Poll
I don't even think this is the case. There are states that use mast arms almost 100 percent, and I'm sure there are some oddball intersections in all of them.
That said, I am Team Mast Arm. Span wires are ugly and should only be used for temporary setups.
Had to go with masts on the second one. A passing train, especially an intermodal one, wouldn't be very kind to a set of spanwire signals.
Thick and huge is more for complying with recent changes to AASHTO design criteria than being an art installation. A couple years ago now FHWA made it a funding requirement to follow more recent AASHTO standards.
If that's current AASHTO design criteria, then shame on them. It makes it a lot harder to see the actual signals. Why this is mandated but span wires are still okay, I don't understand.
Minutia sh*t like this is what makes me think AASHTO is now an agency desperately in search of a mission.
That's debatable. One could also say the thicker arm blocks out more landscape noise, similar to the thought behind installing backplates.
Backplates around the entire fixture blocks out landscape noise. But I find that thick mast arms across the entire roadway and backing only part of the fixture makes it more difficult to see. But as you note, that perception varies by person.
I like how you can tell that the red minivan (in the Victoria, BC GSV) made an illegal left turn through the red light, when you continue through the images across the overpass. :-D (P.S. Your link is a bit screwed up, I fixed it in my quote though.)
Personally, I don't think the median left turn signals are necessary, although I can appreciate how one might like them. However, I do believe that there should be at least two signal heads for left turns.
Thank you for the tip on the broken link. Should be fixed now.
I thought someone might bring that up! :-D Believe it or not, that's actually a legal maneuver in British Columbia (alongside a few other PNW states and MI). Left turns onto one-way streets are legal on red, even from two-way streets.
My preference for median mounted left turn signals is simply to declutter overhead space. As long as there are sufficient redundant left turn signals, I'm not completely sold on the requirement for overhead signals. Though, I understand them especially at larger intersections. Totally agree on the requirement for extra signals.
Like bridge assemblies (what I would call a gantry), or actual bridges?
Actual bridges. Like this. (https://goo.gl/maps/KbzQY9v9Jjv)
Ahh, okay. Would something more modern like this count as well? http://bit.ly/2QvZgRE
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
I would personally consider 25.6 feet to be too high up, even if set back. If they lowered the signals from the bridge and/or added some pole-mounted signals (to reduce neck craning), that would make it better.
Holy shit, that's gotta be a record! The record holder in WA is probably this junction in Bellevue, where a measly 18 signals are attached to the bridge in some manner, but it's dwarfed by the number in your Wisconsin example. There's so many, I keep losing count! In no part thanks to Wisconsin's usually excellent signal placement requirements.
If I counted the plans correctly, there are 24 attached in some fashion to the bridge structure (vertically in the web, horizontally from the flange, or suspended vertically from the web, but below the flange).
I think a SPUI's tight right-of-way seems to necessitate bridge placement. Armed with this knowledge, I scoured other SPUIs in WA that might have a few. I found one with a slightly-more-impressive 22 (http://bit.ly/2TC3o4p) in Vancouver. I can't think of any other situation that would require such a high number of signals beneath a bridge.
I went on street view (http://bit.ly/2AyNYqq) to check out that SPUI. NJ, as usually, has the best signal placement of any northeastern state. I quite like what they did, and appreciate them trying to keep the signals closer to eye level, something that's harder to do with bridge placement unless they are dropped down in some way.
I would guess that the record holder in this regard would be somewhere along an Interstate in Texas, but I'm not gonna do any extensive research to back up that guess :-D
Are we talking one mounted to a light pole via a monotube or mast arm, or directly on the light pole support itself? Got the best of both here in one intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/x3tyfH5waKk).
For some reason Belmont has way too high cantilevers to a point that I think it is dangerous: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3762972,-71.1588352,3a,60y,116.94h,91.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFW9EjgwtIInOFR0gLGCtFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
They may be within legal height (barely -- too high IMO) but I wouldn't think those were within the "cone of vision".
iPhone
Those are just "poles" or "pedestals", not really lamp-posts. The only time you really see true "lamp + signals" in DC is on some of the newer "short arm" mast arm installs, like this (http://bit.ly/2H0XrfS). I'm not sure I've seen lamps positioned above post-only signals in DC, like in WI example above.
Did you stop at the stop line?
Geez. Sounds like someone didn't do any cone of vision study.
