Has the flashing yellow left turn signal made it to your state?

[roadfro]

Hmmm... this topic got quite a bit of reply while I was without internet during my move.  Some replies...

I always assumed FYA was to replace the flashing red ball and other divergent left turn signals (non-standard) in place in many states.  The tower or doghouse (depending on state) is not affected from what I can see as that has separate green and yellow arrows for a protected left and already provides for a permitted left.

That is correct. The FYA was developed to standardize the many differing types of displays that had been developed for displaying a permissive left turn in a separate face--flashing circular red, flashing red arrow, flashing yellow arrow, flashing circular yellow--where a MUTCD 5-section face was not used. In addition, the concern of having a circular green over a left turn lane, whether a PPLT display or permissive only LT, also fueled the research.

The towers work just fine and don't seem to have the same problems, IMHO.  A green ball is already well known while taking any sort of drivers ed that it is for the permissive phase of all turns and straight, not the protected phase.  The fools who think a green ball is protected aren't going to suddenly think a flashing yellow arrow means anything different.

Another contributing factor to the FYA research is the fact that the 5-section heads are not entirely clear. Despite the fact that driver's ed teaches you to treat the circular green as a yield in a permissive left turn situation, many drivers confuse its meaning under the assumption that "green means go". Such drivers don't necessarily automatically assume they have a protected turn, but that impulse to go on display of a green signal is problematic when the turn isn't protected. With a flashing yellow arrow, the message doesn't automatically equate to "go", but more of a "caution", which is a necessary reaction in a permissive left turn situation.

...  I sincerely doubt many drivers mistake a green ball for a green arrow in states where green arrows are typically used with green balls for protected and permissive stages.  I would guess that the mistakes are mostly made by people who come from states with separate signal housings into states with tower or doghouse assemblies.  This is a drivers ed issue, not an engineering one IMHO.  If people are too stupid to understand the difference between a green ball and a green arrow, then they won't understand a FYA either as that will require education in states that use tower or doghouse assemblies.  ...

Deanej, I agree.  In addition, I would suggest more use of permissive phase left turns and getting rid of protected phase only left turn signals.

In Nevada, arrow signals have been used for years to indicate protected left turns. 5-section clusters are in widespread use for PPLT operations, usually with the doghouse being a separate signal face for the left turn lane and an adjacent R10-12 ("Left Turn Yield on Green") sign. In my own experience, I've seen many a driver (even those with Nevada plates on the car) begin to make the turn at the start of a circular green with the protected phase skipped. Meanwhile, Carson City has installed at least three FYA signals with little public outreach, and there have been no problems with drivers adapting despite area drivers being used to doghouses.

The elimination of protected-only left turn signals in favor of more permissive signals just isn't a viable option in many areas. The problem with doing this especially comes in peak hour operations where left turning traffic will have a difficult time finding a gap in opposing traffic, creating excessive delays for the left turn operation.

[roadfro]

There also seems to be a problem with the yellow trap created when opposing signals are phased differently.  The solution, IMHO, would be to eliminate the phasing creating it.  When opposing traffic has a green (while the subject traffic has a red) the left turns should not be permitted.

The yellow trap comes from lead/lag left turn operations using 5-section PPLT displays. Running lead/lag left turns is highly beneficial for signal timing where corridor progression is desired. In a standard 5-section display, the yellow trap is created for the side that has a leading left turn--when the adjacent through turns yellow, left turning drivers trying to make a permitted left may think the opposing through vehicles are also getting a yellow, when in reality the opposing through and left phases are active.

Allowing the left turn vehicles to continue to make permitted left turns while the adjacent through vehicles have a red light increases capacity for the turning traffic, and there's no reason why it can't be done. This is the whole reason Dallas Phasing was developed. With Dallas Phasing, a separate 5-section head must be used for the left turn lane, and the circular sections of that head must be shielded, louvered, or otherwise visibility limited from the through traffic and a R10-21 ("Left turn signal / Yield on Green") sign should be used.

At first, implementing Dallas Phasing required special signal controller modifications to get the circular indications in the 5-section display to overlap with the opposing through indications instead of adjacent through. The flashing yellow arrow works on the same principle, but now most new signal controllers have the display logic built-in so it's much easier to implement.

