Lane End Signs on Expressways

[LeftyJR]

These <signs displayed above> have been used in the Mid-South for a long time.  (Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, etc).  I personally DO NOT like this <W4-2> sign...mainly for the reason that it is unclear to people as to whether the left-hand solid black line represents the other side of the freeway, or a lane on the current side of the freeway.  This sign is confusing IMO.

W4-2 is about as straightforward as a diagrammatic sign can get, plus it's a situation that happens really, really frequently! Even if there were some questions at the beginning, you'd expect people would catch on within a couple sightings. 

The W4-2 has been around for a while. As a kid who knew a lot about roads and signs, I have to say that the W4-2 sign was one of the few that confused me growing up. With just a straight line and a crooked line, it was one symbol that wasn't intuitive to me. However, this was before the broken lane line was added to the symbol.

Now, with the broken line, I agree that the meaning is quite clear. Not sure how the straight line could be interpreted as the other side of a freeway, especially given that the sign sees plenty of use on non-freeway facilities...

W4-5: Haven't seen this one much, if at all.

The W4-5 and W4-6 signs are relatively new additions. They are meant to indicate the merge/added lane condition from the perspective of the ramp. I haven't seen either of these in the field--a couple of situations in Nevada where these could be applied, a W4-1 or W4-3 was posted on the left side of the ramp instead.

I see W4-6 in PA quite frequently...I'll try to snag a pic if I can.

[Michael]

I interpret W4-1 and W4-5 as "merging traffic" and W4-3 and W4-6 as "entering traffic, added lane, no merge needed"

Image for convenience:

[Bryant5493]

^^

I concur, Michael, even though some agencies change it up by putting a merging traffic sign in a place where a lane added sign is needed and vice versa.


Be well,

Bryant

[jdb1234]

^^

I concur, Michael, even though some agencies change it up by putting a merging traffic sign in a place where a lane added sign is needed and vice versa.  

ALDOT did that on Corridor X Eastbound at Exit 57.

The first time I saw W4-2 in that style was at the now current end of Corridor X @ Coalburg Rd.  I have never seen W4-5 or W4-6 in Alabama.  ALDOT used W4-1 with a left entrance for merging traffic from the ramp at the interchange between I-65 & I-459.

[roadfro]

I interpret W4-1 and W4-5 as "merging traffic" and W4-3 and W4-6 as "entering traffic, added lane, no merge needed"

Your interpretation is correct.


The W4-5 and W4-6 are relatively new signs to show the situation from the ramp's perspective, as opposed to the other two which are from the mainline perspective. Previously, this would either not be signed on the ramp, or a W4-1 or W4-2 would be used on the ramp itself (sometimes mounted on the left). The sign from the ramp is not always necessary to post, unless there's some unusual condition or maybe if the configuration has changed from previous; thus, it's not overly common to see the newer signs.

[haljackey]

Here's what they look like here:

Primary warning. Large, overhead sign:


Secondary warning


Final warning. Short broken lines and pavement narrows.

[Stephane Dumas]

Here a lane warning end used in Quebec, like this one on A-73/PQ-175 north of Quebec city http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=46.86113,-71.288137&spn=0.008921,0.05476&z=15&layer=c&cbll=46.861131,-71.28812&panoid=KxSOSe4IeCO6Cko7XGkrDA&cbp=11,343.36,,0,-5.54

[haljackey]

A very cool, unique diagram!  You don't see that often because most signs are mass produced to look the same.

[Michael]

^^^ Agreed.  If people can't figure out what that means, they shouldn't be driving!

Also, do I spy some Clearview on that left BGS? 

[KEK Inc.]

^^^ Agreed.  If people can't figure out what that means, they shouldn't be driving!

Also, do i spy some Clearview on that left BGS? 

I believe you're correct; however, the exit number is in Highway Gothic. 
I don't mind that at all.    Personally, the Clearview numerals look awful.

[Alps]

^^^ Agreed.  If people can't figure out what that means, they shouldn't be driving!

Also, do i spy some Clearview on that left BGS? 

I believe you're correct; however, the exit number is in Highway Gothic. 
I don't mind that at all.    Personally, the Clearview numerals look awful.

The distance of 3 km ought to be in Highway Gothic as well (the "3" specifically).  Numerals and negative contrast both are proscribed uses, at least in the US.

[Scott5114]

There is nothing in the US that prevents Clearview numerals from being used. Texas and Oklahoma both have a lot of gore signs with CV numerals. The only thing preventing them from being used more often is the negative contrast prohibition, since most shields are negative contrast applications.

[Alps]

There is nothing in the US that prevents Clearview numerals from being used. Texas and Oklahoma both have a lot of gore signs with CV numerals. The only thing preventing them from being used more often is the negative contrast prohibition, since most shields are negative contrast applications.

Is it that they're not allowed on shields, then?  If it's only negative contrast prohibited and not shields, I don't know where I got my initial information from.

[roadfro]

Off-topic tangent reply...

There is nothing in the US that prevents Clearview numerals from being used. Texas and Oklahoma both have a lot of gore signs with CV numerals. The only thing preventing them from being used more often is the negative contrast prohibition, since most shields are negative contrast applications.

Is it that they're not allowed on shields, then?  If it's only negative contrast prohibited and not shields, I don't know where I got my initial information from.

There is nothing prohibiting the use of Clearview numerals for in textual guide sign legends, such as distance information, street names or exit numbers. However, my understanding is that Clearview numerals were not approved for use on Interstate (and U.S. Highway?) route markers, in addition to the prohibition on negative contrast signing. At the moment, I cannot recall where I read or heard that.

[Scott5114]

I'm pretty sure it's just that shields don't get Clearview because most of them are negative contrast. If that's the case, the only shields that could get Clearview are Interstate, and state routes in California and Minnesota, and county routes. Michigan has posted some Clearview Interstate shields.