Erroneous road signs

[roadman65]

I guess this is a dud then, as unless you are a member of then its a completely useless.

Too bad it was a great find.

[hbelkins]

Interesting on that one!  It does not come up that way to me.  It is from one user on here's flickr page and perhaps he has a filter on it of some sort, but why does it say that?  Since when is a common road sign considered xxx and not suitable for minors?

[algorerhythms]

https://flic.kr/p/oJYC5U This one taken in Colorado of Green River, Utah being misspelled as one whole word.

Um...? This is what I get attempting to view that:

Maybe it was misspelled as a four letter word.

Utah is a four-letter word.

[formulanone]

It's possible the user accidentally set the photo to Restricted in "Photo Safety Level". Flickr users can choose their own levels, and it will filter the Restricted photos with a warning message or a blank gray image (which looks like static on an old TV set).

Nothing questionable appeared.

[SidS1045]

Interesting on that one!  It does not come up that way to me.  It is from one user on here's flickr page and perhaps he has a filter on it of some sort, but why does it say that?  Since when is a common road sign considered xxx and not suitable for minors?

Only if you don't speak the native language.  In German, the town's name means "place of the people of Focko," a 6th-century Bavarian nobleman who settled there...a perfectly benign, non-offensive, child-friendly name.  The "u" vowel is pronounced in German as "oo" in "book."  However, the town's PTB had to weld the signs to steel posts set in concrete to prevent their repeated theft by English-speaking (mostly British) tourists, and a few years back had to install video cameras to deter tourists from taking selfies while having sex in front of the signs.

[thenetwork]

https://flic.kr/p/oJYC5U This one taken in Colorado of Green River, Utah being misspelled as one whole word.

Um...? This is what I get attempting to view that:

Good Gravy Marie!  That is my Flickr photo site!  I don't know why my sight would give that message either.

Anyhoo, I have changed all photos on the Freeway Fan sign to SAFE status and the link -- https://flic.kr/p/oJYC5U -- should work fine now.

Thanks for the heads up!!!

[roadman65]

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9106297,-75.1730659,3a,75y,270h,73.93t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sD_20B8LY9qPI0hKT8zUXGw!2e0 A green DO NOT ENTER sign?  This one really takes the cake.

[Big John]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

[Zeffy]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

My question is, what's the random lavender-colored trees and grass?

[1995hoo]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

Something's weird with the image, because the color of those signs varies as I move it around to different viewpoints.

[jeffandnicole]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

Something's weird with the image, because the color of those signs varies as I move it around to different viewpoints.

It looks like GSVs taken at different points in time.  I noticed in the Green Do Not Enter shot, the crosswalk's lines are missing/faded.  In other shots with the proper Red sign, the lines are fully there.

[Roadrunner75]

If you go to the GSV link and pull back away from the signs, you'll see everything is fine.  No need to call DRPA to complain.

[roadman65]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

Something's weird with the image, because the color of those signs varies as I move it around to different viewpoints.

It looks like GSVs taken at different points in time.  I noticed in the Green Do Not Enter shot, the crosswalk's lines are missing/faded.  In other shots with the proper Red sign, the lines are fully there.

That is exactly why the image changes when you pan about.  It happens a lot with GSV as you go down any road the image date changes at one location.  In fact in Rahway, NJ along US 1 & 9 you have (or had) near CR 514 the imagery going from when the road was under construction to when the construction was completed.

It might of been green at one point in time, but PennDOT or whoever maintains those ramp signs could have quickly changed it.  However, the picture or the image could also be distorted as nothing and I mean nothing surprises me anymore.

[US71]

Um...? This is what I get attempting to view that:

That lends new meaning to the term road p*rn

[spooky]

^^ then further down the ramp, there are green "WRONG WAY" signs.

Something's weird with the image, because the color of those signs varies as I move it around to different viewpoints.

It looks like GSVs taken at different points in time.  I noticed in the Green Do Not Enter shot, the crosswalk's lines are missing/faded.  In other shots with the proper Red sign, the lines are fully there.

That is exactly why the image changes when you pan about.  It happens a lot with GSV as you go down any road the image date changes at one location.  In fact in Rahway, NJ along US 1 & 9 you have (or had) near CR 514 the imagery going from when the road was under construction to when the construction was completed.

It might of been green at one point in time, but PennDOT or whoever maintains those ramp signs could have quickly changed it.  However, the picture or the image could also be distorted as nothing and I mean nothing surprises me anymore.

and the trees might have been purple at some time? it's obviously a color issue with the photo.

[vtk]

and the trees might have been purple at some time? it's obviously a color issue with the photo.

This.  I concluded quickly myself that the imagery has some kind of color issue.  Most likely, mismatched color channels: the correct red channel data is displayed as green channel data, while the correct green channel data is displayed as red and blue channel data, and the correct blue channel data is lost; or, maybe it's RGB data interpreted as YUV or vice versa.

[WNYroadgeek]

US 20A is an E/W route, not N/S: http://goo.gl/maps/TBwsl

(The goof is likely due to it multiplexing with NY 64 here, which IS signed N/S)

[KG909]

Should be CA 99

[The Nature Boy]

Should be CA 99

Bud Shuster got REALLY ambitious with that I-99 legislation.

[KG909]

Should be CA 99

Bud Shuster got REALLY ambitious with that I-99 legislation.

I thought it being west of I-81 was enough already, but Bud wants it west of I-15.

[The Nature Boy]

Should be CA 99

Bud Shuster got REALLY ambitious with that I-99 legislation.

I thought it being west of I-81 was enough already, but Bud wants it west of I-15.

I hear that there's some hidden language in the bill that designates I-99 as a north/south road that begins in New York City and terminates in Los Angeles. He just wanted to ensure that Altoona got on a really important highway.

[freebrickproductions]

US 231/AL 53 by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
US 431 and US 72 are signed at the intersection of Drake Avenue and Memorial Parkway (US 231/AL 53) despite the fact that they meet with Memorial Parkway further north of this location. Maybe it needs some "To" signs instead of the cardinal directions above the US 431/US 72 shields.

[jakeroot]

Should be CA 99

I assume this is an old photo based on the grain and (what looks like) button copy, but weren't old California interstates signed with state-named shields? And that is an honest question...I keep contradicting myself, one moment thinking they did and other moments thinking they didn't.

[KG909]

Should be CA 99

I assume this is an old photo based on the grain and (what looks like) button copy, but weren't old California interstates signed with state-named shields? And that is an honest question...I keep contradicting myself, one moment thinking they did and other moments thinking they didn't.

Yeah it's pretty old but no I'm sure this was a mistake or something. I don't think California ever signed its highways with interstate shields.

[jakeroot]

Should be CA 99

I assume this is an old photo based on the grain and (what looks like) button copy, but weren't old California interstates signed with state-named shields? And that is an honest question...I keep contradicting myself, one moment thinking they did and other moments thinking they didn't.

Yeah it's pretty old but no I'm sure this was a mistake or something. I don't think California ever signed its highways with interstate shields.

Well of course, no doubt. But I'm wondering if the use of I-99 was intentional (based on reading above) or not. I'm not familiar with the original I-99 plans (if there were any) but perhaps the signage was placed in preparation for an eventual implementation. Then again, it would still be erroneous because I-99 never truly existed in that place and at that time (nor now even).