Per MUTCD Section 4D.15 and figure 4D-5, the top of a signal head 40 feet from the stop line can be as high as 21 feet off the ground, ranging up to 25.6 feet high for a signal head 53 feet or more from the stop line.
Thanks, I did not know the rules were that liberal; they should really be looked at again. I don't really mind signals that far overhead, as there can be numerous physical restrictions (trolley wire, perhaps), but at least use some signals on poles so that they aren't the only thing to look at.
LG-M327
Nice.
The very first time I visited Chicago (1994 as a teen), there were a lot of wire spans in its suburbs (I've never seen any in the city itself). Every visit after that it became less and less common, even statewide. I actually thought none existed nowadays.
Also interesting in your link is that sign hanging in between the signals.
I'm a mast arm type of dude, but I'm not mad at this, it's not sloppy. I am frowning upon those wooden poles though, but its in a city so it's understandable.
There are a few scattered around the state. This one is from the Southern part of the state in Du Quoin, along US 51 (I have posted it previously in another thread):
https://goo.gl/maps/ksGigsvhQ7GcWQbW9
They are odd looking, simply because IL is pretty committed to Mast Arms
Looking at the older imagery it was all span wire.
This is a relatively unique signal, but I'm familiar with another one in California. It is unusual here, since this doesn't seem like an area with lots of pedestrian crossing, which is usually the reason for a right turn FYA.
The essence of this signal is that the right turns are controlled by this signal phase only, independent of the other signals that are showing.
Red ball - thru traffic must stop, but right turns are allowed after stop. Yield to cross-traffic and cross-traffic pedestrians. This light will be red at all times that the thru signals are red and (perhaps) even for a few seconds after thru signals get green to allow for a leading pedestrian interval (LPI). The LPI is not perfect, since right turns are permitted on red in this jurisdiction. (Many right turn FYAs have red arrow which effectively creates a no turn on red situation.)
Yellow arrow - signifies the clearance phase after a sold green arrow or a flashing yellow arrow
Flashing yellow arrow - denotes that right turns have to yield to pedestrians. It is likely that this is only shown while adjacent thru traffic has green light and when the peds have pushed the button.
Green arrow - denotes protected right turn. This will show when the corresponding left (cross-street) is a green arrow. This may also show when adjacent thru has a green light and the peds have not pushed the button to cross.
Right turn FYA at Venice Blvd and Robertson, Los Angeles, CA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282171,-118.3902918,3a,75y,354.93h,78.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s14_6FrmqaMIEnE9acN1kRQ!2e0!5s20190401T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Washington State is weird in that, although turning against a red arrow is allowed, many of the right-facing flashing yellow arrows (for pedestrian protection) do use red orbs.
Here is an example in Auburn, installed within the last two years: https://goo.gl/maps/vtJFUKvhRA8cVhAb9
Couple of theories as to why this choice was made:
1) Operationally, there is no benefit to using a red arrow; to reduce the chance that drivers interpret the red arrow as "NTOR", an orb was used instead.
2) Left turns have a red arrow "lockout" during the walk phase. If drivers behind tall vehicles could only see the pole-mounted signals, and only see red arrows, they may falsely assume the through signal is green (especially if the other direction has an advanced left turn, and opposing through traffic was proceeding).
I had never thought about that, but you're right. At least, in states that allow right turn on red arrow, that is.
I've noticed more "disobedience" of red arrows around here lately. Meaning, quite a few people who wait for the green arrow. I don't know if this is the result of new residents who are not used to WA's more liberal turn-on-red laws, or what. But I appreciate red orbs now more than ever, because I do get tired of waiting for a green arrow when it's not necessary.
This in mind, I am not in favor of changing the law to make turns against red arrows illegal. Changing the law would make many regular right turns, many of which still use red arrows, and many left turns onto one-way streets, effective NTOR situations. This would make turning left onto a freeway on-ramp illegal on a red arrow, something I do quite often (https://youtu.be/2Qa7vD0_TkY) (jump to 0:27 and/or 0:46). My preference continues to be either a blanket NTOR law, or signs where necessary.
Which signal? The ones in my example are in Washington State.
This one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0928517,-77.6535742,3a,75y,231.05h,80.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN_USY3UNwFWnLP8P-jojLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
For NY (outside of NYC) and CA right turns permitted on red orb after stop. Right turns not permitted at all on red arrow.
