h,87.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVkdqPgietaeuEezH6uz7mQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DVkdqPgietaeuEezH6uz7mQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D336.40787%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on June 05, 2023, 05:44:18 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on May 22, 2023, 11:27:31 PM
Well I found one that is only unique to NJ.  I posted it in another thread but one of the resident trolls here, was the only response. He said my GSV image of last Summer was years old, and from past experiences has no clue how New Jersey operates signals despite being a road enthusiast and living in New Jersey which my image pointed out.

Anyway looks like no other user found a state besides New Jersey that fails to use green arrows on split phases, so that is a Jersey thing.

Here is an example. Only one direction goes at a time. It runs in a counterclockwise circle.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8443755,-74.0784353,3a,44.9y,289.08h,93.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smIPQyuVgOUKjWRBQSUEcbw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DmIPQyuVgOUKjWRBQSUEcbw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D286.45612%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 05, 2023, 10:25:49 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/4ezbNYtWaALzTbqg6
This is unusual. Normally New Jersey signals are not mounted this way at the end of the truss arm.  They hang from a chain and sway and not at all mounted to non moving brackets.

Anyone who lives in NJ can contest to this.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 06, 2023, 02:14:41 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 05, 2023, 10:25:49 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/4ezbNYtWaALzTbqg6
This is unusual. Normally New Jersey signals are not mounted this way at the end of the truss arm.  They hang from a chain and sway and not at all mounted to non moving brackets.

Anyone who lives in NJ can contest to this.

I'm sure this is now the norm for new installations? Not really sure as I don't live out that way, but I don't recall hanging signals on new installations that I've seen linked here and from browsing around NJ on Google Maps.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on June 06, 2023, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 05, 2023, 10:25:49 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/4ezbNYtWaALzTbqg6
This is unusual. Normally New Jersey signals are not mounted this way at the end of the truss arm.  They hang from a chain and sway and not at all mounted to non moving brackets.

Anyone who lives in NJ can contest to this.

Just looking around my town on GSV in North Jersey, its a mix. Some are with chains, while others connected directly. I don't know when they choose to use either method since both can be seen at the same intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on June 07, 2023, 12:52:39 AM
Quote from: chrisg69911 on June 06, 2023, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 05, 2023, 10:25:49 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/4ezbNYtWaALzTbqg6
This is unusual. Normally New Jersey signals are not mounted this way at the end of the truss arm.  They hang from a chain and sway and not at all mounted to non moving brackets.

Anyone who lives in NJ can contest to this.

Just looking around my town on GSV in North Jersey, its a mix. Some are with chains, while others connected directly. I don't know when they choose to use either method since both can be seen at the same intersection.

They might have just changed standards some time recently, and the chain-hung signals haven't reached the end of their useful service life. If you look at the Google Maps link with the bracketed signals, they were on chains as late as 2019.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 07, 2023, 01:04:48 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wg6dU4xyFejjeHKu7
You're correct on that.  To me personally I like the older version. The new bracket mounts do not look good aesthetically.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on June 07, 2023, 01:16:51 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/4UecxiahBMye3yGW8
What gets me is still the older signal controller is still in use. Despite the change in signal heads, they didn’t replace the controller.

I’m guessing that the controller hasn’t ended its service life, but the heads have as stated above. To me I’m used to the two tiered cabinets with the larger one over a smaller one as that was the norm in New Jersey for ages once upon a time.

The power company uses the bottom slim box to house the meter while the necessary components to run the signal are in the top cabinet.  Don’t understand why as other states openly mount their meters. In Florida we have them long side the controller on either a short post or on the signal strain pole if it’s a span wire signal.

Considering New Jersey has more than one power supplier, it cant be the power company’s request, like PSE & G afraid of the meters suffering an impossible damage or other paranoia.

Also why is one EB overhead signal aimed the wrong way?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on June 07, 2023, 08:07:25 PM
This one always intrigued me -- A twin 5-segment setup on a single mast:

100 E Broadway Blvd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Hkk7SHUNVXWNSDMR8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on June 07, 2023, 11:41:49 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 07, 2023, 01:04:48 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wg6dU4xyFejjeHKu7
You're correct on that.  To me personally I like the older version. The new bracket mounts do not look good aesthetically.

I don't like the new brackets much either. Chicagoland has the same problem when retofitting their trombone trusses; the signal used to be hung from a plumbizer at the end of the truss (shown in the 2007 capture: https://goo.gl/maps/TNqDFpaVZtnLNGuQ8), but as they retrofitted this intersection at 127th and Ridgeland with new signal bodies, they left almost the whole plumbizer on and it just looks awkward (https://goo.gl/maps/GWm8uBj1ABYmm4dW6).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 08, 2023, 05:25:26 AM
I definitely prefer mast-arm signals to be mounted on brackets, I think signals hanging on a chain looks a bit lazy, and they blow around too much.

That said, agencies do sometimes make a mess of bracket-mounted mast-arm signals. That Illinois signal above and, to a lesser extent, the NJ signal posted by roadman65, aren't particularly pleasing to look at. The exposed wiring in the NJ example, and the leftover mounting equipment in the Illinois example, aren't great, though I prefer the location of the signal now at that Illinois example; before it looks a bit awkward hanging that low.

In whatever way it may be applicable, I think more agencies should take a page out of Japan's design manual; the horizontal signals may be odious to some, but I'll be damned if the installations aren't super tidy: https://goo.gl/maps/VQ3rEmrWx4tBi4637. I do wish more post-mounted signals were used, though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on June 08, 2023, 11:38:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 08, 2023, 05:25:26 AM
I definitely prefer mast-arm signals to be mounted on brackets, I think signals hanging on a chain looks a bit lazy, and they blow around too much.

That said, agencies do sometimes make a mess of bracket-mounted mast-arm signals. That Illinois signal above and, to a lesser extent, the NJ signal posted by roadman65, aren't particularly pleasing to look at. The exposed wiring in the NJ example, and the leftover mounting equipment in the Illinois example, aren't great, though I prefer the location of the signal now at that Illinois example; before it looks a bit awkward hanging that low.

In whatever way it may be applicable, I think more agencies should take a page out of Japan's design manual; the horizontal signals may be odious to some, but I'll be damned if the installations aren't super tidy: https://goo.gl/maps/VQ3rEmrWx4tBi4637. I do wish more post-mounted signals were used, though.

Give me that with the Minnesota style right and left hand supplementals, and it'd be great. Honestly, New Mexico is probably the closest there is right now to that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: lepidopteran on June 09, 2023, 12:14:06 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on June 07, 2023, 08:07:25 PM
This one always intrigued me -- A twin 5-segment setup on a single mast:
Look at this one in Toledo.
https://goo.gl/maps/DYXC8StV234dgtUu7 (https://goo.gl/maps/DYXC8StV234dgtUu7)
If you go back a few years, before they made the switch to black heads with backplates (they seem to be replacing them all over the state), they old yellow signal heads were the same way.  One shown is a doghouse, but I think that was originally an inline-5 like the others as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on June 18, 2023, 08:41:09 PM
Traffic signals mounted on scaffolding. 8th Ave at W 38th St in Manhattan.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.754543,-73.9917618,3a,75y,48.4h,96.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXHjldLXS_h1LThKDprzzhw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7547265,-73.9916731,3a,75y,129.74h,96.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjOTcLNHUHb_5mUHkT1EVBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&entry=ttu

Only in New York.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on June 22, 2023, 08:28:02 PM
these are old traffic lights at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0333108,-85.3135411,3a,61.5y,125.22h,83.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s775E1IgaBGsa-EmN64DLOQ!2e0!5s20230501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 22, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on June 22, 2023, 08:28:02 PM
these are old traffic lights at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0333108,-85.3135411,3a,61.5y,125.22h,83.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s775E1IgaBGsa-EmN64DLOQ!2e0!5s20230501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

What catches my eye at that intersection is this 2-section signal with a right turn red arrow, next to a normal signal. Can't really say that I've seen that before.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/i8qsutfL4D3eG4n96
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 22, 2023, 10:14:25 PM
Quote from: plain on June 22, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on June 22, 2023, 08:28:02 PM
these are old traffic lights at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0333108,-85.3135411,3a,61.5y,125.22h,83.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s775E1IgaBGsa-EmN64DLOQ!2e0!5s20230501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

What catches my eye at that intersection is this 2-section signal with a right turn red arrow, next to a normal signal. Can't really say that I've seen that before.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/i8qsutfL4D3eG4n96

That looks like a slightly different configuration of a doghouse or a side-by-side.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on June 22, 2023, 11:07:30 PM
Quote from: plain on June 22, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on June 22, 2023, 08:28:02 PM
these are old traffic lights at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0333108,-85.3135411,3a,61.5y,125.22h,83.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s775E1IgaBGsa-EmN64DLOQ!2e0!5s20230501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

What catches my eye at that intersection is this 2-section signal with a right turn red arrow, next to a normal signal. Can't really say that I've seen that before.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/i8qsutfL4D3eG4n96

I think that's a yellow, so it's a really wonky doghouse.

If it weren't for that, the inline-5 right turn signal on one of the other legs would be the weirdest thing in that intersection, considering everything else is a doghouse.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 22, 2023, 11:15:21 PM
Quote from: Hobart on June 22, 2023, 11:07:30 PM
Quote from: plain on June 22, 2023, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: UnumProvident101 on June 22, 2023, 08:28:02 PM
these are old traffic lights at this intersection in Chattanooga, TN
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0333108,-85.3135411,3a,61.5y,125.22h,83.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s775E1IgaBGsa-EmN64DLOQ!2e0!5s20230501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

What catches my eye at that intersection is this 2-section signal with a right turn red arrow, next to a normal signal. Can't really say that I've seen that before.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/i8qsutfL4D3eG4n96

I think that's a yellow, so it's a really wonky doghouse.

If it weren't for that, the inline-5 right turn signal on one of the other legs would be the weirdest thing in that intersection, considering everything else is a doghouse.

Taking a real close look, yeah you're right, it is yellow. The shadow caused by the angle of the signal probably threw me off.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on June 23, 2023, 11:19:23 AM
Last month, I filmed these signals in East Lansing, Michigan.
https://youtu.be/1qcn5X3F0hI
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 29, 2023, 01:51:38 AM
Bus signals with the word "BUS" used in a few places near Brossard, Québec. These two below look like they operate as left turn signals:
Other observations:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on June 29, 2023, 12:48:40 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.9814996,-81.1485885,3a,43.8y,109.18h,100.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sD6-Xmv1PiSeCm8vqr4RrVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

It appears that Georgia has been adopting double-red arrows for single-lane protected lefts in recent years. I've seen a few around Metro Atlanta and here in Savannah on GSV.

In South Carolina, they are used nearly all the time for the same applications. (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0652357,-80.9567507,3a,28.3y,65.27h,96.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sITbU62jhe-k1jYhCC4jZBg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)

They used to be used in North Carolina up until the late-2000s, the last one I've seen like it in NC was removed sometime between 2019 and 2022 (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8812508,-78.8415786,3a,16.5y,78.03h,92.65t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdu03Ebj83xxaSseKCfsJng!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)

There was also one I was able to find near Bridgeport, OH that was also removed around the same time as the NC one. (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0727541,-80.7454964,3a,49.1y,295.6h,98.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRzx8LIygXBK9zjoQneh7Cg!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)

I know Texas frequently uses the double-reds for protected lefts, but are there any others around?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on June 29, 2023, 06:05:49 PM
Looks like MoDOT is slowly phasing out the median mounted signals. Saw them being replaced at a few locations along MO 340. I actually like having the left turn signal vertically mounted with the rest overhead; wish they kept this configuration.
(https://i.imgur.com/xyreO3S.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on June 29, 2023, 06:15:08 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 29, 2023, 06:05:49 PM
Looks like MoDOT is slowly phasing out the median mounted signals. Saw them being replaced at a few locations along MO 340. I actually like having the left turn signal vertically mounted with the rest overhead; wish they kept this configuration.
(https://i.imgur.com/xyreO3S.jpg)

NJ is taking out the median mounted signals as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on June 29, 2023, 06:17:27 PM
^^ Median mounted signals are too accident prone.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on June 29, 2023, 08:41:09 PM
Those new MoDOT signals look very sharp.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on June 30, 2023, 12:08:07 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 29, 2023, 06:17:27 PM
^^ Median mounted signals are too accident prone.

Someone should probably tell that to Maryland.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2023, 02:25:58 AM
Many countries around the world rely on median-mounted signals. While they are accident prone by virtue of being at ground-level, American agencies seem to place them too close to the nose of the median where they will logically be knocked down more often, as they are closer to where traffic is turning and may be clipped. I also notice that American agencies seem to place the signals in medians that are too narrow, and then use too large of signal mountings.

British Columbia uses median-mounted signals very frequently, mostly for left turn signals. BC seems to have more luck, though, as medians in BC are usually wide enough to keep the signals from being clipped, but the signals are also typically a couple meters back from the nose of the median, out of the turning radius of vehicles. Example here (https://goo.gl/maps/MUNnKAkhHh6Q69yG8), installed in 2009 (note that the post-mounted signals were previously 8-8-8 but BC is converting all signals to 12-12-12).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Lukeisroads on June 30, 2023, 08:20:46 AM
Kern county is phasing them out too
Before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4194456,-119.0128588,3a,75y,5.95h,91.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLoRtsgfcpc2w-9urSH1BEw!2e0!5s20220401T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
After:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4194444,-119.0128567,3a,75y,5.95h,91.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfvVObPWLAAhnJX5oX9eqwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Another intersection before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4265116,-119.0124059,3a,75y,7.81h,94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5MlDKLCdUP64cosZvzWLQQ!2e0!5s20220401T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
After:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4265082,-119.0124093,3a,75y,7.81h,94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1N_zfncZeFibXWw-mt5clQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1N_zfncZeFibXWw-mt5clQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D208.85532%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on June 30, 2023, 09:36:55 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on June 30, 2023, 08:20:46 AM
Kern county is phasing them out too
...
Another intersection before:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4265116,-119.0124059,3a,75y,7.81h,94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5MlDKLCdUP64cosZvzWLQQ!2e0!5s20220401T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
After:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4265082,-119.0124093,3a,75y,7.81h,94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1N_zfncZeFibXWw-mt5clQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D1N_zfncZeFibXWw-mt5clQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D208.85532%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

This intersection was quite unusual, the approach that had the median-mounted left turn signal also had two overhead through signals (for only two lanes) and no far-right supplemental signal. In most states this is normal, but California always uses "through [lanes] minus one" for overhead signals, with a far-right mast-mounted through signal in its place; intersections without far-right supplemental signals are very, very rare. The current setup is California-standard, with only a single overhead through signal (but three total, including the stop-line signal).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 02, 2023, 06:57:54 PM
Does anyone know if any Florida cities/towns still use 12-8-8 signals? Minus Key West anyway since they have several 8-8-8 signals. I'm from Tampa, which used to have a couple dozen but they all got replaced with 12-12-12s between roughly 2010 - 2014. Interestingly, a lot of said replaced signals have subsequently been replaced by mast arms. This intersection is a good example:

- 2008 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/KUeCeDZMP8uZbnHr6
- 2011 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/N9vwq1W2HyQsPjxE8
- 2022 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/gj1xs4MQ8MRnEfsk8

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 02, 2023, 08:52:30 PM
Quote from: SilverMustang2011 on July 02, 2023, 06:57:54 PM
Does anyone know if any Florida cities/towns still use 12-8-8 signals? Minus Key West anyway since they have several 8-8-8 signals. I'm from Tampa, which used to have a couple dozen but they all got replaced with 12-12-12s between roughly 2010 - 2014. Interestingly, a lot of said replaced signals have subsequently been replaced by mast arms. This intersection is a good example:

- 2008 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/KUeCeDZMP8uZbnHr6
- 2011 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/N9vwq1W2HyQsPjxE8
- 2022 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/gj1xs4MQ8MRnEfsk8



Wow, that Florida mast-arm looks identical to some recent New York State DOT installations. Very crude looking, but I guess cost-effective.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 02, 2023, 09:26:48 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 02, 2023, 08:52:30 PM
Quote from: SilverMustang2011 on July 02, 2023, 06:57:54 PM
Does anyone know if any Florida cities/towns still use 12-8-8 signals? Minus Key West anyway since they have several 8-8-8 signals. I'm from Tampa, which used to have a couple dozen but they all got replaced with 12-12-12s between roughly 2010 - 2014. Interestingly, a lot of said replaced signals have subsequently been replaced by mast arms. This intersection is a good example:

- 2008 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/KUeCeDZMP8uZbnHr6
- 2011 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/N9vwq1W2HyQsPjxE8
- 2022 GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/gj1xs4MQ8MRnEfsk8


Wow, that Florida mast-arm looks identical to some recent New York State DOT installations. Very crude looking, but I guess cost-effective.