For a visual of all this, seemy video explanation of PPLT with lead/lag operations on YouTube.

They're all over Beaverton.  After 4 or 5 years of waiting, they finally put one at the intersection where I turn into my apartment community a couple of weeks ago.  It greatly reduces the time I have to sit at that signal to turn left.  They were using a 4 lamp signal for a while but are currently using a 3 lamp signal with the steady green and the flashing yellow arrows in the bottom position.

There shouldn't be a reason to reduce to a three-section display unless physical conditions require it.

With every level of government below federal scrimping for money anywhere they can find it?  Sounds like a good enough reason.

--Andy
[/quote]

In most cases, you would want to use the 4-section FYA signal. The visual 'jump' of the arrow going to a different section of the display provides a better cue that the signal has changed between permitted and protected. I can't imagine that using a bi-modal arrow in a three-section display would be that much less expensive than the four-section standard display anyway.

[andytom]

They're all over Beaverton.  After 4 or 5 years of waiting, they finally put one at the intersection where I turn into my apartment community a couple of weeks ago.  It greatly reduces the time I have to sit at that signal to turn left.  They were using a 4 lamp signal for a while but are currently using a 3 lamp signal with the steady green and the flashing yellow arrows in the bottom position.

There shouldn't be a reason to reduce to a three-section display unless physical conditions require it.

With every level of government below federal scrimping for money anywhere they can find it?  Sounds like a good enough reason.

--Andy

In most cases, you would want to use the 4-section FYA signal. The visual 'jump' of the arrow going to a different section of the display provides a better cue that the signal has changed between permitted and protected. I can't imagine that using a bi-modal arrow in a three-section display would be that much less expensive than the four-section standard display anyway.

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

--Andy

[rawmustard]

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

But there would be a direct transition from flashing yellow to green if a lagging left were used. I don't think there's really a big a deal making that transition, but as the MUTCD says, why reduce from a four-section face if there's plenty of room for it, especially if it was already there?

[roadfro]

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

Which is why I said "from permitted to protected". In the case of a lagging protected turn at a 3-section FYA face, the bi-modal arrow in the bottom (right) section of the signal head would change directly from flashing yellow to steady green. When sitting at an intersection waiting for a gap, the "jump" of the arrow to the next signal head section provides better emphasis.

What's interesting is the display of indications when going from a leading protected left turn to permitted lefts. If I understand correctly, Oregon requires a sequence of: green > steady yellow > red > flashing yellow. The MUTCD allows the omission of the red arrow in this transition--I know this is the what Carson City does. In contradistinction, when going from permitted left to protected left, the MUTCD says the signal should go directly from flashing yellow to green.

[US71]

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

I've seen it a 3 ways here:

Leading Green:

Green Arrow-> Yellow Arrow-> FYA

GA->YA->Red Arrow-> FYA

Lagging Green:

FYA->GA->YA->RA

[andytom]

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

But there would be a direct transition from flashing yellow to green if a lagging left were used. I don't think there's really a big a deal making that transition, but as the MUTCD says, why reduce from a four-section face if there's plenty of room for it, especially if it was already there?

Only the new installations are going in as 3 lamp assemblies (switching out the lower, green arrow lamp with a combo, green-flashing yellow arrow lamp).  The older installations are staying 4 lamp assemblies.

--Andy

[deathtopumpkins]

Checked out the FYAs on US-60 at Busch Gardens today. All 3 of them (I thought there were supposed to be four, but there were only three) were 4-lamp signals that went green -> FYA -> yellow arrow -> red then back to FYA. I recorded a video of them that I plan to post on youtube at some point, once it's been edited.

[roadfro]

DTP, you sure you didn't get your sequence mixed up there? According to the MUTCD, a green arrow must always be followed by a steady yellow arrow before transitioning to flashing yellow arrow.

[deathtopumpkins]

Let me check my video here in a bit and I'll double-check. Forgot to copy it off my camera last night and the camera battery is dead now.

[roadfro]

Update for Nevada:

The city of Henderson now has at least one FYA signal operating at Pacific Avenue & Van Wagenen Street. This is the first FYA installation in the Las Vegas valley. According to a couple news articles, they plan to install FYAs at 80 intersections in Henderson at a cost of $263,000. The article hints that FYAs may be installed throughout the Las Vegas Valley beginning later this year.