I would assume that in both NY and CA (and probably WA as well) a flashing red arrow would also have the meaning of right turn permitted after stop, assuming you yield to whatever traffic actually has the right of way. Curious as to why red orb is used instead of flashing red arrow.
In the L.A. example from above at Venice/Robertson, I can tell you that there is also a "right turn signal" sign. This is because for parts of the signal cycle this red orb is lit, even though the through signal cycle has a straight green arrow. This produces the lead pedestrian interval, right turn cannot simply go even though straight traffic can go. Right turns must stop and yield (to pedestrians). After a few seconds, they get a FYA - no need to stop on right turns, but must still yield to pedestrians who are now in the street for a while. Then a solid yellow arrow to show that the right turn signal is ending and then a red ball again.
What I'm not sure about is what happens next. I believe that the next phase of the signal is the left from Venice to Robertson [NO U TURN], which will produce a right green arrow as this is a complementary turn. But I'm not sure is whether during this phase, the red orb is lit or not. While it is common for many 5 aspect signals to have red orb with green right arrow, since this signal is meant to only control the right turn, I would think that the red orb with green arrow would be contradictory. Regardless, a yellow arrow would follow green arrow and then back to red orb.
But what is important to point out is that in this case the red orb of the right turn signal is not always lit at the same times as the red orb of the thru signal. Thru has red during the right turn protected phase. RIght turns have red during the LPI. When Venice has green, both thru and right signals facing Robertson have red orb. I don't know if that's the case with the NY or WA signals, or whether the red orb is just meant, as Jake said, to provide another signal in case it's blocked by a truck. In the WA and NY cases, there is no "right turn signal" sign.
I don't know if something like this is legal under the MUTCD - to have two separately timed red orb signals facing the same traffic. I know there is a big push to get rid of "left turn signal" red orbs in places like VA and PA and replace those with red left arrows. I don't know if the same exists with regard to these right turn signals.
I've noticed that since 2012 or so, NYSDOT has started replacing a lot of signals, many of them being converted to mast arms. I have no idea why the conversion is necessary, but many of them have been sloppy like you mentioned. The first intersection I noticed this at was Washington St and the Arterial in Auburn. Compare the old signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9309339,-76.5763636,3a,75y,74.88h,94.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saFF6IJykb1AEZuGRFXMPrA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) to the new ones (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9309649,-76.5763914,3a,75y,74.88h,94.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4qBxvxDphfVDOIC5Nyanxg!2e0!5s20130901T000000!7i13312!8i6656). Even though the older imagery appears to have brackets that are too long, they seemed shorter in person. Even if I'm not remembering correctly, I can say that the new signals weren't level with each other and some were crooked when they were installed.
It's allowed for right turn signals if "[a] RIGHT TURN SIGNAL (R10-10) sign (see Sections 4D.21 through 4D.24) is mounted adjacent to the signal face(s) controlling the right-turning movement." (4D.05 Paragraph 11 Item B).
Thanks for that. In fact, there is a clear right turn signal sign at the Venice/Robertson signal. On top of that, the thru signal has a green straight arrow. That is a "hint" that the thru signal only controls thru movements and that turns are either controlled by other signals or are prohibited.
(sorry to clip a bunch of your post -- trying to cut down on post length to avoid "tl;dr")
Right-turn leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) are pretty common in Seattle, but very rare (totally unheard of?) elsewhere in WA. The right-facing flashing yellow arrow signals that I see on a regular basis in cities like Auburn, Federal Way, or Bellevue (all WA) do not use leading pedestrian intervals. The FYA comes up immediately with the through signal, often times even when the pedestrian walk sign is in a steady "don't walk" phase. The right-facing FYAs are there simply to aid pedestrian visibility, not to incorporate smarter features like LPIs. In the Auburn examples I posted above, a red orb was used. I 100% guarantee you that a red arrow would have been used if there was an LPI ("...TURN SIGNAL" signs are exceedingly rare in WA).
This is contrary to many of the left turn FYA installations in WA, which not only incorporate leading pedestrian intervals, but often incorporate red arrows throughout the entire WALK phase. This was pioneered in Bellevue and has crept into surrounding areas (and has been adopted by Pierce County entirely, which encompasses almost the entirety of the metro area south of Seattle). These do not work on timed corridors, which are very common in Federal Way, as the walk sign is on for the entire length of the through signals (not allowing any time for a permissive phase). This is probably why I only see these installations in non-timed areas, or in areas where the WALK sign is automatic, but only lasts for about 10-12 seconds.