They've been installed all over Tampa, I'm pretty sure I could send in 15 GSV links of them. Cost-effective like you said since it's all on one arm, and I would think it's better against storms than the older span wires they replace. They definitely lead to some....interesting looking installations though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on July 04, 2023, 02:08:38 AM
Interesting signal pattern I found today. It's on Page Ave just west of the I-170 interchange in the St Louis area. The design has 4-bulbs, with straight and right turn arrows. Normally, MoDOT uses those when both arrows light up at the same time. But in this case, it's also used for protected right turns while the straight movement is red.

(https://i.imgur.com/pNwVUdL.jpg)
Green right arrow only. Note red ball on overhead signal

(https://i.imgur.com/fB88kFx.jpg)
Yellow ball when that green right arrow turns red. A bimodal green/yellow right arrow would be the equivalent that's more commonly used in some other states.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 10:58:36 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wvBF6AU2Brij2GXJA
I see the two section pedestrian heads are still being used.

The signal is part of a very recent DDI project in Woodbury, NY.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on July 04, 2023, 11:11:47 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 04, 2023, 10:58:36 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/wvBF6AU2Brij2GXJA
I see the two section pedestrian heads are still being used.

The signal is part of a very recent DDI project in Woodbury, NY.

Two-section ped heads are still allowed per MUTCD. But I'd guess probably 90% (or greater) of agencies choose the single-section combined display for new installations nowadays.

Zooming really close, it looks like the top section is combined hand/walking man symbols and the bottom is the countdown, which is also an allowable display (but again, seems rare for new installs and was likely more common for retrofitting countdowns into existing installations).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 05, 2023, 05:15:42 AM
I would be curious to know which agencies install two-head ped signals.

Off the top of my head:

* Washington DC (DDOT) definitely uses two-head ped signals; typical setup seems to be WALK with an always-on countdown on the lower display.
* British Columbia MOT uses two-head ped signals, though some agencies use single-head ped signals (Vancouver proper for example).

Besides BC, I don't think any other agencies in the Pacific Northwest use two-head ped signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 05, 2023, 07:39:03 AM
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0baH4bGTwh7KysMqsySgDUVM5L6brEdNqA4A87zi75GgKKL3fKPYpBdsBv6Z1smxHl&id=100063566321766
Something of a novelty to use, but in reality it may work.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on July 05, 2023, 04:28:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 05, 2023, 05:15:42 AM
I would be curious to know which agencies install two-head ped signals.

Off the top of my head:

* Washington DC (DDOT) definitely uses two-head ped signals; typical setup seems to be WALK with an always-on countdown on the lower display.
* British Columbia MOT uses two-head ped signals, though some agencies use single-head ped signals (Vancouver proper for example).

Besides BC, I don't think any other agencies in the Pacific Northwest use two-head ped signals.

Virginia still uses two-head in I believe all but the district that includes the Fredericksburg area. Localities are about a 50/50 mix I would say.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 10, 2023, 11:05:21 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Update on this signal. Passed by it last Friday and the flashing circular green was changed back to a flashing circular yellow, like it was with the older signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2446125,-71.00188,3a,75y,65.42h,87.85t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKbSomKcmnkCsLTZ_ldciGg!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). I'll post a video and update this when I get the chance.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 10, 2023, 09:12:25 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 10, 2023, 11:05:21 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Update on this signal. Passed by it last Friday and the flashing circular green was changed back to a flashing circular yellow, like it was with the older signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2446125,-71.00188,3a,75y,65.42h,87.85t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKbSomKcmnkCsLTZ_ldciGg!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). I'll post a video and update this when I get the chance.

I'm sorry they changed it back to flashing yellow. I actually liked the flashing green though I admit it serves no real purpose. Also, re: the side street signal, how can it go from flashing yellow to steady-red? Doesn't the MUTCD require a steady-yellow change interval?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on July 10, 2023, 10:57:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 10, 2023, 09:12:25 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 10, 2023, 11:05:21 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Update on this signal. Passed by it last Friday and the flashing circular green was changed back to a flashing circular yellow, like it was with the older signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2446125,-71.00188,3a,75y,65.42h,87.85t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKbSomKcmnkCsLTZ_ldciGg!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). I'll post a video and update this when I get the chance.

I'm sorry they changed it back to flashing yellow. I actually liked the flashing green though I admit it serves no real purpose. Also, re: the side street signal, how can it go from flashing yellow to steady-red? Doesn't the MUTCD require a steady-yellow change interval?

A new flashing green appearing in Massachusetts was quite the thing while it lasted...so many have gone away over the years. 
There is a problem with all directions having yellow at the same time that they probably wanted to avoid, although there were bigger problems like the main drag having flashing green while the side street had flashing yellow at the same time--yikes! The old setup (which included fun 12-12-8 and 12-8 signals) had a 12-inch red at the top for steady and an 8-inch red for flashing for the side street as I recall...no yellow at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 11, 2023, 12:38:05 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/ts6QEzY3JEzj6Qs17
What signal companies manufacture the infamous NYC click boxes?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 12, 2023, 08:05:01 PM
Found two all-8 inch traffic light on GSV in Jacksonville, FL today one block away from each other:

https://goo.gl/maps/3CjyNEmN2eEpEgfA8

https://goo.gl/maps/DuD6cVzmeas68mXC9

Mildly interesting since outside of Key West, 8 inch signals in Florida are few and far between. This state also loves to replace/modernize traffic signals, but here the mounting hardware and a couple of the signals appear to have been there for a while.


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on July 13, 2023, 06:45:31 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/pruj3jTib9cCS4Bf8
Interesting green arrows with a second unlit section.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 13, 2023, 06:54:50 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 13, 2023, 06:45:31 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/pruj3jTib9cCS4Bf8
Interesting green arrows with a second unlit section.
Seen that in New York before.  I believe the upper section is a yellow light in case it goes into flash mode.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on July 15, 2023, 05:32:08 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 05, 2023, 05:15:42 AM
I would be curious to know which agencies install two-head ped signals.

Off the top of my head:

* Washington DC (DDOT) definitely uses two-head ped signals; typical setup seems to be WALK with an always-on countdown on the lower display.
* British Columbia MOT uses two-head ped signals, though some agencies use single-head ped signals (Vancouver proper for example).

Besides BC, I don't think any other agencies in the Pacific Northwest use two-head ped signals.

I'm pretty sure NYSDOT and several cities in NY still use two-head pedestrian signals. Other than there and DC, I can't think of anywhere else in the US that still uses them. Many states still have older two-head pedestrian signals though.

Vancouver used to use two-head pedestrian signals (2009 StreetView (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2109766,-123.0756769,3a,15y,118.1h,86.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9Z4zygIoXfmHMgXaFCQ08A!2e0!5s20090401T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu)), but instead of the orange hand being on top of the walking man, the hand was to the left of the walking man. Victoria (which now uses the 16" pedestrian signals common in the US and Vancouver) used to do the same thing according to some old 1980s photos I can't find right now.

Coquitlam, BC is actively replacing 16" pedestrian signals with two-head 12" pedestrian signals. This is the opposite of what is happening in the US.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 15, 2023, 03:05:33 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on July 15, 2023, 05:32:08 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 05, 2023, 05:15:42 AM
I would be curious to know which agencies install two-head ped signals.

Off the top of my head:

* Washington DC (DDOT) definitely uses two-head ped signals; typical setup seems to be WALK with an always-on countdown on the lower display.
* British Columbia MOT uses two-head ped signals, though some agencies use single-head ped signals (Vancouver proper for example).

Besides BC, I don't think any other agencies in the Pacific Northwest use two-head ped signals.

I'm pretty sure NYSDOT and several cities in NY still use two-head pedestrian signals. Other than there and DC, I can't think of anywhere else in the US that still uses them. Many states still have older two-head pedestrian signals though.

Vancouver used to use two-head pedestrian signals (2009 StreetView (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2109766,-123.0756769,3a,15y,118.1h,86.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9Z4zygIoXfmHMgXaFCQ08A!2e0!5s20090401T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu)), but instead of the orange hand being on top of the walking man, the hand was to the left of the walking man. Victoria (which now uses the 16" pedestrian signals common in the US and Vancouver) used to do the same thing according to some old 1980s photos I can't find right now.

Coquitlam, BC is actively replacing 16" pedestrian signals with two-head 12" pedestrian signals. This is the opposite of what is happening in the US.

This intersection in Maitland, FL (Suburb of Orlando) has three two-head and one single-head pedestrian signals. It's the only place I know of in FL that hasn't phased them out.

https://goo.gl/maps/Y4kVEASko4MY9RuA7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on July 18, 2023, 09:26:14 PM
I just found out about this one in the Forest Hills section of Queens;
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7176978,-73.8410104,3a,75y,329.97h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31uNNAiwZaJR3A8ZmkkyEQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu
I've been struggling to sort out the categories for specific apartment buildings in that section of the Five Boroughs.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Revive 755 on July 18, 2023, 10:12:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 05, 2023, 05:15:42 AM
I would be curious to know which agencies install two-head ped signals.

Not sure any of the following still use two-section ped signals:

* Iowa City, IA (https://goo.gl/maps/Ycd3HuGzBsC6NSr97)
* Bloomington, IL (https://goo.gl/maps/eY2GipHKBuD1jR7L6)
* Champaign, IL (https://goo.gl/maps/rKfTbwJ16bRFCqMP6)
* They were used on IL 15 through Mt. Vernon (https://goo.gl/maps/m8kLDXXKdep3pycLA) when the signal were upgraded to using flashing yellow arrows.
* Belleville, IL (https://goo.gl/maps/PvZ7RAj43aSi8qjy6)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on July 20, 2023, 03:32:44 PM
Found these McCain PV beacon clusters in Grand Ledge, Michigan.
https://youtu.be/BO5hrMrtrpY
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RoadsByArco on July 23, 2023, 10:29:28 PM
does anyone know how state agencies determine where traffic signal structures are typically placed? caltrans txdot fdot and other dots seem to all have different standards? does anyone know how they know whether to place the traffic signal on the sidewalk or outside? thanks
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 23, 2023, 10:39:23 PM
Quote from: RoadsByArco on July 23, 2023, 10:29:28 PM
does anyone know how state agencies determine where traffic signal structures are typically placed? caltrans txdot fdot and other dots seem to all have different standards? does anyone know how they know whether to place the traffic signal on the sidewalk or outside? thanks
Heh.  Sometimes, it's just a matter of where they'll squeeze in.  Just was working on a project where surveys from a few decades ago misplaced the highway boundary (just using a general distance from the centerline rather than actual property ownership...oy vey) causing just this sort of issue.  NYSDOT likes to avoid ROW takings for typical projects due to their adding another year into the project schedule, so engineers just figure out what they can get away with.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 24, 2023, 07:43:41 PM
California usually hangs the overhead signal arm from a street light pole. New York State DOT and Nassau County DPW typically site the poles wherever they will fit and still be positioned properly related to the dimensions/geometry of the intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on July 27, 2023, 11:25:06 PM
both of these intersections in Red Bank, TN have new traffic lights
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1227338,-85.2977813,3a,49y,134.44h,89.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPl3gzZvkGeSla027X4j20w!2e0!5s20230601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1217753,-85.2957346,3a,47.1y,279.31h,90.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sl1mF9jgqGHedVzybo9da3g!2e0!5s20230601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: burgess87 on July 28, 2023, 03:22:39 PM
College Station, TX - using one signal on a dual left turn lane to a frontage road:  <R <R Y <G <G

One arrow for each lane, it appears!

https://goo.gl/maps/JwcYGwyBodBRs5g39
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 28, 2023, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: burgess87 on July 28, 2023, 03:22:39 PM
College Station, TX - using one signal on a dual left turn lane to a frontage road:  <R <R Y <G <G

One arrow for each lane, it appears!

https://goo.gl/maps/JwcYGwyBodBRs5g39

States that use two signal heads for one lane (GA off the top of my head) are sweating bullets just looking at that thing
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 28, 2023, 07:48:46 PM
This signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JPidnPLFRfCTBqNU6) in Union City NJ shows the lengths the city will go to to avoid replacing signals. This portion of Central Avenue has been totally redone, but the old signals remain. They also added what looks like a 360 degree detection camera, which looks weird on this old signal. I'm surprised if this signal is actuated, I assumed everything around here was pre-timed.

It also looks like the pole was originally a guy-wire design but a standard arm was retrofitted at some point.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on July 29, 2023, 12:33:42 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 28, 2023, 07:48:46 PM
This signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JPidnPLFRfCTBqNU6) in Union City NJ shows the lengths the city will go to to avoid replacing signals. This portion of Central Avenue has been totally redone, but the old signals remain. They also added what looks like a 360 degree detection camera, which looks weird on this old signal. I'm surprised if this signal is actuated, I assumed everything around here was pre-timed.