It sounds to me like Henderson is doing a full-scale replacement of current 5-section doghouses to FYA, with other entities in the Vegas area following suit. Since it's not required to replace existing PPLT displays, I think it's interesting that they're taking such an aggressive stance towards switching these out. So it appears that the Vegas area will have to adapt quickly to FYAs...hopefully it will be an easy transition.

[froggie]

While heading to Maine yesterday, saw a FYA at the western junction of NH 107 with US 4/US 202/NH 9.

[Ian]

While heading to Maine yesterday, saw a FYA at the western junction of NH 107 with US 4/US 202/NH 9.

Wow never thought they would come to New Hampshire that quickly. I'll have to head out there when I go to Lake Winnipesaukee in a week.

[andytom]

There is no direct transition from green to flashing yellow in OR.  The signal must go through a steady yellow phase showing a reduction in right-of-way status, and, by law, steady yellow must be followed by steady red.  After that, the signal can go to flashing yellow.

Which is why I said "from permitted to protected". In the case of a lagging protected turn at a 3-section FYA face, the bi-modal arrow in the bottom (right) section of the signal head would change directly from flashing yellow to steady green. When sitting at an intersection waiting for a gap, the "jump" of the arrow to the next signal head section provides better emphasis.

The point is that, when in the left turn lane, you shouldn't be monitoring the condition of the signal continuously.  You should be monitoring the condition of oncoming traffic or the cars in front of you also turning left and checking the condition of the signal when it looks like you may be given a chance to move.  When the signal is in your peripheral vision, the falshing vs. non-flashing is much more apparent than the change in position.  That's why this works.

--Andy

[roadfro]

^  You're right in that nobody should be monitoring the signal head constantly, but rather monitoring oncoming traffic for adequate gaps. If you're just keeping a casual eye on the signal while waiting for the gap in traffic, I'd think you'd be much more apt to notice the light change position and turn steady than just becoming steady alone--which is certainly why FHWA doesn't allow the flashing yellow and steady yellow arrows to be in the same section of the signal head.

Of course, this debate only really matters if the signal has lagging protected left turns following permitted left and a 3-section FYA display with bimodal arrow. Most jurisdictions don't use lagging lefts unless they're trying to achieve signal progression along a corridor, and most agencies will use 4-section heads, so it's likely this issue will ever be a major problem.

[Troubleshooter]

Indiana doesn't have it yet, because some legislators are afraid of it.

I have kept a running list of who has and who doesn't:

HAS:

AK AL AR AZ CA CO CT DC DE FL GA IA ID IL KS KY LA MD ME MI MN MO MS MT NC NH NJ NM NV NY OR SC TX UT VA VT WA WI WY Territories GU

HAS NOT:

HI IN MA ND NE OH OK PA RI SD TN WV Territories PR VI

[Troubleshooter]

I'm betting New York takes the easy way out by using a doghouse (or side-by-side) over the lane-line between the left-turn lane and the left-thru lane. That is still permitted by the new MUTCD in lieu of a separate left-turn head with flashing yellow arrow.  

IMO the doghouse style is superior to using a dedicated signal.  Why use a separate signal with a flashing yellow when the doghouse style is sufficient?

One community in NY is using them, even though the NY legislature has not yet put FYA into the traffic code.

The doghouse is not sufficient. It causes yellow trap if the signal skips phases.

I always assumed FYA was to replace the flashing red ball and other divergent left turn signals (non-standard) in place in many states.  The tower or doghouse (depending on state) is not affected from what I can see as that has separate green and yellow arrows for a protected left and already provides for a permitted left.

Replacing the flashing red ball (or in Delaware and Maryland the flashing red arrow) is an ancillary effect.  But the primary reason for the FYA's development and purpose is because too many drivers were confusing the steady green (i.e. the permitted left) on the tower or the doghouse signals for a protected left.

Wrong. The purpose is to eliminate yellow trap without placing restrictions on signal phasing.

It depends on where you are. In Indiana (and other midwestern states), often several cars will enter while the light is green and turn when it turns yellow, but people almost always stop on yellow there. I learned quickly to break that habit when I moved to Florida since so many people run late yellow/early red lights. I'll sit at the line and wait for the protected left next cycle if I have to.