Normally, not a fan of these. I've had them last the entire length of the through signal before, which is extremely annoying. But places like Puyallup (WA) have actually managed to incorporate some smart features into them. Many of the left turn signals will lag when the pedestrian signal is activated. Through traffic and peds go first. By the time gaps start to develop in through traffic, the FYA activates, and drivers can start turning. Then the green arrow comes up. Not bad, but they're not always that smart. You can sort of see one in action here (https://goo.gl/maps/gQSJbSfLfqNutfx37). Note that there are no cars waiting, but the green arrow has activated. If you spin the camera around, you can see all the cars that just went through while the red arrow, and then FYA, were active.
Leading lefts should maximize the capacity of an isolated intersection. Suppose a NB LT gaps out early. That extra time can be given to the SB THRU (even as the SB LT is still running). With lagging lefts you can't reintroduce the THRU phase since it has already ran (so when that NB LT wants to gap out early it can't... and that's just wasted green time).
I see you revived the PPLT thread, so I'll reply to your point over there.
Without quoting the whole post: I think you and I will get along just fine :-D.
We can certainly agree on California, Illinois, Nevada, Arizona, et al when it comes to signals. Those states all have fairly consistent designs with heavy mast arm use. Aesthetically, I think a typical mast arm install is superior to anything involving excessive wires (including those box span installs with wires along the bottom and top of the signals, even if they "sturdier").
Clean install. I see nothing wrong with this.
I wish the road name sign was bigger.
That's the standard span wire design for Indiana. Nearly all stoplights that use span wires are designed this way and IMO look pretty decent as a result. Certainly compared to what I see in Ohio and Kentucky with their span wires. There's also plenty of mast arm designs throughout the state in the more urbanized parts of the cities. Still, I find Illinois's mast arms to be very nice statewide.
I think you mixed up your words a bit. FIFY.
As for my opinions on this topic, I believe it's just the fact that I'm from Illinois (i.e., the land of mast arms), and when I think of span wire signals, I think of other states. When I think of other states, I think of vacations. So there's definitely bias here that I enjoy a good span wire signal, I won't even try to deny that. I think both have their use cases. And I think both can look good and both can look bad.
JPC14, I generally dislike span-wire, but the best quality installations I've seen are those done by New York State DOT and Nassau County DPW on Long Island.
And Paul, 12-inch heads are not standard everywhere in the country even nowadays. Regrettably the agencies I mentioned still use a mix of both sizes. Usually 12-inch for the main road and either 12 or 8 inch for a smaller intersecting road. I assume it depends on the judgment of the engineer who spec's it. But I agree that 12-inch should be standard almost everywhere in new and rebuilt installations.
I like 12-8-8 as well, it looks cool. The traffic signal I got is 21-8-8, and green (my favorite color, also pretty uncommon now) to boot!
I checked the BC MOT Signal Design Manual (see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-guidelines/electrical-engineering/electrical-traffic-engineering-manual)), and they've actually changed the manual to call for 300mm (12") heads for all new primary, secondary, and auxiliary signals. This change seems to have occurred in the last year or two.
This is actually quite a major change, as 200mm signals are very common for secondary (mounted on poles) and auxiliary (near-side pole) signals, with only some cities (Coquitlam being one example) installing 300mm signals for all installations consistently. Along MOT-maintained roads, 200mm signals were still being installed as of 2019 (see here (https://goo.gl/maps/cm1szJe8TWyqcUby6)).
I think the primary argument was that 300mm signals did not provide enough additional visibility for them to absolutely require it. 300mm signals have always been an option, and they've been installed under all circumstances (primary, secondary, auxiliary) for decades. The difference being that it's never been a requirement. It's similar to the "category b" section of MUTCD 2E: destinations can be 20" UC, but this is not strictly necessary, as 16" UC provides sufficient readability under most circumstances. Similarly, 200mm signals provide sufficient visibility under most circumstances. I suspect the change to 300mm signals will make signals cheaper and easier to install, especially in terms of mounting hardware, with improved visibility being only a small benefit (and only under certain circumstances at that).