It also looks like the pole was originally a guy-wire design but a standard arm was retrofitted at some point.

I mean... if it ain't broke, don't fix it?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on July 29, 2023, 08:13:50 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 28, 2023, 07:48:46 PM
This signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JPidnPLFRfCTBqNU6) in Union City NJ shows the lengths the city will go to to avoid replacing signals. This portion of Central Avenue has been totally redone, but the old signals remain. They also added what looks like a 360 degree detection camera, which looks weird on this old signal. I'm surprised if this signal is actuated, I assumed everything around here was pre-timed.

It also looks like the pole was originally a guy-wire design but a standard arm was retrofitted at some point.
Paving and signal contracts are typically let separately, albeit not always.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on July 29, 2023, 08:29:06 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 28, 2023, 07:48:46 PM
This signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JPidnPLFRfCTBqNU6) in Union City NJ shows the lengths the city will go to to avoid replacing signals. This portion of Central Avenue has been totally redone, but the old signals remain. They also added what looks like a 360 degree detection camera, which looks weird on this old signal. I'm surprised if this signal is actuated, I assumed everything around here was pre-timed.

It also looks like the pole was originally a guy-wire design but a standard arm was retrofitted at some point.



The camera is a police closed circuit camera for detecting and recording crime and incidents. Doesn't have connection to the signal.

The signal itself is in good shape, so why does it need to be replaced? It's just a housing unit. The lights themselves have been upgraded to LEDs. The intersection is missing a second light per direction which is really the only main issue here.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 29, 2023, 09:06:25 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 29, 2023, 08:29:06 AM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on July 28, 2023, 07:48:46 PM
This signal (https://goo.gl/maps/JPidnPLFRfCTBqNU6) in Union City NJ shows the lengths the city will go to to avoid replacing signals. This portion of Central Avenue has been totally redone, but the old signals remain. They also added what looks like a 360 degree detection camera, which looks weird on this old signal. I'm surprised if this signal is actuated, I assumed everything around here was pre-timed.

It also looks like the pole was originally a guy-wire design but a standard arm was retrofitted at some point.



The camera is a police closed circuit camera for detecting and recording crime and incidents. Doesn't have connection to the signal.

The signal itself is in good shape, so why does it need to be replaced? It's just a housing unit. The lights themselves have been upgraded to LEDs. The intersection is missing a second light per direction which is really the only main issue here.


Well that in itself should result in either a rebuild or adding of an add'l signal head in each direction. The Manual requires two signal faces in each direction for good reasons. This requirement is not new. The signal should have been upgraded long ago.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 29, 2023, 09:11:16 PM
Quote from: SilverMustang2011 on July 28, 2023, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: burgess87 on July 28, 2023, 03:22:39 PM
College Station, TX - using one signal on a dual left turn lane to a frontage road:  <R <R Y <G <G

One arrow for each lane, it appears!

https://goo.gl/maps/JwcYGwyBodBRs5g39

States that use two signal heads for one lane (GA off the top of my head) are sweating bullets just looking at that thing

Never understood why two turn lanes can only have one signal; every exclusive movement should have two signals, especially double turns (ideally more than five feet apart ... looking at you Georgia :/). Worth noting that Georgia only requires two signal heads on protected-only left turns, permissive is allowed to have only one. Never understood that exception.

For years, Utah was a big abuser of double left turns with only one overhead signal. I think that practice has ended though. Shame MUTCD permits it at all.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on July 29, 2023, 09:31:03 PM
^^ Georgia requires 2 red turn arrows for protected left turns, but is usually done by 2 signal heads, though a single T-head with 2 red arrows is occasionally used to meet that requirement.  And MUTCD calls for a minimum 8' separation (center to center).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 29, 2023, 09:38:30 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2023, 09:31:03 PM
^^ Georgia requires 2 red turn arrows for protected left turns, but is usually done by 2 signal heads, though a single T-head with 2 red arrows is occasionally used to meet that requirement.  And MUTCD calls for a minimum 8' separation (center to center).

I believe the eight-foot separation rule between signal heads only applies to the two circular-green heads for the thru movement. I checked this out after observing several installations in New York City where the left or right turn signal head was hung right next to the thru movement head on mast-arms, separated by only a couple of feet. It's getting to be a common sight in Midtown Manhattan. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 29, 2023, 09:51:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 29, 2023, 09:11:16 PM
For years, Utah was a big abuser of double left turns with only one overhead signal. I think that practice has ended though. Shame MUTCD permits it at all.

Yeah, design standards seem to have been updated to require 2 overhead signals for any double left turns in the last 6 years or so. However, there are still a huge number of intersections across the Wasatch Front that still use the old way and UDOT is certainly in no hurry to upgrade them.



Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2023, 09:31:03 PM
^^ Georgia requires 2 red turn arrows for protected left turns, but is usually done by 2 signal heads, though a single T-head with 2 red arrows is occasionally used to meet that requirement.  And MUTCD calls for a minimum 8' separation (center to center).

That 8 foot separation is definitely not always followed. Here's a prime example: https://goo.gl/maps/UGPFs8Mp29xZVte8A
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on July 29, 2023, 10:17:08 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 29, 2023, 09:38:30 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2023, 09:31:03 PM
^^ Georgia requires 2 red turn arrows for protected left turns, but is usually done by 2 signal heads, though a single T-head with 2 red arrows is occasionally used to meet that requirement.  And MUTCD calls for a minimum 8' separation (center to center).

I believe the eight-foot separation rule between signal heads only applies to the two circular-green heads for the thru movement. I checked this out after observing several installations in New York City where the left or right turn signal head was hung right next to the thru movement head on mast-arms, separated by only a couple of feet. It's getting to be a common sight in Midtown Manhattan.

I believe the rule is that same-type signals have to be eight feet apart, but unrelated signals can be adjacent (example in Los Angeles (https://goo.gl/maps/5L6JBApS9vTeSF5R6) of a right and left turn display right next to each other). This makes sense, as there could be situations where unrelated signals may need to be placed right next to each other due to limited space (especially post-mounted situations), where it may be infeasible or unnecessary to keep them eight feet apart.

Maryland seems to require more than eight feet, seemingly twelve or more feet.

Quote from: US 89 on July 29, 2023, 09:51:46 PM
That 8 foot separation is definitely not always followed. Here's a prime example: https://goo.gl/maps/UGPFs8Mp29xZVte8A

That is a prime example...of when a through signal should just go on the signal mast. But since it's not downtown Atlanta, that doesn't seem to be allowed (not literally...just barely ever see post-mounted signals in Georgia outside of downtown Atlanta).

Kind of related: I don't understand why that second required protected-only left turn arrow/signal isn't more often post-mounted on the far left corner. Why not spread them out? Why make them both equally invisible when another vehicle could block them? Every other state that requires a second left turn signal puts it on the far left corner, with South Carolina being the exception I believe.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on July 30, 2023, 01:56:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 29, 2023, 10:17:08 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 29, 2023, 09:51:46 PM
That 8 foot separation is definitely not always followed. Here's a prime example: https://goo.gl/maps/UGPFs8Mp29xZVte8A

That is a prime example...of when a through signal should just go on the signal mast. But since it's not downtown Atlanta, that doesn't seem to be allowed (not literally...just barely ever see post-mounted signals in Georgia outside of downtown Atlanta).

Kind of related: I don't understand why that second required protected-only left turn arrow/signal isn't more often post-mounted on the far left corner. Why not spread them out? Why make them both equally invisible when another vehicle could block them? Every other state that requires a second left turn signal puts it on the far left corner, with South Carolina being the exception I believe.

^ In this case, it might be to avoid confusion with the dedicated signals for the bike path to the left. But even if that weren't there I doubt they'd mount the second left turn signal over there. At any rate, from my own experience with that intersection in particular, there is zero reason that should be fully protected. Honestly fully permissive (no arrow movements at all) would be fine 90% of the time.

Georgia's standards for left turn signals are basically identical to South Carolina's, with the T-head very common for single-lane protected lefts to cover the requirement for two red arrows. Far-post signals of any kind are quite rare in Georgia, with the exception of downtown Atlanta as you stated.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on July 30, 2023, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: US 89 on July 30, 2023, 01:56:25 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 29, 2023, 10:17:08 PM
Quote from: US 89 on July 29, 2023, 09:51:46 PM
That 8 foot separation is definitely not always followed. Here's a prime example: https://goo.gl/maps/UGPFs8Mp29xZVte8A

That is a prime example...of when a through signal should just go on the signal mast. But since it's not downtown Atlanta, that doesn't seem to be allowed (not literally...just barely ever see post-mounted signals in Georgia outside of downtown Atlanta).

Kind of related: I don't understand why that second required protected-only left turn arrow/signal isn't more often post-mounted on the far left corner. Why not spread them out? Why make them both equally invisible when another vehicle could block them? Every other state that requires a second left turn signal puts it on the far left corner, with South Carolina being the exception I believe.

^ In this case, it might be to avoid confusion with the dedicated signals for the bike path to the left. But even if that weren't there I doubt they'd mount the second left turn signal over there. At any rate, from my own experience with that intersection in particular, there is zero reason that should be fully protected. Honestly fully permissive (no arrow movements at all) would be fine 90% of the time.

Georgia's standards for left turn signals are basically identical to South Carolina's, with the T-head very common for single-lane protected lefts to cover the requirement for two red arrows. Far-post signals of any kind are quite rare in Georgia, with the exception of downtown Atlanta as you stated.

Far-post signals are pretty rare in general in the Southeast, I didn't realize how common they could be until I went out to Arizona and California.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on July 31, 2023, 03:53:15 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on July 10, 2023, 10:57:25 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 10, 2023, 09:12:25 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on July 10, 2023, 11:05:21 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on September 14, 2022, 11:11:57 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 14, 2022, 07:45:44 PM
Interesting.........where is the recent flashing green installation in Quincy?

Could this be the one? If so, this is on School St at Hancock St (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2445917,-71.001906,3a,75y,59.3h,83.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYYQ3dOj_96Wte8vxp41GGg%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D108.1307%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hhhyUuWb8c

Update on this signal. Passed by it last Friday and the flashing circular green was changed back to a flashing circular yellow, like it was with the older signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2446125,-71.00188,3a,75y,65.42h,87.85t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sKbSomKcmnkCsLTZ_ldciGg!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu). I'll post a video and update this when I get the chance.

I'm sorry they changed it back to flashing yellow. I actually liked the flashing green though I admit it serves no real purpose. Also, re: the side street signal, how can it go from flashing yellow to steady-red? Doesn't the MUTCD require a steady-yellow change interval?

A new flashing green appearing in Massachusetts was quite the thing while it lasted...so many have gone away over the years. 
There is a problem with all directions having yellow at the same time that they probably wanted to avoid, although there were bigger problems like the main drag having flashing green while the side street had flashing yellow at the same time--yikes! The old setup (which included fun 12-12-8 and 12-8 signals) had a 12-inch red at the top for steady and an 8-inch red for flashing for the side street as I recall...no yellow at all.

Here is what this intersection looks like now with the flashing greens removed. Unsure if the controller got replaced too when the heads were replaced:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlgJHc3LFNo

Also, found some interseting things in the latest editions of the Massachusetts Amendments to the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (https://www.mass.gov/doc/massachusetts-amendments-to-the-mutcd-2022/download), discuraging the use and installation of any new or reconstructed bi-modal green / yellow arrow indications, and requiring the FYA to be used at locations where PPLT is to be used with a dedicated left turning lane, making any shared signal indications no longer permitted for PPLT use in MA. Wonder why the FYA requirement doesn't extend to approaches that are fully permissive (no protected phase) with a dedicated left turning lane?

QuoteSection 4D.06 Signal Indications — Design, Illumination, Color, and Shape
Insert the following paragraph:
Guidance: New or reconstructed signal installations should not use alternate display (bimodal, or dual-arrow signal section) of a GREEN ARROW and a YELLOW ARROW.

QuoteSection 4D.20 Signal Indications for Protected/Permissive Mode Left-Turn Movements
Insert the following paragraph:
Standard: Where a mandatory left-turn lane exists and the signal operates with a protected/permissive mode for left turns on that approach, a shared signal face shall not be used. A separate left-turn signal face with a flashing left-turn yellow arrow signal face per Paragraph 03 of this section shall be provided.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on July 31, 2023, 08:12:19 PM
V-e-r-y i-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g. I'm pleasantly surprised to see Massachusetts taking such a forward thinking approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 13, 2023, 10:22:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?

I believe the MUTCD does not permit dark signals. In my area fire station signals normally show flashing yellow or steady green between activations. But we do have some legacy installations in a few places that have dark signals like the one in your Edison, N.J. photo.

But the concept of no dark signals permitted has been blown sky high by the new HAWK signals. On one hand the FHWA says no dark signals, but on the other hand allows dark HAWK signals. So the concept has been lost.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on August 13, 2023, 10:34:58 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?

Many in jersey have two 12 inch heads for the typical red and yellow, and then an 8 in flashing yellow on the bottom. That should either have the green illuminated or have a flashing yellow instead of the green
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PurdueBill on August 13, 2023, 11:51:22 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 13, 2023, 10:22:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?

I believe the MUTCD does not permit dark signals. In my area fire station signals normally show flashing yellow or steady green between activations. But we do have some legacy installations in a few places that have dark signals like the one in your Edison, N.J. photo.

But the concept of no dark signals permitted has been blown sky high by the new HAWK signals. On one hand the FHWA says no dark signals, but on the other hand allows dark HAWK signals. So the concept has been lost.

Is it only an optical illusion, or is the green on the left for the eastbound signals? 

At least a couple approaches have FIRE SIGNAL signs, but a couple also do not.  Those that do have signs that are faded so much as to not be very useful anyway.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on August 14, 2023, 03:29:43 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 13, 2023, 10:22:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?

I believe the MUTCD does not permit dark signals. In my area fire station signals normally show flashing yellow or steady green between activations. But we do have some legacy installations in a few places that have dark signals like the one in your Edison, N.J. photo.

But the concept of no dark signals permitted has been blown sky high by the new HAWK signals. On one hand the FHWA says no dark signals, but on the other hand allows dark HAWK signals. So the concept has been lost.

HAWKs are beacons, not signals, so they are legally allowed to rest in dark. Yeah, that's dumb as hell. As though anyone would know the difference on the road.

I think emergency signals may also be considered beacons, so they can legally rest in dark. But I could have that wrong. I've never actually seen a rest-in-dark emergency signal before. I'm convinced the NJ signal above may just be broken.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2023, 08:22:18 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 14, 2023, 03:29:43 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on August 13, 2023, 10:22:33 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 13, 2023, 10:08:33 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/nKwZ8go9T9gNZAsa8
This Emergency Signal has no indications that it's such a signal. Plus it doesn't flash or stay green when no EMS vehicle is leaving the fire house.

