Traffic signal

[STLmapboy]

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 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.

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 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.

[mrsman]

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 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.

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 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.

[jakeroot]

mrsman above touched on my sentiments, but I was already finished writing this so I'm posting it anyways:

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 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.

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 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:

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 in Melbourne, VIC. All corners are covered in some way, and there is an overhead signal as well. Also, see this SPUI 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.

[STLmapboy]

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 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.

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 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.

[traffic light guy]

Marbelite 4-way traffic signal (tunnel visors) by thesignalman, on Flickr

Signal Service Corp. 4-way traffic signal by thesignalman, on Flickr


American Gas Accumulator 4-way traffic signal by thesignalman, on Flickr

Marbelite 3-way traffic signal by thesignalman, on Flickr

[STLmapboy]

Question for my Southeast folk:

I've seen a lot of white stripes (no, not those) on NC span wire installs. Examples include this in Greenville, this north of Charlotte, this near Raleigh, and this in Asheville. So, what are the white pinstripes?

[Jet380]

Question for my Southeast folk:

I've seen a lot of white stripes (no, not those) on NC span wire installs. Examples include this in Greenville, this north of Charlotte, this near Raleigh, and this 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:

[roadfro]

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.

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 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.

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 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 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.

[KEK Inc.]

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

[STLmapboy]

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

It's a 3M version of what France is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit.

[KEK Inc.]

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

It's a 3M version of what France is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit.

That's standard for all bike signals in the US too.  Seattle:

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.

[STLmapboy]

This is what you like to see. In Nevada.

[Amtrakprod]

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

It's a 3M version of what France is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit.

That's standard for all bike signals in the US too.  Seattle:

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

[Roadrunner75]

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

It's a 3M version of what France is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit.

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...

[STLmapboy]

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

It's a 3M version of what France is so fond of doing.

On an unrelated note, those mast-armlets in the background are some serious Washington DC shit.

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 installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon with signals aligned to be the same height, yellow reflectors, and large street signs.

[jakeroot]

But back to signals...
I actually quite like Oregon's new installs. They're very similar to Missouri.

Edit: Even newer Oregon 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 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.

[roadfro]

This 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).

[STLmapboy]

This 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.

[STLmapboy]

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 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.

[jakeroot]

This 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.

[Amtrakprod]

Half a light


iPhone

[mapman]

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 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

[zachary_amaryllis]

Half a light

does that light ever turn red? or is it always the green arrows?

[Amtrakprod]

Half a light

does that light ever turn red? or is it always the green arrows?

This side does. The other doesn't.


iPhone

[STLmapboy]

Why...?