Of course, now whenever I visit family back in Indiana, I'll sometimes get honked at for not moving into the intersection!

This behavior of waiting in the intersection, combined with the law requiring you to get out of the intersection by the time the red comes on, causes the danger in yellow trap.

The drivers either dart across live traffic that still has a green, or are trapped in the intersection on red.

[Combined multiple posts. -S.]

[agentsteel53]

This behavior of waiting in the intersection, combined with the law requiring you to get out of the intersection by the time the red comes on, causes the danger in yellow trap.

indeed.  that red-light law is completely senseless.  Needing to enter the intersection by red is a lot more reasonable, as it allows queues to empty as people behave reasonably, and do not attempt to dart around to try to beat the light.  Just a foot or two in, to announce your intention, and then on red (or on late yellow, when you've judged that opposite traffic will come to a stop) you complete the turn.

[Troubleshooter]

This behavior of waiting in the intersection, combined with the law requiring you to get out of the intersection by the time the red comes on, causes the danger in yellow trap.

indeed.  that red-light law is completely senseless.  Needing to enter the intersection by red is a lot more reasonable, as it allows queues to empty as people behave reasonably, and do not attempt to dart around to try to beat the light.  Just a foot or two in, to announce your intention, and then on red (or on late yellow, when you've judged that opposite traffic will come to a stop) you complete the turn.

The problem is that traffic laws are written by politicians, not experts.

Froggie, it says that "some engineers have had concerns that drivers turning left on a permissive circular green signal indication might inadvertently mistake that indication as implying the left turn has the right of way".  This means that some, not all, not many, but some think people get this mixed up.  I sincerely doubt many drivers mistake a green ball for a green arrow in states where green arrows are typically used with green balls for protected and permissive stages.  I would guess that the mistakes are mostly made by people who come from states with separate signal housings into states with tower or doghouse assemblies.  This is a drivers ed issue, not an engineering one IMHO.  If people are too stupid to understand the difference between a green ball and a green arrow, then they won't understand a FYA either as that will require education in states that use tower or doghouse assemblies.  We've used tower assemblies here in Illinois since the 1960s (from the signals I've seen) with great success.  I sincerely doubt IDOT (much less the municipalities) will change and start using the FYA.  They don't even use doghouse assemblies here (which I can see getting mixed up easier as the green ball and green arrow are next to each other).

Deanej, I agree.  In addition, I would suggest more use of permissive phase left turns and getting rid of protected phase only left turn signals.

It's not the engineers who think the people don't understand the green ball. It's the politicians who don't understand the real reasons the engineers are doing this.

The real problem is that the green ball for one direction can turn yellow while the opposing traffic still has a green ball. Some reasons this happens include:

- At night, a signal finds no traffic on the cross street, but traffic is waiting to make left turns. It skips the cross street, causing yellow trap in one direction on the artery.

- The engineer wants to create two-way progression on a street. Often a solution can't be found without using lagging left turns.

- An emergency vehicle or a railroad preempts an intersection. The signal turns green for one approach, and red for the other three approaches.

If turns are permitted on circular green, these conditions cause yellow trap. There are only a few ways to prevent yellow trap for these cases:

- With a leading left turn, prevent phase skip.

- Use exclusively protected left turns (no turns on circular green).

- Use flashing yellow arrows for the permissive turns.

- Prohibit lagging left turns (prevents progression in most cases).

The flashing yellow arrow was created to provide a missing indication: There was no way to indicate that a permissive turn can go while the main signals are red for the approach.

Only the following systems safely allowed permissive turns to keep turning while the circular green turned yellow and then red, preventing yellow trap:

- Michigan's flashing red ball
- Delaware's flashing red arrow (still allowed)
- Seattle's flashing yellow ball
- Reno's flashing yellow arrow (newly allowed)
- Dallas phasing
- All-red clear before lagging left turn (disrupted progression)

This.

IMHO, it should be completely prohibited, and the whole signal issue just fades away.  Minimal cost and effort.

Yellow trap is now prohibited. It must either be kept out of the signal sequence or warned with a sign.