In my home state of Florida a signal that is not working by law is a four way stop.  Some other states have the same law as well. NJ, though, I'm not sure, but I am aware that many firehouse or EMS facilities that have signals do not display a red green yellow and only operate during an emergency. Many emergency signals don't even have three sections, but just two. One for the red and the other for yellow with not even a third section for a second ( bottom) yellow.

Does the MUTCD allow the way some NJ communities with a complete non working signal, or is a green or bottom flasher supposed to be. Plus, aren't emergency signals to be signed?

I believe the MUTCD does not permit dark signals. In my area fire station signals normally show flashing yellow or steady green between activations. But we do have some legacy installations in a few places that have dark signals like the one in your Edison, N.J. photo.

But the concept of no dark signals permitted has been blown sky high by the new HAWK signals. On one hand the FHWA says no dark signals, but on the other hand allows dark HAWK signals. So the concept has been lost.

HAWKs are beacons, not signals, so they are legally allowed to rest in dark. Yeah, that's dumb as hell. As though anyone would know the difference on the road.

I think emergency signals may also be considered beacons, so they can legally rest in dark. But I could have that wrong. I've never actually seen a rest-in-dark emergency signal before. I'm convinced the NJ signal above may just be broken.

The manual specifies that emergency signals are traffic signals and must meet the standard requirements. However, an Emergency Vehicle Hybrid Beacon which is almost the same as a HAWK beacon is also permitted, which can rest in dark.

Also, I don't think that signal in Edison is broken. I have seen legacy signals like that in the past in New Jersey. That signal looks very old as does Edison's Headquarters Fire Station. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 08:56:29 PM
Don't forget about rail road signals. They rest in dark while having no amber either.

Some older drawbridges in Florida used red flashers similar to railroad flashers. They would be dark until the bridge tender operates the bridge raising procedures.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on August 14, 2023, 09:03:33 PM
^^ MUTCD allows for 2 kinds of drawbride signals - the standard RYG signal that shows green when the bridge is not in operation, and 2 vertical red beacons separated by a stop here on red sign which flash alternately when the drawbridge is in operation and dark when not.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 09:19:07 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 14, 2023, 09:03:33 PM
^^ MUTCD allows for 2 kinds of drawbride signals - the standard RYG signal that shows green when the bridge is not in operation, and 2 vertical red beacons separated by a stop here on red sign which flash alternately when the drawbridge is in operation and dark when not.

And Newark, NJ used to used standard red yellow green heads, but flashed them when the bridges were lowered. Don’t know if they still flash. Heck don’t even know if large vessels use the Passaic River anymore through Newark as the NJ 3 drawbridge in Clifton ( 5 or so miles upstream from Newark) was removed for a fixed span a while ago. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on August 14, 2023, 09:21:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 08:56:29 PM
Don't forget about rail road signals. They rest in dark while having no amber either.

Some older drawbridges in Florida used red flashers similar to railroad flashers. They would be dark until the bridge tender operates the bridge raising procedures.

Railroad signals are a separate category of signals. Yes, they rest-in-dark but are completely different in appearance from standard traffic signals.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 09:31:41 PM
I see the gate lowering process on CSX crossings require separate lowering of opposing gates. The right side comes down before the left.  I’m guessing that’s either CSX or FDOT, and not the MUTCD implementing this to avoid vehicles getting trapped between gates, especially when many drivers are trying to spare shock absorbers abuse or wheel alignment costs by creeping across the tracks.

I live in Florida and been noticing this new process ar local grade crossings.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on August 14, 2023, 10:26:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 09:19:07 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 14, 2023, 09:03:33 PM
^^ MUTCD allows for 2 kinds of drawbride signals - the standard RYG signal that shows green when the bridge is not in operation, and 2 vertical red beacons separated by a stop here on red sign which flash alternately when the drawbridge is in operation and dark when not.

And Newark, NJ used to used standard red yellow green heads, but flashed them when the bridges were lowered. Don't know if they still flash. Heck don't even know if large vessels use the Passaic River anymore through Newark as the NJ 3 drawbridge in Clifton ( 5 or so miles upstream from Newark) was removed for a fixed span a while ago.

There's usually a 30ft clearance under the bridge, but it doesn't even matter since the union ave bridge after that is a low fixed span. The commerical traffic on the passaic river is zero, especially after the industry in Passaic slowed down
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 14, 2023, 11:20:01 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on July 29, 2023, 09:38:30 PM
Quote from: Big John on July 29, 2023, 09:31:03 PM
^^ Georgia requires 2 red turn arrows for protected left turns, but is usually done by 2 signal heads, though a single T-head with 2 red arrows is occasionally used to meet that requirement.  And MUTCD calls for a minimum 8' separation (center to center).

I believe the eight-foot separation rule between signal heads only applies to the two circular-green heads for the thru movement. I checked this out after observing several installations in New York City where the left or right turn signal head was hung right next to the thru movement head on mast-arms, separated by only a couple of feet. It's getting to be a common sight in Midtown Manhattan. 

https://goo.gl/maps/brfS4P9euJtUestH6
They got it right at this intersection. The two heads are at least 8 feet apart.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on August 28, 2023, 08:34:22 AM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52082265243
What are these pole bases called?

In NJ and NYC they seem to be the norm. I always assumed they're breakaway just like freeway light poles are to break free if a vehicle hits one.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:24:26 PM
Could anyone say for sure if this new signal is compliant? The shared signal seems odd.

WSDOT resignalized the intersection of US-101 and WA-105 (https://goo.gl/maps/mdRDidJZg3CQpVPQ6), just south of the Chehalis River in Aberdeen. The project added a crosswalk (the one in the foreground).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53172351188_479c0bd4fd_o.jpg)
US-101 / WA-105 traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2p1EcvE) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on September 07, 2023, 10:34:33 PM
The side signal counts toward the 2-signal requirement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SkyPesos on September 07, 2023, 10:38:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:24:26 PM
Could anyone say for sure if this new signal is compliant?

WSDOT resignalized the intersection of US-101 and WA-105 (https://goo.gl/maps/mdRDidJZg3CQpVPQ6), just south of the Chehalis River in Aberdeen. The project added a crosswalk (the one in the foreground).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53172351188_479c0bd4fd_o.jpg)
US-101 / WA-105 traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2p1EcvE) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
What's the reason for a protected left turn using an option lane here? Sounds counterintuitive to me (though MoDOT does it a bit in the STL area too).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:42:15 PM
Quote from: Big John on September 07, 2023, 10:34:33 PM
The side signal counts toward the 2-signal requirement.

I was thinking the shared signal, sorry. Should have been more specific in my OP.

Quote from: SkyPesos on September 07, 2023, 10:38:12 PM
What's the reason for a protected left turn using an option lane here? Sounds counterintuitive to me (though MoDOT does it a bit in the STL area too).

This was my confusion with the setup. I don't know why they don't use either a double left with a single through lane on the right, or a single left (probably FYA) with two through lanes on the right. The whole thing could have still been signalized to allow for a pedestrian crossing. But instead they create this weird middle lane situation where literally zero people will ever use it. Unless they get lucky and time it perfectly.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on September 08, 2023, 06:47:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:42:15 PM
Quote from: Big John on September 07, 2023, 10:34:33 PM
The side signal counts toward the 2-signal requirement.

I was thinking the shared signal, sorry. Should have been more specific in my OP.

Quote from: SkyPesos on September 07, 2023, 10:38:12 PM
What's the reason for a protected left turn using an option lane here? Sounds counterintuitive to me (though MoDOT does it a bit in the STL area too).

This was my confusion with the setup. I don't know why they don't use either a double left with a single through lane on the right, or a single left (probably FYA) with two through lanes on the right. The whole thing could have still been signalized to allow for a pedestrian crossing. But instead they create this weird middle lane situation where literally zero people will ever use it. Unless they get lucky and time it perfectly.

My only response to the middle lane is that perhaps there are times when traffic is heavy enough that warrant the two lanes.  There could be one part of the day when the left turn is the heavier movement, and one time of day when the striaght is the heavier movements.

So under normal operation, it seems that the middle lane is mainly useful for left turning traffic, since a person waiting to turn left will need to wait for the green, and straight traffic will just take the right lane which will always be green, except when a pedestrian is crossing.  However, if there is a backup in the right lane - will it not be better to sty in the middle lane (to flow straight into the left lane of WA 105) even if you are behind someone turning left?  How about if there is noboby in front of you?

The situation can speak to any situation where there is a middle option lane that is not split phasing.  (Obviolulsy with split phasing, green stragiht and green arrow are lit at exactly the same time.)  There will be some times when people traveing in the option lane will be blocked by people ahead of them, but having the option helps to even out the flow of traffic.

Now in this specific situation, it doesn't seem necessary as the 101 movement is much heavier, so it might as well be: Left, left, straignt.  But down below on Bowery at Manhattan Bridge, with far heavier traffic and a heavy left movement in the afternoon and a heavy straight movement in the mornings (and no room to widen the street), the option lane (with a permissive left) is the only reasonable compromisse:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7167779,-73.995796,3a,33.3y,216.92h,88.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sya5VTAlXavIA-jf4cwtNtw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Now it is true that with permissive lefts, it is possible for someone in the middle lane to make their left on a regular green (and not hold up traffic behind them) but realistically with NYC traffic, that is rare and so effectively people are only turning at the lagging left arrow.  And if you are in the middle lane, you can go either left or straight.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 09, 2023, 04:22:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:24:26 PM
Could anyone say for sure if this new signal is compliant? The shared signal seems odd.

WSDOT resignalized the intersection of US-101 and WA-105 (https://goo.gl/maps/mdRDidJZg3CQpVPQ6), just south of the Chehalis River in Aberdeen. The project added a crosswalk (the one in the foreground).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53172351188_479c0bd4fd_o.jpg)
US-101 / WA-105 traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2p1EcvE) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

I don't think the MUTCD envisions scenarios like this, so compliance might not be achievable... But I would think that it's not really compliant, because you have a through movement (the shared lane) where there is only one signal head for the through movement–the right lane signals being controlled separately doesn't count (in my opinion). Perhaps if both the shared signal and the left turn signal were both using circular red indications, it would be closer to compliant...


The setup is a bit odd though. With the crosswalk on this near side, all vehicular traffic has to stop when a pedestrian is crossing. I keep thinking that they could have put the pedestrian crossing on the far side instead–this would have allowed both directions of US 101 to go at the same time as pedestrians crossing the WA 105 leg.

It appears the only reason that the crosswalk was put on the near (west) side is to provide a signalized crossing for the Chehalis River Trail. However, it seems like maybe they could have routed the trail to cross underneath the bridge instead, which would likely be better for the trail users than needing to cross the highway at grade.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on September 09, 2023, 06:52:20 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 09, 2023, 04:22:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 07, 2023, 10:24:26 PM
Could anyone say for sure if this new signal is compliant? The shared signal seems odd.

WSDOT resignalized the intersection of US-101 and WA-105 (https://goo.gl/maps/mdRDidJZg3CQpVPQ6), just south of the Chehalis River in Aberdeen. The project added a crosswalk (the one in the foreground).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53172351188_479c0bd4fd_o.jpg)
US-101 / WA-105 traffic signal (https://flic.kr/p/2p1EcvE) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr

I don't think the MUTCD envisions scenarios like this, so compliance might not be achievable... But I would think that it's not really compliant, because you have a through movement (the shared lane) where there is only one signal head for the through movement–the right lane signals being controlled separately doesn't count (in my opinion). Perhaps if both the shared signal and the left turn signal were both using circular red indications, it would be closer to compliant...


The setup is a bit odd though. With the crosswalk on this near side, all vehicular traffic has to stop when a pedestrian is crossing. I keep thinking that they could have put the pedestrian crossing on the far side instead–this would have allowed both directions of US 101 to go at the same time as pedestrians crossing the WA 105 leg.

It appears the only reason that the crosswalk was put on the near (west) side is to provide a signalized crossing for the Chehalis River Trail. However, it seems like maybe they could have routed the trail to cross underneath the bridge instead, which would likely be better for the trail users than needing to cross the highway at grade.

Per https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/part4d.htm#figure4D09 , Standard 01 C, "The shared signal face shall always simultaneously display the same color of circular indication that the adjacent through signal face or faces display.

So if I understand this correctly, this light *shouldn't* be compliant because the option lane must have a green thru signal whenever the thru lane has a green signal.

Why I highlight shouldn't: In the standard they state "circular indication".  At the intersection, the right lane is using a straight up arrow.  I think Washington is trying to sidestep the intent of the guidance here by claiming the standard doesn't apply since the right lane is using a straight arrow green, not a circular green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on September 10, 2023, 05:13:53 PM
^ I think you're right, both with the citation of the shared signal face standard that applies (which I was too lazy to look for yesterday) and the interpretation on how WA is sidestepping the intent of the standard.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 10, 2023, 05:38:52 PM
Thanks for the replies, everyone.

Quote from: mrsman on September 08, 2023, 06:47:30 AM
Now in this specific situation, it doesn't seem necessary as the 101 movement is much heavier, so it might as well be: Left, left, straignt.  But down below on Bowery at Manhattan Bridge, with far heavier traffic and a heavy left movement in the afternoon and a heavy straight movement in the mornings (and no room to widen the street), the option lane (with a permissive left) is the only reasonable compromisse:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7167779,-73.995796,3a,33.3y,216.92h,88.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sya5VTAlXavIA-jf4cwtNtw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Now it is true that with permissive lefts, it is possible for someone in the middle lane to make their left on a regular green (and not hold up traffic behind them) but realistically with NYC traffic, that is rare and so effectively people are only turning at the lagging left arrow.  And if you are in the middle lane, you can go either left or straight.

I think this kind of setup (Bowery approach to Manhattan Bridge) would have been a good solution here. Unfortunately, WSDOT would be unlikely to ever intentionally use a permissive setup with more than one lane; I say intentionally because double left turns on red are common for on-ramps, and I've never seen any signed for no-turn-on-red.



Quote from: roadfro on September 09, 2023, 04:22:46 PM
The setup is a bit odd though. With the crosswalk on this near side, all vehicular traffic has to stop when a pedestrian is crossing. I keep thinking that they could have put the pedestrian crossing on the far side instead–this would have allowed both directions of US 101 to go at the same time as pedestrians crossing the WA 105 leg.

It appears the only reason that the crosswalk was put on the near (west) side is to provide a signalized crossing for the Chehalis River Trail. However, it seems like maybe they could have routed the trail to cross underneath the bridge instead, which would likely be better for the trail users than needing to cross the highway at grade.

I noticed this as well, it is pretty frustrating. I hope it's an all-way walk, at least.



Quote from: roadfro on September 10, 2023, 05:13:53 PM
^ I think you're right, both with the citation of the shared signal face standard that applies (which I was too lazy to look for yesterday) and the interpretation on how WA is sidestepping the intent of the standard.

