Traffic signal

[CJResotko]

^^ 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.

[UnumProvident101]

I was talking about the older traffic lights at those two intersections

[jakeroot]

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).

[UnumProvident101]

https://goo.gl/maps/PKSzAVV5zh455i3Y7

https://goo.gl/maps/q4wy9e2c4psVAjrJ9

[jakeroot]

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.

[paulthemapguy]

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!?!?!

[jakeroot]

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 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 (oh, and yes, all three of those left turn signals have different size configurations).

[mrsman]

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 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 (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.

[jakeroot]

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. 8-inch arrows are perfectly adequate in near-side situations.



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).

[roadfro]

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.

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

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

[Mark68]

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.

[jakeroot]

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.

[Big John]

^^ Wisconsin is phasing out the near side left signal. using a mast arm instead.

[jakeroot]

^^ 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...)

[mrsman]

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.

[jakeroot]

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 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 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. They're surprisingly large, especially when they're close enough to reach out and touch:

[roadfro]

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. 

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.

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.

[SignBridge]

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. 

[jakeroot]

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. 

I suppose a period, versus a semicolon, would have helped.

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.

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.

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, 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 (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 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 () 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.

[roadfro]

The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07.

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, 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 (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 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 () 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!

[mrsman]

The MUTCD does allow for new 8" signals in limited circumstances, per Section 4D.07.

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, 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 (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 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 () 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.

[jakeroot]

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.

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, 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 (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 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 () 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).

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. 8" signals seem more common along Provincially-maintained routes.

[bcroadguy]

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.

[bcroadguy]

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 intersections where some post-mounted signals have been moved up higher than usual, I'm assuming to make the pedestrian signals more visible to drivers.