This former practice echoes that of Australia, where 200mm signal heads are standard, and 300mm signal heads are only used as warranted (example here (https://goo.gl/maps/aUooECY838uFXjbq5) north of Brisbane).
In my opinion, if you're looking to have the greatest impact on signal visibility, the best practice is not to have only jumbo-sized overhead signals (when will 12" be considered small?), but a series of primary, secondary, and auxiliary signals in different positions. You can combine the two, but I'd recommend 'extra signals' before having only larger primary signals, as is the way in many US states (OR, WA, IN, etc).
I'm trying to remember where in Maryland I've seen span wire. Seems like in the DC area, they're mostly mast arm.
MD signals are easy to remember, for me, as there's almost always a near-side signal, and they use those 12-12-8-8-8 doghouses rather frequently.
For about five years there was an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/8sehvwjTJxMzjxgc8)near me in which 3 of the 4 directions were span wire. I think the reasoning behind it was that different approaches to the intersection were upgraded at different times. You can see the evolution of the intersection pretty well in GSV, but basically the approach with the one mast arm facing it was completed in 2015 as part of the initial widening project on that approach (which is also when the signal bases/light poles for the other approaches were installed with span wires). However, funding constraints prevented other planned improvements at the intersection from being constructed (notably a dual-left turn lane and some realignment and lengthening of the right turn lanes). Those improvements were completed in 2019 and now the intersection is all mast arms.
Normally in a situation like this in Minnesota if a signal system is upgraded at an intersection where there are improvements planned in the near future either every direction gets mast arms with additional space for more signals (example (https://goo.gl/maps/fBUJUGbY8Nut6HkN9)) or the entire intersection gets a "true" temporary span wire signal (wood vertical bases, etc.) until the work is completed and a new permanent signal is installed. This example is the best (or worst) or both worlds, I guess. I haven't seen anything else like it anywhere in the state.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2219511,-83.4852147,3a,75y,161.52h,96.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCM-3M0EpoTxxcmdGeGINOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Belleville Rd. at I-94
This one in Danville, KY. Since Google Streetview last photographed, the eastern mast arm on Main Street has been replaced with a span wire (the existing mast arm still remains in place with signals moving to the span wire–done to accommodate new left turn signalization). Both of the span wires are temporary, as the city is working with KYTC to replace all signals with a new streetscape project in the next few years.
https://goo.gl/maps/9jHsLH2uKC7N7s7RA
(https://i.imgur.com/jIV1Skl.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Vm4Q3tG.jpeg)
I was actually in Waldorf back in January, but I was only on US-301 for a short distance (and not in an area that had any wire span) after coming east on MD-228 via southbound MD-210 heading out of DC. Now that you mention it, I recall seeing some wire span signals along MD-210.
I am not sure there are uglier traffic signals in the country than Houston area horizontal span wire signals.
iPhone
You can complain about seattle all you want, but that city, and the PNW in general, has better and more innovative signalization practices than 90% of the country. That's the only reason you notice the span wire. In places like NY state ugly span wire and poor signal placement are just expected as the norm.
Yup, posting this was like throwing down a lit bomb. But I digress... :spin:
I've perused Seattle on StreetView and the span wires generally don't look at that great. I know earlier in on this topic I said span wires could be appropriate. However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
Very unusual for NJ is the traffic light setup at this new intersection on US 322 at the new Inspira Hospital near NJ 55.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/saPN3SezkNXgkoGw9
While shown here in the construction phase, this is how they completed the project. And odder still...the main road: US 322, has the span wire; the side road has the mast arms.
It does appear there are in-ground bases for posts and mast arms for 322. My guess is that there was some sort of issue with those bases or the traffic light structues, and they went with a Plan B for a while.
Random question, would anyone know how old those lights (on the mast) are? I feel like that design of light (with that back) is the oldest traffic light style that's still common in VA.
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
There are definitely more examples than just Seattle. Vancouver, BC has an extensive amount of span wire in their downtown. Both Seattle and Vancouver have plenty of mast arms as well. The use of span wire is by no means close to a universal practice in either city. Where I live, in Tacoma, another large PNW city, span wire is also very prevalent throughout the downtown core.
There are many reasons why span wire is preferred in urban areas:
(1) easier to modify later if lane layouts change
(2) easier to work into trolley wire setups (esp. important in Vancouver and Seattle)
(3) mast arms are bulky and can be inappropriate in tighter urban areas. Small mast arms, like in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/aa4bG1ShFAJDk7VXA), are a good compromise.