I'm going to agree with this assessment as well.

Reminds me of how Japan will signalize a protected turn: red orbs, but with green arrows for the directions that can go. Example (https://goo.gl/maps/cQjdB7DgrPC7gBFEA).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 17, 2023, 06:30:02 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53179253649
Check this one out on the NB I-49 Exit 86 ramp in Bentonville, AR. Two mast arms in opposing directions.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 17, 2023, 06:38:11 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 17, 2023, 06:30:02 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53179253649
Check this one out on the NB I-49 Exit 86 ramp in Bentonville, AR. Two mast arms in opposing directions.

You see that on occasion. University Drive/US 72 here in Huntsville, AL, used to have a 4-way mast-arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7407256,-86.6654801,3a,75y,326.96h,92.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg65Mjg97K9H8rGXTfnvm1Q!2e0!5s20131101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu) in the median of it just east of Research Park Boulevard/AL 255 prior to the site of Madison Square Mall being redeveloped into MidCity Huntville.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on September 17, 2023, 06:58:59 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 17, 2023, 06:38:11 PM
University Drive/US 72 here in Huntsville, AL, used to have a 4-way mast-arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7407256,-86.6654801,3a,75y,326.96h,92.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg65Mjg97K9H8rGXTfnvm1Q!2e0!5s20131101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu) in the median of it just east of Research Park Boulevard/AL 255 prior to the site of Madison Square Mall being redeveloped into MidCity Huntville.

Kind of unrelated, but I find it quite peculiar how the left turn (slightly west of the original signal) was unsignalized, despite its very close proximity to the main signal.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Dirt Roads on September 17, 2023, 08:33:11 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 17, 2023, 06:38:11 PM
University Drive/US 72 here in Huntsville, AL, used to have a 4-way mast-arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7407256,-86.6654801,3a,75y,326.96h,92.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg65Mjg97K9H8rGXTfnvm1Q!2e0!5s20131101T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu) in the median of it just east of Research Park Boulevard/AL 255 prior to the site of Madison Square Mall being redeveloped into MidCity Huntville.

Quote from: jakeroot on September 17, 2023, 06:58:59 PM
Kind of unrelated, but I find it quite peculiar how the left turn (slightly west of the original signal) was unsignalized, despite its very close proximity to the main signal.

It is even stranger how the left turn signals (slightly east of the original signal) (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7405339,-86.6644493,3a,25.1y,289.02h,86.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1shQj50KCKrKMvYhx9GdHvWA!2e0!5s20170301T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu) are mounted on the mast that is entirely over the opposing lanes.  One of those signal does line up with the leftmost turn lane, but this doesn't look Kosher.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on September 18, 2023, 05:56:45 PM
^
Then there's this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1604343,-77.591638,3a,37.5y,31.24h,90.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1socceNR0FFAF7WtYCNkkIYQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&entry=ttu) strange assembly in downtown Rochester, NY. They could have used one mast arm for that. Both signal heads are for the same approach.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on September 19, 2023, 08:35:15 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 17, 2023, 06:30:02 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53179253649
Check this one out on the NB I-49 Exit 86 ramp in Bentonville, AR. Two mast arms in opposing directions.

In North Carolina, they seem to like using the butterfly mast arms for their superstreet intersections.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2158859,-78.0189599,3a,89.9y,352.37h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swZdVPr4678ep7z1QXKbDfg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 19, 2023, 03:49:59 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53199779885/in/dateposted-public/
Here is one in Hutchinson, KS using all three direction arrows rather than a green ball.  Though the side mount is a green ball.

Although I know what is being done here using the right overhead the way they are, but it still seems odd seeing it this way.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on September 19, 2023, 08:43:13 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 19, 2023, 03:49:59 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53199779885/in/dateposted-public/
Here is one in Hutchinson, KS using all three direction arrows rather than a green ball.  Though the side mount is a green ball.

Although I know what is being done here using the right overhead the way they are, but it still seems odd seeing it this way.

That looks ridiculous. A green-ball would have been better for the right-overhead.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 20, 2023, 09:46:14 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 19, 2023, 08:43:13 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on September 19, 2023, 03:49:59 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53199779885/in/dateposted-public/
Here is one in Hutchinson, KS using all three direction arrows rather than a green ball.  Though the side mount is a green ball.

Although I know what is being done here using the right overhead the way they are, but it still seems odd seeing it this way.

That looks ridiculous. A green-ball would have been better for the right-overhead.

Perhaps.  Yet it wouldn't convey the same information.  A green left arrow tells the driver that his turn is protected.  If we assume the driver is only paying attention to the signal in front of his lane (which a policy of signal head per lane seems to assume), then a green ball wouldn't convey that same information.

Which makes me wonder...  Is this split-phasing only?  I don't see how, given the stoplight set up, opposing traffic could have a green light at the same time.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on September 20, 2023, 09:50:53 AM
Quote from: kphoger on September 20, 2023, 09:46:14 AM
Quote from: SignBridge on September 19, 2023, 08:43:13 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on September 19, 2023, 03:49:59 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53199779885/in/dateposted-public/
Here is one in Hutchinson, KS using all three direction arrows rather than a green ball.  Though the side mount is a green ball.

Although I know what is being done here using the right overhead the way they are, but it still seems odd seeing it this way.

That looks ridiculous. A green-ball would have been better for the right-overhead.

Perhaps.  Yet it wouldn't convey the same information.  A green left arrow tells the driver that his turn is protected.  If we assume the driver is only paying attention to the signal in front of his lane (which a policy of signal head per lane seems to assume), then a green ball wouldn't convey that same information.

Which makes me wonder...  Is this split-phasing only?  I don't see how, given the stoplight set up, opposing traffic could have a green light at the same time.

It's split phased. I drove the set up last week.

Also a green ball with green left would suffice in the right lane. Being it's split phased, it would convey that both lanes are indeed protected.

In my home state a doghouse would be used in this set up for the right signal head. Even with the yellow left and yellow balls working together, it wouldn't matter the redundant use of two different ambers.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on September 20, 2023, 10:36:09 AM
Yes, a green ball plus green left arrow would suffice.

At any rate, it looks very Missouri to my eyes.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: UnumProvident101 on September 20, 2023, 10:11:28 PM
the traffic light at this intersection looks a little strange to me
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2005856,-85.1587974,3a,42.8y,56.49h,89.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWX_jZfd0ewKULcJ17gK8vA!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on September 20, 2023, 10:12:19 PM
^^ frankensignal
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: bcroadguy on September 30, 2023, 05:01:54 AM
This existing doghouse signal in Atlanta was modified to have a flashing yellow arrow.
Looks like they replaced the green arrow with a bimodal green / flashing yellow arrow.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/uPAnPcfnwhBmWFqY8?g_st=ic
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on September 30, 2023, 06:19:27 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on September 30, 2023, 05:01:54 AM
This existing doghouse signal in Atlanta was modified to have a flashing yellow arrow.
Looks like they replaced the green arrow with a bimodal green / flashing yellow arrow.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/uPAnPcfnwhBmWFqY8?g_st=ic
Atlanta has a good few of those. I believe Minnesota uses them some as well.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on September 30, 2023, 07:33:34 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 30, 2023, 06:19:27 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on September 30, 2023, 05:01:54 AM
This existing doghouse signal in Atlanta was modified to have a flashing yellow arrow.
Looks like they replaced the green arrow with a bimodal green / flashing yellow arrow.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/uPAnPcfnwhBmWFqY8?g_st=ic
Atlanta has a good few of those. I believe Minnesota uses them some as well.
First used in Minnesota.  Eau Claire WI also uses them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on September 30, 2023, 08:32:17 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on September 30, 2023, 06:19:27 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on September 30, 2023, 05:01:54 AM
This existing doghouse signal in Atlanta was modified to have a flashing yellow arrow.
Looks like they replaced the green arrow with a bimodal green / flashing yellow arrow.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/uPAnPcfnwhBmWFqY8?g_st=ic
Atlanta has a good few of those. I believe Minnesota uses them some as well.

Some of the Atlanta ones aren't even bimodal - that is, the flashing yellow section can't ever be green.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2023, 11:30:49 PM
Greetings from San Francisco!

I saw this bicycle signal on the north approach to the Golden Gate Bridge.  There was some maintenance equipment on the east sidewalk, but even more on the west walk.  The views are better on the east anyway.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53233434305_908e819fb9_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2p74goR)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2023, 11:39:17 PM
Also in Sausalito, I found a deactivated traffic light where they just turned the heads away.  If they were covered up, the hoods are long gone now.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/jAFbkGnfsfRYHJuk9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 04, 2023, 11:42:09 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on October 03, 2023, 11:39:17 PM
Also in Sausalito, I found a deactivated traffic light where they just turned the heads away.  If they were covered up, the hoods are long gone now.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/jAFbkGnfsfRYHJuk9

Nice find! Can't imagine California has too many abandoned traffic lights left standing like that.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on October 17, 2023, 01:57:52 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/W7vv3uK56EkJjFqKA
Unusual left and green arrows in the middle instead of a green ball.  The left and right heads display both a ball and arrow that is also odd as there are no separate signals here or any protected turns.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/E9obb3sprUeDeER49
Also never seen before detector loops like this being completely round.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on October 17, 2023, 08:42:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 17, 2023, 01:57:52 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/E9obb3sprUeDeER49
Also never seen before detector loops like this being completely round.

Wow, really? These are crazy common where I'm from (WA). I think they're common in the West, generally.

Are they normally square back East?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 17, 2023, 08:49:01 PM
Loops are normally rectangular shaped here on Long Island. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: ErmineNotyours on October 22, 2023, 02:28:25 PM
I finally got a chance to photograph an old style weigh station messaging signal sign.  New installations have variable messaging, and even tells the driver the weight.  This one is northbound U.S. 101 heading in to Raymond, Washington.  Additionally, due to limited space, it's mounted behind the driver, so it's mirrored for viewing in the rear view mirror.  The scale house is normally boarded up, but one window was left uncovered.  I could see inside and saw a calendar for 1997.  It probably doesn't get used much.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53276522252_9f412fbd45_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2paS6Wu)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on October 22, 2023, 09:38:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 17, 2023, 08:42:42 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 17, 2023, 01:57:52 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/E9obb3sprUeDeER49
Also never seen before detector loops like this being completely round.

Wow, really? These are crazy common where I'm from (WA). I think they're common in the West, generally.

Are they normally square back East?

Detector loops arranged in a square layout (technically an octagon, but with much smaller sides at the corners so that the overall appearance is a square) is still very common in Nevada. It's only been in the last 5-10 years or so that new and reconstructed loops are being installed as circles.

I think square loops may have been a bit better in detecting lighter vehicles (like motorcycles favoring one side of the lane), but my understanding is that the corners on the loops were more susceptible to damage under repeated vehicle loads over time and/or as asphalt pavement deforms.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Rothman on October 22, 2023, 09:56:43 PM
NYSDOT has a policy of replacing all loops wirh video detection.  Certain Regions are more aggressive than others in implementing it.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 22, 2023, 10:30:06 PM
Nassau County DPW on Long Island is no longer installing detector loops. All new and rebuilt signals have motion detectors mounted on the mast-arms.

However in contrast to that modern practice, I have not yet seen a single flashing-yellow arrow on a Nassau County signal, though NYS DOT Region-10 is putting in a lot of them on state highways. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on October 27, 2023, 12:23:05 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5021666,-122.9972801,3a,75y,157.29h,85.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3eFTQ1Bpo-RfS2tte6mu2A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Double green balls on the four-section signal on this approach in Guerneville, California - it appears this approach was split phased initally with left and right arrows, and then it got changed to a fully permissive setup some time later.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on October 27, 2023, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on October 27, 2023, 12:23:05 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5021666,-122.9972801,3a,75y,157.29h,85.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3eFTQ1Bpo-RfS2tte6mu2A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Double green balls on the four-section signal on this approach in Guerneville, California - it appears this approach was split phased initally with left and right arrows, and then it got changed to a fully permissive setup some time later.

The fact that CalTrans or someone stuck the yellow reflective tape on the heavily faded backgrounds there is kind of amusing.

The fact that the mast-mounted signals on the one side there are all 12 inch while the rest mostly have 8 inch mast-mounted signals makes me think that side originally used arrow indications in all signals before being changed, I'm guessing to accomodate a pedestrian phase better.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on October 27, 2023, 02:50:20 PM
^^ Traffic can't go straight, so I think flashing yellow arrows would be more appropriate.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on October 27, 2023, 11:35:16 PM
Old 8in pedestrian signals got replaced with 12in heads instead of actual ped signals.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S2z28BibXSgAWwwP7
Also having 12in heads with no overheads just looks cool
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on October 28, 2023, 07:41:15 PM
Quote from: chrisg69911 on October 27, 2023, 11:35:16 PM
Old 8in pedestrian signals got replaced with 12in heads instead of actual ped signals.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S2z28BibXSgAWwwP7
Also having 12in heads with no overheads just looks cool

Very California-like.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 02, 2023, 01:35:12 PM
Quote from: chrisg69911 on October 27, 2023, 11:35:16 PM
Old 8in pedestrian signals got replaced with 12in heads instead of actual ped signals.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S2z28BibXSgAWwwP7
Also having 12in heads with no overheads just looks cool

Not pedestrian signals, those were actually just 8-inch side mounted signals, used for both traffic and pedestrians.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on November 06, 2023, 08:07:45 AM
Quote from: plain on November 02, 2023, 01:35:12 PM
Quote from: chrisg69911 on October 27, 2023, 11:35:16 PM
Old 8in pedestrian signals got replaced with 12in heads instead of actual ped signals.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S2z28BibXSgAWwwP7
Also having 12in heads with no overheads just looks cool

Not pedestrian signals, those were actually just 8-inch side mounted signals, used for both traffic and pedestrians.

Since it's oneway they now technically acting as ped signals
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on November 07, 2023, 09:24:17 PM
Found these left turn signals with an unusual lens layout.
https://youtu.be/DkYEBkTvmH8?si=h2zeFhVF90GQwpIj
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 08, 2023, 11:41:29 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JrEzR7zJJ1Sv48CAA
Here is a signal that uses two side by side heads rather than spaced apart. Plus it's a an old mast arm to boot that is why the heads have to be that way here.
No it's not a Google double image either.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/KxysRrEoCQU7ic6t8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on November 08, 2023, 11:44:22 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on November 07, 2023, 09:24:17 PM
Found these left turn signals with an unusual lens layout.
https://youtu.be/DkYEBkTvmH8?si=h2zeFhVF90GQwpIj

Reminds me of this signal in Ashland, VA.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/o6u1D3m2hnmGKPwG8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 08, 2023, 11:48:10 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ASCWaktWbg98k3s49
How about these odd looking cutout visors.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: paulthemapguy on November 08, 2023, 12:45:38 PM
I found a functioning set of 4-ways in La Rue, Ohio.  I can't believe this are still in use!