But new solutions are needed to fix the problem, or we lose some advantages:

- To progress traffic on a two-way street, there are three choices:
--- Prohibit some left turns.
--- Use exclusively protected turns.
--- Use flashing yellow arrows.

- The cross street can no longer be skipped if it has no cars, unless one of the above choices is used.

- Intersections with more than 4 legs can't be signalized, unless one of the above choices is used.

- Preemptions can't be used, unless one of the above choices is used.

I sincerely doubt IDOT (much less the municipalities) will change and start using the FYA.  They don't even use doghouse assemblies here (which I can see getting mixed up easier as the green ball and green arrow are next to each other).

Peoria already has FYA. And it has been written into the Illinois driving code.

There also seems to be a problem with the yellow trap created when opposing signals are phased differently.  The solution, IMHO, would be to eliminate the phasing creating it.  When opposing traffic has a green (while the subject traffic has a red) the left turns should not be permitted.

The following phasings and features would have to be eliminated to do that:

- Single lead (if phase skip allowed)
- Single lag (except T intersections and intersections with one way streets)
- Dual and quad split lead with full phase skip, unless permissive turns are eliminated
- Lead-lag with permissive turns (except where no splits occur - this is split phasing)
- Progression on most two way streets, unless permissive turns are eliminated
- Certain kinds of emergency vehicle, railroad, and drawbridge preemption
- Intersections with more than 4 legs

One very neat feature of the 4-section flashing yellow arrow face is that it can be programmed to change modes at different times of the day, or as needed under different traffic conditions:

- Lead-lead
- Lead-lag
- Lag-lag
- Exclusively protected
- Protected-permissive using flashing yellow arrow
- Protected-permissive with required stop using flashing red arrow
- Exclusively permissive using flashing yellow arrow
- Exclusively permissive with required stop using flashing red arrow
- Prohibited (e.g. during a railroad pre-emption, to prevent turn into a train)

Something tells me that the next version of the MUTCD will prohibit the 5-section "doghouse" and inline signal, except for use with shared lanes (where FYA is not allowed).

An explanation of the need for the flashing yellow arrow.

The problem is that the circular green has too many meanings to be used for controlling just the permissive left turn. Straight ahead and right turn traffic also see it and obey it.

What was really needed was a permissive movement signal indication that applies to only the left or right turn. The problem is that we almost ran out of signal indications.

The following were investigated:

- Flashing green arrow - conflicts with the usage in Canada, where flashing green means protected, and steady green means permissive.

- The Canada system - would require all signals with protected turns to be changed.

- Flashing yellow ball (Seattle)

- Flashing yellow arrow (Reno)

- Flashing red ball (Michigan) - requires a stop

- Flashing red arrow (Delaware) - requires a stop

- The Swiss system of having a flashing yellow triangle next to the green arrow if it is permissive.

- Adding a new color - problems with color blindness: the three colors we have now are balanced so the color blind can tell them apart. There was no way to add another color without causing confusion here.

- Dallas phasing

The flashing yellow arrow was chosen because it already had the required definition in most states.

Note that a flashing yellow indication has NO connotation of a protected movement, and it never did. Turning drivers facing a flashing yellow indication have to yield to pedestrians and oncoming traffic, whether it is a ball or an arrow. Many drivers make the mistake of thinking a flashing yellow arrow is protected when the signal is flashing, because the three-section all-arrow head does have a protected meaning in normal signal operation.

To get the use of the flashing yellow arrow for permissive turns, the following have to happen:

- The Uniform Vehicle code has to be amended to clarify that a flashing yellow arrow, and the steady yellow arrow following it, have no protected meaning.

- The MUTCD has to be amended to allow flashing yellow arrows.

- The individual state vehicle codes have to be amended to allow flashing yellow arrows.

- Controllers have to be modified or manufactured to allow flashing yellow arrow faces.

The first two have been done. The third depends on the states. And the controller manufacturers have already jumped on the bandwagon.

Two additional requirements were added when the 2009 revision of the MUTCD was released. All left turn signals that are not shared with other movements must now use the red arrow, not the red ball. And no signal intended for exclusive use by left turning vehicles shall have a circular green indication.

[Combined multiple posts. -S.]

[vdeane]

One community in NY is using them, even though the NY legislature has not yet put FYA into the traffic code.

The doghouse is not sufficient. It causes yellow trap if the signal skips phases.

The doghouse is perfectly sufficient.  If a driver can't understand it, the driver shouldn't have a license.  By the way, we don't have yellow traps in NY because our laws are sensible and don't require you to get out of the intersection before the red.

And PLEASE learn to use the edit button!

[SignBridge]

Has anyone yet seen a FYA in the downstate area of New York State? That would include Rockland, Westchester Counties, NYC and Long Island. I have not seen any on Long Island so far.

Also, I've travelled to California several times and I'm curious to see how they will handle this matter. On roads with 2 lanes in each direction, with no turning arrows, they have a standard configuration of one overhead signal, and one on the far-right and far-left corners. I don't think the green-ball will be prohibited on the far-left corner, as I believe the Manual only prohibits it above or directly in front of the LT lane on a median. Calif. may consider that far-left corner signal to be a supplemental head, as opposed to a separate left-turn head. Anyone here from the far-west who can tell us what they're doing out there? 

[US71]

In Arkansas, only Fort Smith and Little Rock have them... and I think LR only has 2 or 3.

[Troubleshooter]

One community in NY is using them, even though the NY legislature has not yet put FYA into the traffic code.

The doghouse is not sufficient. It causes yellow trap if the signal skips phases.

The doghouse is perfectly sufficient.  If a driver can't understand it, the driver shouldn't have a license.  By the way, we don't have yellow traps in NY because our laws are sensible and don't require you to get out of the intersection before the red.

And PLEASE learn to use the edit button!

I know how to use the edit button. Did I miss a typo?

The problem is not driver understanding.

It is the need to have a signal indication that allows a permissive turn to filter through gaps in oncoming traffic when the straight-ahead signals are red. And there are reasons other than yellow trap to use it.

What do you do if the following happens? (I have seen it)

- You are waiting in the intersection to turn left into a single lane side road.

- Your signal turns yellow, then red. But oncoming traffic still has a green, because the signal skipped the side street phase.

- During the oncoming green, the oncoming right turns have a green arrow. Even if the straight ahead stream has a gap in it, the right turners are blocking your turn. The oncoming right turn stream has very heavy traffic.

- The signal changes to the side street on your left having a green and a left turn green arrow. The oncoming right turn arrow is still green. So your turn is still blocked, and traffic from the left is honking for you to get out of the way.

This is not an intended sequence, but it is the sequence I have seen at a nearby shopping center at night, when some approaches are empty. The signal has split lead left turns and doghouse signals. But phase skip brings up such sequences.

Here is another case:

- You are at a split intersection with a railroad running across the middle and two sets of signals, one on each side of the railroad track.

- You are waiting in the second intersection to turn left. There is no left turn signal at your intersection. But the first intersection (behind you) has a left turn doghouse signal facing in the opposite direction.

- The signal changes from straight ahead in both directions to the left turn for the other direction. Your signal turns red. There are three cars waiting behind you to turn. One is stupidly waiting on the tracks. But the oncoming signal is still green.

- The third car waiting in line is blocking the left turning cars from turning on the green arrow. They move forward, and are blocked. And again, one driver stops on the tracks. Now the two lines are blocking each other.

- A train comes. The signal goes into track clearance. But because your signal was already red, it does not attempt to clear the track in your direction. And the cars facing the other way are still blocked.

I saw this actually happen. Two left turners in each direction went straight ahead to clear the tracks. Two of them ran the red light to do so.

[mightyace]

- A train comes. The signal goes into track clearance. But because your signal was already red, it does not attempt to clear the track in your direction. And the cars facing the other way are still blocked.

I saw this actually happen. Two left turners in each direction went straight ahead to clear the tracks. Two of them ran the red light to do so.

Well, that kind of thing is one of the times if I got caught up in that, my thought would be, "They can go ahead and ticket me, at least I'll be alive to get it."  (Though, I never purposely stop on RR tracks!)

[Scott5114]

I know how to use the edit button. Did I miss a typo?

You posted five and then seven times in a row. If you forget something, use the edit button to go back and add something. If you want to quote multiple people, click the "Reply" tab at the bottom–don't use the Quick Reply box–and use the "Insert Quote" feature next to each post you want to quote.