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eww3xkDjySPvtBb16
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on November 08, 2023, 03:19:18 PM
Quote from: plain on November 08, 2023, 11:44:22 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on November 07, 2023, 09:24:17 PM
Found these left turn signals with an unusual lens layout.
https://youtu.be/DkYEBkTvmH8?si=h2zeFhVF90GQwpIj

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3753263,-79.2874201,3a,15y,237.41h,89.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stdojWQHMcVMvGnIMArbcQw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

This signal in Georgetown, SC is similar

Reminds me of this signal in Ashland, VA.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/o6u1D3m2hnmGKPwG8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 08, 2023, 05:28:12 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 08, 2023, 11:48:10 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ASCWaktWbg98k3s49
How about these odd looking cutout visors.

Unrelated; I forgot just how much of a dead-ringer those old New Jersey horizontal signals are for Japanese signals, at least in terms of their placement and orientation (especially the back-to-back placement). Japanese signals are normally silver, with 250mm lenses, but otherwise it's just like Japan.

Example: https://maps.app.goo.gl/8XZ5F36K29SpuA4p8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on November 08, 2023, 11:20:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 08, 2023, 11:48:10 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ASCWaktWbg98k3s49
How about these odd looking cutout visors.

Looks like those are Marbelite signals, I believe those "fat cutaways" are exclusive to their signals, save for ones used as replacements on other heads of course.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on November 09, 2023, 04:54:33 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on November 08, 2023, 03:19:18 PM
Quote from: plain on November 08, 2023, 11:44:22 AM
Quote from: CJResotko on November 07, 2023, 09:24:17 PM
Found these left turn signals with an unusual lens layout.
https://youtu.be/DkYEBkTvmH8?si=h2zeFhVF90GQwpIj

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3753263,-79.2874201,3a,15y,237.41h,89.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stdojWQHMcVMvGnIMArbcQw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

This signal in Georgetown, SC is similar

Reminds me of this signal in Ashland, VA.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/o6u1D3m2hnmGKPwG8
There's also something similar to this in Portage, MI: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2195179,-85.5895203,3a,71.5y,259.45h,100.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHhLDQUKrCQhHSwSgBDwdPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on November 13, 2023, 03:31:35 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/4ToSXoDUBeuZp9nF6
New Jersey beats both California and Illinois here with three left turn signal heads for one left lane protection using a four section permissive signals. Usually two are only used for a single lane turn, even in New Jersey.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 14, 2023, 11:47:45 AM
Quote from: Big John on October 27, 2023, 02:50:20 PM
^^ Traffic can't go straight, so I think flashing yellow arrows would be more appropriate.

A similar setup closer to home in Cambridge, MA was converted to a FYA setup (albeit with seperate 3-section signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672503,-71.0776344,3a,75y,276.64h,78.64t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sLCC6JlybBnz4dTDFcHqZpA!2e0!5s20160901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu)) - previously, it used to use both steady left and right green arrows (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3672292,-71.077655,3a,75y,274.83h,79.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sq942x0baSJV1l1S1nrkTRg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu) while the oncoming traffic had a circular green.

The steady left/right green arrows (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.364778,-71.135458,3a,75y,331.17h,80.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sR4ph4YsSdAjZtp5vH9rvIw!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) while oncoming traffic has a circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.364778,-71.135458,3a,75y,133.5h,81.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sR4ph4YsSdAjZtp5vH9rvIw!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) setups still exist in some parts of Boston, like at Everett St at Soldiers Field Rd's jughandle. I once saw a driver on the Everett St approach get off-guard at this intersection - despite having green arrows for both left and right, the driver didn't expect oncoming traffic to also have a green as well.

There is also this setup in Brooklyn (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBOKFA-ZkFg&list=WL&index=2) at Atlantic Avenue & Euclid Avenue (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.680896,-73.8735137,3a,27.3y,352.34h,93.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snZcyto0FR__4kDvjj3suxQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu), but unlike the CA or MA examples, this example is two, one way streets intersecting with each other. It used to be circular green, but changed to a double FYA setup in the 2020s.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on November 14, 2023, 09:53:19 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on November 14, 2023, 11:47:45 AM
The steady left/right green arrows (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.364778,-71.135458,3a,75y,331.17h,80.05t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sR4ph4YsSdAjZtp5vH9rvIw!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) while oncoming traffic has a circular green (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.364778,-71.135458,3a,75y,133.5h,81.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sR4ph4YsSdAjZtp5vH9rvIw!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) setups still exist in some parts of Boston, like at Everett St at Soldiers Field Rd's jughandle. I once saw a driver on the Everett St approach get off-guard at this intersection - despite having green arrows for both left and right, the driver didn't expect oncoming traffic to also have a green as well.

At what point in history was it ever okay for there to be a left turn green arrow opposite a solid green orb? That completely defeats the point of a green arrow.

I've seen setups like this (I think...they may have been green orbs), but the oncoming traffic has a flashing yellow orb, not a solid green orb.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on November 14, 2023, 10:01:34 PM
I agree jakeroot. The whole principle of a green turn arrow is that it gives you an exclusive right-of-way for that specific movement. The signal will not (should not) clear any other movement that conflicts with the arrow movement and that includes pedestrian signals. A pedestrian will not (or should not)  get a walk signal if it conflicts with the arrow movement.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on November 14, 2023, 11:13:57 PM
I believe pre 1971 MUTCD allowed an all arrow indication that meant allowed movements and not protected movements. There were instances after that the signal indications were changed from 2 green arrows on a 4-section signal to a green ball and a blank section.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 02, 2023, 10:37:22 AM
This particular signal was posted in the New York thread

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lake+Success,+NY/@40.7684679,-73.6914672,3a,37.5y,154.93h,95.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4DTfFyqu-YtN0qS4gEdxqQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x89c289c5e4f90f9b:0x5074739adcfe6831!8m2!3d40.7698453!4d-73.7090428!10e5!16zL20vMHkybXQ?entry=ttu

I noticed a single aspect signal head on the same assembly as a three aspect head. Looks like NYSDOT added a bimodal arrow next to a regular signal. Strange for a NYSDOT install.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 03, 2023, 08:06:51 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on December 02, 2023, 10:37:22 AM
This particular signal was posted in the New York thread

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lake+Success,+NY/@40.7684679,-73.6914672,3a,37.5y,154.93h,95.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4DTfFyqu-YtN0qS4gEdxqQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x89c289c5e4f90f9b:0x5074739adcfe6831!8m2!3d40.7698453!4d-73.7090428!10e5!16zL20vMHkybXQ?entry=ttu

I noticed a single aspect signal head on the same assembly as a three aspect head. Looks like NYSDOT added a bimodal arrow next to a regular signal. Strange for a NYSDOT install.

Reminds me a bit of the vertical signals in Japan, just with the arrow in the opposite place:

(https://stat.ameba.jp/user_images/20160130/22/0-denzai-kyosan/2a/a4/j/o0800069513554117778.jpg)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 04, 2023, 09:51:25 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1EWSuYwsgbfPRfAA
What kind of a set up is this here? The FYLA is on top maybe?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on December 04, 2023, 09:57:24 PM
Sign says Left Turn Yield on Flashing Red Arrow After Stop.  Looks like Delaware is trying a left turn system fashioned from a HJAWK system.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 05, 2023, 12:02:39 AM
I can't find any permissive phasing in Google Street View. But I agree, looks like it might be designed to have adjacent flashing red arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on December 05, 2023, 12:36:03 PM
Quote from: Big John on December 04, 2023, 09:57:24 PM
Sign says Left Turn Yield on Flashing Red Arrow After Stop.  Looks like Delaware is trying a left turn system fashioned from a HJAWK system.

It's not "fashioned from a HAWK". It's a permissible signal head arrangement in the MUTCD.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2r3/images/fig4d_08.gif)
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 05, 2023, 09:31:17 PM
DE really needs to drop the flashing reds and get on board with the FYA. Seriously.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 05, 2023, 11:47:52 PM
Quote from: roadfro on December 05, 2023, 12:36:03 PM
Quote from: Big John on December 04, 2023, 09:57:24 PM
Sign says Left Turn Yield on Flashing Red Arrow After Stop.  Looks like Delaware is trying a left turn system fashioned from a HJAWK system.

It's not "fashioned from a HAWK". It's a permissible signal head arrangement in the MUTCD.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2r3/images/fig4d_08.gif)

This That four head signal must be one of the most rarely-used MUTCD-permitted features, of any chapter. Up there with the large painted "yield ahead" triangle.

edited for clarity.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 05, 2023, 11:51:53 PM
Isn't the flashing red left turn arrow also a thing in Maryland? Or have they abandoned that for the FYA?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 06, 2023, 12:12:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 05, 2023, 11:51:53 PM
Isn't the flashing red left turn arrow also a thing in Maryland? Or have they abandoned that for the FYA?

My understand is that Maryland continues to use the flashing red arrow alongside neighboring Delaware.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on December 06, 2023, 08:12:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2023, 12:12:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 05, 2023, 11:51:53 PM
Isn't the flashing red left turn arrow also a thing in Maryland? Or have they abandoned that for the FYA?

My understand is that Maryland continues to use the flashing red arrow alongside neighboring Delaware.

I thought I saw a flashing red used in Michigan before as well
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on December 06, 2023, 01:48:54 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/siGpVizZNPwjP6QN7
Here is still a 3M that has yet been phased out in use as of last Summer.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/R8cWT53yaWQ2gkrS8
Another signal with a 3M from past August.

Ironically the second example is at a NJDOT maintenance facility driveway.

Another rare find. The Google imagery captured the fiber optic arrow in a yellow phase in the four section permissive signal head.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/d2kqoaWywFdiEZFU6
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: chrisg69911 on December 06, 2023, 06:39:57 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 06, 2023, 01:48:54 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/siGpVizZNPwjP6QN7
Here is still a 3M that has yet been phased out in use as of last Summer.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/R8cWT53yaWQ2gkrS8
Another signal with a 3M from past August.

Ironically the second example is at a NJDOT maintenance facility driveway.

Another rare find. The Google imagery captured the fiber optic arrow in a yellow phase in the four section permissive signal head.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/d2kqoaWywFdiEZFU6

Only in Jersey will you have a ped signal with no crosswalk and a crosswalk with no ped signals, and both without curb cuts or ada bumps
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: epzik8 on December 07, 2023, 04:01:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2023, 12:12:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 05, 2023, 11:51:53 PM
Isn't the flashing red left turn arrow also a thing in Maryland? Or have they abandoned that for the FYA?

My understand is that Maryland continues to use the flashing red arrow alongside neighboring Delaware.

Indeed, I still have three in my county alone, including one just installed in 2020.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on December 07, 2023, 05:07:14 PM
NYSDOT uses flashing red arrow as well but it's extremely rare

Here's one in upstate on NY 104 that I had posted elsewhere in this thread.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2273522,-77.2820007,3a,37.5y,69.03h,102.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3-kkbgbf5rhPSylz1Uq9rw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&entry=ttu

Most of the signals along this stretch of NY 104 are protected left turn only but the signal just west of the flashing red arrow was recently updated with FYA.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on December 08, 2023, 01:18:48 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on December 06, 2023, 08:12:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2023, 12:12:38 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 05, 2023, 11:51:53 PM
Isn't the flashing red left turn arrow also a thing in Maryland? Or have they abandoned that for the FYA?

My understand is that Maryland continues to use the flashing red arrow alongside neighboring Delaware.

I thought I saw a flashing red used in Michigan before as well

Indeed, flashing red orbs have been all over Michigan for decades, slowly converting to flashing arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on December 10, 2023, 12:32:55 AM
Another rare NYSDOT flashing red left, but with louvered red orbs and bonus Nassau DPW syle mast arms. NYS has very few louvered red orbs for left turns remaining in service as it is.

106 at Hicksville LIRR, both sides of the bridge have them.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/LyQPLVgCnHzozUeP8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CoreySamson on December 11, 2023, 03:17:10 PM
I found this bizarre one-section traffic light in Vicksburg, MS on US 61 yesterday:

(https://imgur.com/0zWfGGo.jpg)

GSV of the intersection:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/tpAZ5wKzzWdn22sH9

The light stays on during the red phase but turns off completely when the other lights turn green, as can be seen in the GSV imagery.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on December 11, 2023, 06:27:19 PM
I've seen several intersections with those extra one-sections, but not many are still around. There used to be some on US 58 just east of I-95 at US 58 BUS in Emporia (gone by 2010).

https://maps.app.goo.gl/8ibwDWZro4EhpL2b8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Hobart on December 11, 2023, 11:22:15 PM
Regarding the single section heads, I know in Southern Alabama they had a few kicking around as of 2014, complete with strobe inside the head.

Here's one at the south end of Alabama 113; I'm not sure of any more, I haven't been to Alabama in years.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iaepTkVB54YLZxpS8
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 14, 2023, 12:07:54 AM
Quote from: Hobart on December 11, 2023, 11:22:15 PM
Regarding the single section heads, I know in Southern Alabama they had a few kicking around as of 2014, complete with strobe inside the head.

Here's one at the south end of Alabama 113; I'm not sure of any more, I haven't been to Alabama in years.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iaepTkVB54YLZxpS8

There's a good few around if you know where to look, though many of the strobes are long-dead, however. US 72 has a pair in Stevenson, and there's also a pair on Old Lee Highway just east of Cherokee. US 280 eastbound at I-459 has a very spectacular set-up of them, with multiple double red traffic lights as well. I know there used to be one on the south side of Dothan, but it's long-gone.

Talladega installed a few single-section 12 inch reds between some 8 inch signals on South Street a few years back, no doubt to improve visibility of the red (which the Mississippi example seems to basically do now, along with most here in Alabama these days). Tennessee seems to be a mix of putting the strobes in the reds of the signals and mounting the strobes in their own single-section red signal like Alabama.

Slightly unrelated, but the NYS&W in northern New Jersey still has a few crossings with strobe lights at them.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on December 16, 2023, 07:53:18 PM
I simply don't get these single section reds that were just posted above.  In what way are these signals hard to see that adding in an extra red aspect improves visibility?  This doesn't seem to have any positive function.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on December 16, 2023, 09:04:50 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 16, 2023, 07:53:18 PM
I simply don't get these single section reds that were just posted above.  In what way are these signals hard to see that adding in an extra red aspect improves visibility?  This doesn't seem to have any positive function.

Same reason why the MUTCD requires a signal over every lane and two signal faces minimum per direction: redundancy and, at least theoretically, the more red lights on the harder it is to miss them. In the case of Alabama (and a few other states), they were also done to house strobe tubes at the intersections. I suspect this was done to make the removal of the strobes easier if it was determined they were no longer needed, and also the fact that the earliest strobes used an 8 inch red lens surrounded by the strobe in a 12 inch lens, which basically made the reds a bit dimmer than they would be. I have some photos of some of these early examples lit-up, I'd have to go find 'em...

Also, here's the example I mentioned above on US 280:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4427611,-86.7313926,3a,45y,122.56h,95.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1D07hLTbVU6Rbkp7WvPKXg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 16, 2023, 09:47:22 PM
The Manual does require two signal faces for the thru movement but only recommends one over each lane under support (Sec. 4D.11.06) It is not required.

Another interesting point no one has mentioned is that strobes in traffic lights are prohibited by the MUTCD. (Sec. 4D.06.03) But at least one state, (New York) has an exception that specifically permits strobes in traffic signal heads and some good locations on Long Island have them. One such place is at the end of the Loop Pkwy. at Lido Blvd. in Point Lookout.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on December 18, 2023, 04:23:29 AM
The extra reds may add redundancy, but they improve actual visibility of signals very little, if at all.

Near-side and corner signals are still the best way to improve signal redundancy and visibility.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
I've seen this occasionally in Georgia as well. Here's an example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7ogzGfTG8P5rMAgS7) at US 27 and US 82 near Cuthbert.

That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on December 18, 2023, 07:41:03 PM
Looks like it was done to give right-turning traffic from the cross road a clear lane to turn into.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 18, 2023, 08:02:17 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
I've seen this occasionally in Georgia as well. Here's an example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7ogzGfTG8P5rMAgS7) at US 27 and US 82 near Cuthbert.

That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.

That seems overly excessive.  One other GSV is from 2008 showing the same condition. Maybe an accident long ago forced the redesign? 

Quote from: SignBridge on December 18, 2023, 07:41:03 PM
Looks like it was done to give right-turning traffic from the cross road a clear lane to turn into.

Although they don't have their own turn lane to turn into.  All it would take is a few cars at the stop line, or a single tractor trailer, and they won't be able to turn anyway.

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: lordsutch on December 18, 2023, 11:56:37 PM
Quote from: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.

The US 341 intersection with GA 540/GA 49 Connector northwest of Fort Valley has a similar layout, with the right lanes on GA 540 being used as dedicated right turn lanes and the left lanes as combined left and straight lanes, except here it's a four-way stop and the intersection has pavement for dedicated left turn lanes as well. It's really kind of a bodge and either should be replaced with an RCUT or a roundabout until GDOT finds funding for I-14.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Caps81943 on January 05, 2024, 05:32:32 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.06638,-81.16949,3a,75y,237.05h,91.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D329.6319%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Interesting six-head signal in SC
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 05:48:06 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 05, 2024, 05:32:32 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.06638,-81.16949,3a,75y,237.05h,91.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D329.6319%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Interesting six-head signal in SC
That same intersection also has what looks like a flashing red arrow setup for one of the left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0664741,-81.1696427,3a,75y,128.99h,101.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIKsNz47RYQ7PRflHxaF6ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 05, 2024, 06:54:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 05:48:06 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 05, 2024, 05:32:32 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.06638,-81.16949,3a,75y,237.05h,91.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D329.6319%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Interesting six-head signal in SC
That same intersection also has what looks like a flashing red arrow setup for one of the left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0664741,-81.1696427,3a,75y,128.99h,101.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIKsNz47RYQ7PRflHxaF6ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

In South Carolina (and Georgia, more recently), they use two reds for single-lane protected left turns. We don't have flashing red arrows.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 07:46:38 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 05, 2024, 06:54:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 05:48:06 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 05, 2024, 05:32:32 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.06638,-81.16949,3a,75y,237.05h,91.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D329.6319%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Interesting six-head signal in SC
That same intersection also has what looks like a flashing red arrow setup for one of the left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0664741,-81.1696427,3a,75y,128.99h,101.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIKsNz47RYQ7PRflHxaF6ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

In South Carolina (and Georgia, more recently), they use two reds for single-lane protected left turns. We don't have flashing red arrows.
That's interesting. Good idea though.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 05, 2024, 08:06:04 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 07:46:38 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on January 05, 2024, 06:54:33 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on January 05, 2024, 05:48:06 PM
Quote from: Caps81943 on January 05, 2024, 05:32:32 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.06638,-81.16949,3a,75y,237.05h,91.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwJ6QuKr6zIz91md6FjCX7Q%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D329.6319%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Interesting six-head signal in SC
That same intersection also has what looks like a flashing red arrow setup for one of the left turns.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0664741,-81.1696427,3a,75y,128.99h,101.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIKsNz47RYQ7PRflHxaF6ng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

In South Carolina (and Georgia, more recently), they use two reds for single-lane protected left turns. We don't have flashing red arrows.
That's interesting. Good idea though.

They used to be in North Carolina as well, but they were phased out.

There are a couple like it at the WV 622 interchange with I-64 outside Charleston, WV, they're at the left turn lanes onto both directions of I-64.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.4126177,-81.7973227,3a,41.3y,218.12h,89.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stETZscdEVjn65YBUTQ_oGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

There was one like it in Bridgeport, OH, but it was replaced a couple years ago.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0726911,-80.7453666,3a,23y,300.77h,93.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTP7dV2cdldu-UxImzfOqiA!2e0!5s20151001T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: lepidopteran on January 07, 2024, 12:24:33 AM
There used to be at least two of those lone-reds at the Lenoir City, TN exit of I-75 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/vMH54cJuLAZtHrdr6).  I'm not sure if it's the same exit, but I think the single-section head facing the off-ramp had a strobe that flashed when it was lit.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on January 07, 2024, 01:19:04 AM
Quote from: lepidopteran on January 07, 2024, 12:24:33 AM
There used to be at least two of those lone-reds at the Lenoir City, TN exit of I-75 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/vMH54cJuLAZtHrdr6).  I'm not sure if it's the same exit, but I think the single-section head facing the off-ramp had a strobe that flashed when it was lit.

Looks like they both had strobe tubes on them.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: JMAN_WiS&S on January 08, 2024, 02:01:22 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
I've seen this occasionally in Georgia as well. Here's an example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7ogzGfTG8P5rMAgS7) at US 27 and US 82 near Cuthbert.

That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.

Something I immediately noticed, 82 westbound has a left and right near-side signal with double reds for each. I wonder if there is a low driver complacency rate at this intersection. Usually, these types of intersections get prioritized for alternative intersections, mainly roundabouts if nothing else can be done to mitigate the red-running issue. 27 in both directions also gets a speed zone, 7 signal ahead signs, 3 sets of dual flashers including one overhead, and painted rumble strips. It seems the local agency here is trying everything in their power to increase awareness here without spending tons of money to reconstruct the intersection. I am a bit surprised to see that roadway lighting has not been implemented here on the approaches as an attempted solution.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on January 09, 2024, 11:03:08 AM
Quote from: JMAN_WiS&S on January 08, 2024, 02:01:22 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
I've seen this occasionally in Georgia as well. Here's an example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7ogzGfTG8P5rMAgS7) at US 27 and US 82 near Cuthbert.

That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.

Something I immediately noticed, 82 westbound has a left and right near-side signal with double reds for each. I wonder if there is a low driver complacency rate at this intersection. Usually, these types of intersections get prioritized for alternative intersections, mainly roundabouts if nothing else can be done to mitigate the red-running issue. 27 in both directions also gets a speed zone, 7 signal ahead signs, 3 sets of dual flashers including one overhead, and painted rumble strips. It seems the local agency here is trying everything in their power to increase awareness here without spending tons of money to reconstruct the intersection. I am a bit surprised to see that roadway lighting has not been implemented here on the approaches as an attempted solution.

I'd almost argue that there are too many signal ahead signs... You expect to see the actual signal by the time you get to the second set.

Yeah, they probably should install some overhead lighting as a mitigation. Around me, it's rare to encounter a permanent signal setup that does not have any overhead lighting at the intersection, even in rural areas.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on January 12, 2024, 04:54:24 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 09, 2024, 11:03:08 AM
Quote from: JMAN_WiS&S on January 08, 2024, 02:01:22 AM
Quote from: US 89 on December 18, 2023, 09:42:07 AM
I've seen this occasionally in Georgia as well. Here's an example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7ogzGfTG8P5rMAgS7) at US 27 and US 82 near Cuthbert.

That intersection also features what appears to be a case of traffic calming on a highway. US 27 is divided with two lanes each direction throughout southwestern Georgia, but on both approaches to the US 82 intersection, 27 is striped to lose one of its two lanes before promptly regaining it on the other side - even when the road cross section that is built would clearly support carrying both lanes through. I have never seen this anywhere else. Doesn't bother me too much since 27 is not a highly traveled road, but if that's used anywhere with more traffic I imagine it getting frustrating.

Something I immediately noticed, 82 westbound has a left and right near-side signal with double reds for each. I wonder if there is a low driver complacency rate at this intersection. Usually, these types of intersections get prioritized for alternative intersections, mainly roundabouts if nothing else can be done to mitigate the red-running issue. 27 in both directions also gets a speed zone, 7 signal ahead signs, 3 sets of dual flashers including one overhead, and painted rumble strips. It seems the local agency here is trying everything in their power to increase awareness here without spending tons of money to reconstruct the intersection. I am a bit surprised to see that roadway lighting has not been implemented here on the approaches as an attempted solution.

I'd almost argue that there are too many signal ahead signs... You expect to see the actual signal by the time you get to the second set.

Yeah, they probably should install some overhead lighting as a mitigation. Around me, it's rare to encounter a permanent signal setup that does not have any overhead lighting at the intersection, even in rural areas.

May even need to re-evaluate the intersection geometry. It looks like US 27 comes around the curve at 65 MPH before dropping down to 45 MPH, and US 82 crests a hill right before the signal.

Could it be that US 27 enables people to go too fast? What if they reduced the speed limit to 55 and 'undivided' US 27 and make it two-lanes through the bypass?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on January 31, 2024, 08:31:27 AM
Here is an interesting signal for a bus queue lane:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6548042,-75.6163846,3a,75y,244.77h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEFganywu3slmYpyze0W8Cg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The signal seems normal, but the operation is interesting.  At this split between US 13 and US 40 in Delaware, the signal will make it easier for buses in the right lane to continue onto US 13, which splits off to the left.  What is odd is that the queueing signal is way ahead of the normal signal, that controls the pedestrian crossing and allows for access from the fire station.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 08:06:02 AM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Ldaavj8fpKD5n23t9
Interesting look without the middle visor.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 04, 2024, 10:11:15 AM
Quote from: mrsman on January 31, 2024, 08:31:27 AM
Here is an interesting signal for a bus queue lane:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6548042,-75.6163846,3a,75y,244.77h,94.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEFganywu3slmYpyze0W8Cg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The signal seems normal, but the operation is interesting.  At this split between US 13 and US 40 in Delaware, the signal will make it easier for buses in the right lane to continue onto US 13, which splits off to the left.  What is odd is that the queueing signal is way ahead of the normal signal, that controls the pedestrian crossing and allows for access from the fire station.

I've seen that there for many years. No clue if it actually works. Seems like it doesn't have any normal controls such as those you mentioned.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: hotdogPi on February 04, 2024, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?

Tewksbury MA

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6242269,-71.2660291,3a,75y,340.49h,80.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUfSaMVIUVeJWSfTsMrCAoQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on February 04, 2024, 07:06:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?

There used to be at least one in Nevada on westbound Sahara Ave on the railroad bridge approaching I-15 in Las Vegas, but it was replaced at least 15 years ago in favor of Nevada's current standard "Prepare to Stop When Flashing" warning sign with yellow beacons.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on February 04, 2024, 11:16:10 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?
Pennsylvania uses them too. Here's a couple of photos of them I found:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/iccdude/5500681661
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2022-10-29_13_33_44_View_south_along_Pennsylvania_State_Route_309_%28West_End_Boulevard%29_just_south_of_Reservoir_Road_in_Richland_Township,_Bucks_County,_Pennsylvania.jpg
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on February 06, 2024, 08:02:44 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?

Henrico County, VA uses them in a few locations. Here's one on Parham Rd.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.584137,-77.570045,3a,20.581234y,150.39925h,92.78626t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sLSeVoRmRJP9gKQf52Cq7mQ!2e0
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: US 89 on February 07, 2024, 08:28:40 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?

I recall seeing a number of these on US 60 in southern Missouri.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: kphoger on February 07, 2024, 03:02:10 PM
Quote from: US 89 on February 07, 2024, 08:28:40 AM

Quote from: roadman65 on February 04, 2024, 04:17:01 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TURqgUyg5FNnPAzF6
Does any other state besides NJ and MD use these "RED" light up signal warning signs?

I recall seeing a number of these on US 60 in southern Missouri.

Ah, yes, you're correct!  I remember seeing them near Rogersville:  https://maps.app.goo.gl/U2k7ksXSwVVVaiuf7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 07, 2024, 08:32:45 PM
We have a few in Long Island's Nassau County, NY too.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 13, 2024, 08:48:28 PM
Made a video about a rare signal in Japan. Most intersections in Japan use lagging green arrows. Traffic starts with the yield phase, and the protected phase is at the end. Because the signals are all shared, there's no way to have individual operations, so both sides have the same right-arrow green time. This is not always ideal, but it works well most of the time.

Anyways, this intersection in the video (Google Maps: Yogi Intersection in Naha, Okinawa (https://maps.app.goo.gl/HuegnVSd5evBNDuX7)) has a leading phase for one approach, and then a lagging phase at the end for both approaches. There is no yellow phase for the end of the advanced right turn, though there is at the end. This phasing seems to have been introduced because there is no designated right turn lane, so this helps clear out traffic better than just having a green arrow at the end.

https://youtu.be/rBr-BONo9ek?si=1N2IGB1xcAUr5hYv

It operates the same as this intersection in Tucson, Arizona, that I also recorded many years ago:

https://youtu.be/1WWBn_6o4oY?si=-cBjOelwheDCir5f
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 13, 2024, 09:01:43 PM
I've seen that in California also, both lead and lag left arrow in the same signal. It was back in 2010 on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) in Millbrae, near San Fran. Int'l. Airport.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 13, 2024, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 13, 2024, 09:01:43 PM
I've seen that in California also, both lead and lag left arrow in the same signal. It was back in 2010 on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) in Millbrae, near San Fran. Int'l. Airport.

There are two lead & lag arrow intersections in my area.  One in Grand Junction (which also involves a railroad crossing @ the intersection) and one in Montrose, CO.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on February 14, 2024, 12:35:29 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 13, 2024, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 13, 2024, 09:01:43 PM
I've seen that in California also, both lead and lag left arrow in the same signal. It was back in 2010 on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) in Millbrae, near San Fran. Int'l. Airport.

There are two lead & lag arrow intersections in my area.  One in Grand Junction (which also involves a railroad crossing @ the intersection) and one in Montrose, CO.

For these, just to clarify, they all operate with lead and lag phasing in the same phase? Or switch between the two depending on, say, time of day?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on February 14, 2024, 12:11:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 14, 2024, 12:35:29 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 13, 2024, 09:11:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on February 13, 2024, 09:01:43 PM
I've seen that in California also, both lead and lag left arrow in the same signal. It was back in 2010 on S.R. 82 (El Camino Real) in Millbrae, near San Fran. Int'l. Airport.

There are two lead & lag arrow intersections in my area.  One in Grand Junction (which also involves a railroad crossing @ the intersection) and one in Montrose, CO.

For these, just to clarify, they all operate with lead and lag phasing in the same phase? Or switch between the two depending on, say, time of day?

Yes, after cross-street traffic completes, the leading left green arrows begins the main highway phase, then full green  .  In the case of Montrose (US-50 @ US-550), eastbound US-50 traffic gets an additional lagging left-turn arrow phase.

In the case of the Grand Junction case (WB I-70B @ 31-½ Road), the westbound traffic starts with a leading left arrow phase (green balls for other WB traffic), then full green for EB I-70B traffic.  At the end of the cycle, WB gets another lagging left arrow phase before 31-½ traffic gets their green.

Both situations assume there are left turn/cross-street traffic calls at the traffic sensors at both opportunities 24/7 and there are no trains affecting either intersection.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on February 14, 2024, 08:58:28 PM
California is same phase also.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 16, 2024, 10:54:24 AM
I know of an intersection in Portland, Maine that does this, though not in the traditional sense as some of these other examples - this is for the West ME Route 22 / Congress Street approach:

- Starts off with a leading protected left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6561655,-70.2866932,3a,27.8y,296.04h,88.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7K0PXqoE9XsgmKaqtEM6IA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) to Fore River Pkwy + Through traffic continuing west on ME Route 22 / Congress Street.
- Shared permissive left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6561492,-70.2869471,3a,26.5y,311.2h,91.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHR1Qb1kB9rAaqNwLwagB_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) - both thru directions of ME Route 22 / Congress proceed
- "Lagging" protected left turn (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.656408,-70.2869498,3a,15y,269.6h,94.75t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQbV2DswJsjTvfq39Q3La8A!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) onto Fore River Pkwy from West ME Route 22 / Congress Street. The right turns from Fore River Parkway and I-295 Exit 5 B are also active at this time - I think this left turn might simply be an overlap of the Fore River Pkwy right (or could be reversed).
- West ME Route 22 / Congress Street left turn, and I-295 Exit 5 B change to red, and the left turn from Fore River Pkwy gets its left green arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.656172,-70.2872982,3a,75y,24.69h,82.15t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfcffLazE-VzRcJOil9GAZw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DfcffLazE-VzRcJOil9GAZw%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D104.45137%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu).

For some reason, I'm not sure why the circular red is louvred on both the doghouse and 3-section signal, but not the other indications.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on February 25, 2024, 07:35:05 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/zZch2L9t2SxLMg649
Traffic signals set up like a Fire Signal with flashing yellow on bottom.

I'm guessing the City of Easton did a study to find that the signals at this circle are no longer warranted but instead of flashing them as normal they removed the green lens and set up like an emergency signal.

Looks like it operates for pedestrians as the crosswalk heads are still active. 
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SilverMustang2011 on February 25, 2024, 08:29:05 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 25, 2024, 07:35:05 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/zZch2L9t2SxLMg649
Traffic signals set up like a Fire Signal with flashing yellow on bottom.

I'm guessing the City of Easton did a study to find that the signals at this circle are no longer warranted but instead of flashing them as normal they removed the green lens and set up like an emergency signal.

Looks like it operates for pedestrians as the crosswalk heads are still active.

Looks like the signals have been like that since at least 2009 per street view, so while it predates something like a HAWK beacon I'm surprised they haven't considered replacing the old signals with one yet.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on February 26, 2024, 10:23:33 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 25, 2024, 07:35:05 PM
Looks like it operates for pedestrians as the crosswalk heads are still active. 

Even better, the previous 9 inch pedestrian signals there (which had been upgraded to LED with the traffic lights) were replaced with the current 16 inch pedestrian signals sometime after 2013:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Easton,+PA/@40.6914801,-75.2090304,3a,90y,291.09h,76.39t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s00MtHhvPyUC0oH7gR0TWgg!2e0!5s20130801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!4m7!3m6!1s0x89c46b821870585f:0x37203227748fc82b!8m2!3d40.688432!4d-75.2207323!10e5!16zL20vMF83ejI?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 02, 2024, 01:18:57 PM
Quote from: SilverMustang2011 on February 25, 2024, 08:29:05 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 25, 2024, 07:35:05 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/zZch2L9t2SxLMg649
Traffic signals set up like a Fire Signal with flashing yellow on bottom.

I'm guessing the City of Easton did a study to find that the signals at this circle are no longer warranted but instead of flashing them as normal they removed the green lens and set up like an emergency signal.

Looks like it operates for pedestrians as the crosswalk heads are still active.

Looks like the signals have been like that since at least 2009 per street view, so while it predates something like a HAWK beacon I'm surprised they haven't considered replacing the old signals with one yet.

I'm surprised too. It's already acting like one only flashing yellow during normal operations.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: SignBridge on March 13, 2024, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7

I think that is a ramp metering signal, based on the instructions on the sign.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: Big John on March 13, 2024, 08:25:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 13, 2024, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7

I think that is a ramp metering signal, based on the instructions on the sign.
Panning the 2nd link shows it to be a channelized right turn lane of an intersection with the signal in the island.

And they use the British term "amber" for "yellow".
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jakeroot on March 13, 2024, 09:00:48 PM
I didn't think anything of the sign when I read it, even though it says "amber". That's a good catch; definitely not the standard terminology.

It might have been had we decided to use the term "flashing amber arrow" (FAA...lol).
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 13, 2024, 10:10:56 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 13, 2024, 08:25:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 13, 2024, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7

I think that is a ramp metering signal, based on the instructions on the sign.
Panning the 2nd link shows it to be a channelized right turn lane of an intersection with the signal in the island.

And they use the British term "amber" for "yellow".

Looking back, it's been there since 2012.  And at the time the lights were both on the left and right until, I assume, the light on the right was hit and never replaced.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 15, 2024, 10:41:13 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 13, 2024, 10:10:56 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 13, 2024, 08:25:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 13, 2024, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7

I think that is a ramp metering signal, based on the instructions on the sign.
Panning the 2nd link shows it to be a channelized right turn lane of an intersection with the signal in the island.

And they use the British term "amber" for "yellow".

Looking back, it's been there since 2012.  And at the time the lights were both on the left and right until, I assume, the light on the right was hit and never replaced.

I wonder why this would need a meter and not just have a yield sign...  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mglass87 on March 16, 2024, 10:30:57 AM
Here's an interesting signal setup:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/7Q4RzDWYApcxqm7L6

Not only is this a combination of span wire and mast arm, but the signals to the left are installed to the pole very strangely. As far as I know, this setup has always been like this.

A closer look at the left signal:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/WvD2K4VCahta8y5M9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 17, 2024, 01:16:45 AM
There's an empty bracket for a signal on the left-hand mast arm. I'm guessing the span-wire hung signal there was originally mounted to that arm, but was later moved for visibility purposes. I'm not sure where the other span-wire signal originally was, as there doesn't seem to be any available mounts for it and I assume that all of the signals there are of about the same age (as they're all LFEs).

RIP to this classic bimodal (neon?) pedestrian signal that used to be there though:
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3019589,-77.2872312,3a,15y,330.3h,95.9t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sjyT_D1cEkFWcz9U1gUSNMA!2e0!5s20080501T000000!7i3328!8i1664?entry=ttu
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: mrsman on March 17, 2024, 05:41:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 15, 2024, 10:41:13 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 13, 2024, 10:10:56 PM
Quote from: Big John on March 13, 2024, 08:25:46 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on March 13, 2024, 08:22:23 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 13, 2024, 01:16:48 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SjeXwFKNB2rXzarF8
This right turn signal in Augusta, GA looks like a ramp meter onto a freeway. Two section with no green though.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TFnA2S36AAgdqgvB7

I think that is a ramp metering signal, based on the instructions on the sign.
Panning the 2nd link shows it to be a channelized right turn lane of an intersection with the signal in the island.

And they use the British term "amber" for "yellow".

Looking back, it's been there since 2012.  And at the time the lights were both on the left and right until, I assume, the light on the right was hit and never replaced.

I wonder why this would need a meter and not just have a yield sign...  :hmmm:

While nearly all metering signals are at freeway entrance ramps, there are other purposes for them.

I would think that over here, the red light prevents people from turning during such times that would overload the street that's coming ahead.  The next intersection is a big one where US 1 meets US 78.  Plus, there may also be concerns for the traffic that would be exiting the mall, when the mall was open.

I know of another metering signal that is close to a traffic circle that is also designed to limit the traffic circle from being overloaded.

Here is a traffic circle at Snowden River Parkway and the ramps to the MD-100 freeway in Columbia, MD.  It is basically a T-intersection to regulate the traffic control between traffic exiting westbound MD-100 for Snowden and traffic from Snowden entering westbound MD-100.  During busy times, the metering signal limits the amount of traffic into the circle, which prevents backups from the freeway exit backing up the freeway.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2122589,-76.7957032,3a,75y,99.77h,79.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spZ89WZDBlrDwcMucmap2Ew!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 18, 2024, 09:42:20 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/W4RzwAtbahfMLknR8
I see LVNV uses 3M signals on Tropicana at Dean Martin.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 22, 2024, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2024, 09:42:20 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/W4RzwAtbahfMLknR8
I see LVNV uses 3M signals on Tropicana at Dean Martin.

Not even sure why. These signals are (were) not that close to the signals at the I-15 interchange...
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: plain on March 22, 2024, 06:22:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2024, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2024, 09:42:20 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/W4RzwAtbahfMLknR8
I see LVNV uses 3M signals on Tropicana at Dean Martin.

Not even sure why. These signals are (were) not that close to the signals at the I-15 interchange...

They might have them there to deter speeding. I've seen it done before. One would have to see which phase is active before proceeding.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: LilianaUwU on March 22, 2024, 07:59:45 PM
Quote from: plain on March 22, 2024, 06:22:37 PM
They might have them there to deter speeding. I've seen it done before. One would have to see which phase is active before proceeding.
Isn't using traffic signals (and stop signs) for speed control disallowed?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: thenetwork on March 22, 2024, 08:20:40 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 22, 2024, 07:59:45 PM
Quote from: plain on March 22, 2024, 06:22:37 PM
They might have them there to deter speeding. I've seen it done before. One would have to see which phase is active before proceeding.
Isn't using traffic signals (and stop signs) for speed control disallowed?
If that were the case, EVERY municipality's signals on main routes would always be in perfect synchronization.

There are towns that can and will "mis-time" a string of intersections to "control" traffic to their liking.  It's harder to catch them in the act with traffic lights like you can with stop signs.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadfro on March 23, 2024, 01:55:31 PM
Quote from: plain on March 22, 2024, 06:22:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2024, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2024, 09:42:20 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/W4RzwAtbahfMLknR8
I see LVNV uses 3M signals on Tropicana at Dean Martin.

Not even sure why. These signals are (were) not that close to the signals at the I-15 interchange...

They might have them there to deter speeding. I've seen it done before. One would have to see which phase is active before proceeding.

Why here only and not more widespread use then, if this indeed is the reason?
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: roadman65 on March 25, 2024, 03:09:35 PM
https://maps.app.goo.gl/obAzRWKPd6zBwPUM8
I see the horizontal mounts are used here even though the underpass is several hundred feet away that its installation is the reason here.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: jeffandnicole on March 25, 2024, 10:35:12 PM
Quote from: plain on March 22, 2024, 06:22:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2024, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 18, 2024, 09:42:20 PMhttps://maps.app.goo.gl/W4RzwAtbahfMLknR8
I see LVNV uses 3M signals on Tropicana at Dean Martin.

Not even sure why. These signals are (were) not that close to the signals at the I-15 interchange...

They might have them there to deter speeding. I've seen it done before. One would have to see which phase is active before proceeding.

Per the GSVs prior to the preceding light, the lights are clearly visible, so that isn't the reason here. https://maps.app.goo.gl/QoGcxqFWaMbSiiQA9
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: PColumbus73 on March 26, 2024, 07:53:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 25, 2024, 03:09:35 PMhttps://maps.app.goo.gl/obAzRWKPd6zBwPUM8
I see the horizontal mounts are used here even though the underpass is several hundred feet away that its installation is the reason here.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norwich,+CT/@41.4410045,-72.1166214,3a,39.4y,287.81h,107.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDQ-BW4zuGACKzGgE9mrSKQ!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x89e67142cb928715:0xad54fb696edfe305!8m2!3d41.5242649!4d-72.0759105!10e5!16zL20vMDFtMjRt?entry=ttu

I'm more interested in the two 8" louvered signals that don't seem to make sense
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: freebrickproductions on March 26, 2024, 09:36:47 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on March 26, 2024, 07:53:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 25, 2024, 03:09:35 PMhttps://maps.app.goo.gl/obAzRWKPd6zBwPUM8
I see the horizontal mounts are used here even though the underpass is several hundred feet away that its installation is the reason here.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norwich,+CT/@41.4410045,-72.1166214,3a,39.4y,287.81h,107.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDQ-BW4zuGACKzGgE9mrSKQ!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x89e67142cb928715:0xad54fb696edfe305!8m2!3d41.5242649!4d-72.0759105!10e5!16zL20vMDFtMjRt?entry=ttu

I'm more interested in the two 8" louvered signals that don't seem to make sense

I think this button (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norwich,+CT/@41.4410045,-72.1166214,3a,15y,252.33h,74.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDQ-BW4zuGACKzGgE9mrSKQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m7!3m6!1s0x89e67142cb928715:0xad54fb696edfe305!8m2!3d41.5242649!4d-72.0759105!10e5!16zL20vMDFtMjRt?entry=ttu) is related to that. It seems the 8 inch signals are being used as some kind of diagonal pedestrian crossing, but, for some reason, are aimed at the nearsides rather than across the intersection, which probably makes them rather hard to see.
Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: D-Dey65 on March 28, 2024, 01:22:11 AM
Does anybody remember me mentioning the dead end traffic signals of New York City? This one is on City Island in the Bronx.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8524513,-73.7871995,3a,75y,60.36h,94.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA79FUcuaEFWWHdqZRlZ3Lg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu


Title: Re: Traffic signal
Post by: CJResotko on April 01, 2024, 10:51:01 AM
An interesting temporary traffic light setup at the southbound Holt Road exit on US-127 in Michigan.
https://youtu.be/wwuLxP35On0?si=NC57-Ysdp7x8E_I0
Text only | Text with Images