(4) mast arms do nothing to improve signal visibility, which is better achieved through backplates (which Seattle makes extensive use of).
In downtown Seattle and downtown Vancouver, span wire likely became popular early on because overhead signals showed up pretty quickly over a short period of time, mostly in the 70s and 80s, and the cost to implement overhead signals with mast arms would have far exceeded most budgets given the sheer number of signalized intersections. Few modifications have taken place since then, so span wire remains common. This is especially true in Vancouver, where most signals are post-mounted and where the span wire signals were mostly added only to aid in signal visibility.
It should be noted that both cities have plenty of mast arms. Both old and new examples of both can be found throughout each city. In Downtown Seattle, a large number of intersections use only post mounted signals. Many signals that are not post mounted, such as those along 2nd Ave and 5th Ave, are mast arms. Never mind the huge number of mast arms outside of the downtown area.
Basically: don't rag on Seattle because (A) they're not unique in using span wire, (B) they have good reasons to use it, and (C) many intersections don't use span wire anyway.
Couple other things, too: new span wire is hard to come by in WA no matter where you are. Many cities have never used it. Additionally, in that above photo quote (original quote from me), the only intersection in that picture with span wire is from Missouri, and the other two pictures are not from Seattle. What in the hell made you bring up Seattle?
As to the comments above about politics: get the f*** out of here with that shit. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
attack Washington when Jake is around
iPhone
I'm doing better already, and I only have three more sessions of therapy to go.
LOL Good to hear you're doing so well. I hope Jakeroot is making as good or better recovery. LOL
-- When I was speaking of major cities with span wire signals downtown, I was speaking of North America. Seattle is unique among big cities that I have been by having prevalent span wire use in a downtown core. You will not see span wire in downtown Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc. You do not see them used in most other countries, even developing ones. Pedestal mounts or overhead mastarms are pretty universal outside of North America elsewhere that I have seen.
-- Cities like Boston and San Francisco seem to have no issue using overhead mastarms where streetcar wires are present.
I have long been reading about municipalities make up interesting excuses for why they do not use mastarm signals. This 1988 article from the Washington Post is always one I have enjoyed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/). To quote:
Most of Northern Virginia's signals are controlled by the state, which has long preferred span wires. Anne Didden, the state's area engineer on this subject, says they are about $20,000 cheaper and easier to install. Mast arms require undergound wiring and that can get complicated and expensive because underground utilities sometimes have to be worked around, she said. Asked how California, with 25 million people, seems to surmount this problem and put mast arm signals all over the state, Didden said, "Interesting question."
Many municipalities were using the guy-wire mastarms as early as the 50's. Here's footage driving down Sunset Blvd. in Los Angeles in 1963 where overhead guy-wire signals are standard:(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2tU_zAxuc). About the 1:20 mark forward, you can see what appears to be maybe one of the first left-turn signals at Doheny Drive. Modern mastarms came into use sometime in the 1970's I believe. You can see some in Las Vegas in the 70's at about the 1:15 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI).
My beef is not with Seattle. I just don't think they should use span wire signals in the downtown core. My main beef is with span wire signals generally. I don't think they should be used ever and states like California, Nevada, and Illinois reinforce my viewpoint on that. Florida's continued use of span wire given the threat of hurricane winds is embarrassing. However, even the ones they do install are often terrible. Tampa, where I live, has taken to installing diagonal mastarms that are atrocious and have poor visibility for certain approaches to the intersection. https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6 (https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6)
As far as underground wiring goes, NJ has mast arms with overhead wires as power supply. Cranford was one of them before Union County replaced them with their own mono tube arms using underground conduits. I don’t know why it can’t be done like that in VA.
https://goo.gl/maps/NpzScGRasRfnqtp17
I think we've had this conversation before, but it was several years ago. Are span-wire installations more hurricane-resistant? That's what I told my sons the other day in the car during a conversation prompted by driving through a span-wire intersection.
"[Mastarms] are becoming more common in Florida after proving far more reliable than traditional cable-suspended lights during Hurricane Andrew in 1992. State officials said only one was damaged, while more than 2,700 cable-suspended signals broke off and fell, said Ron Cook, a civil engineering professor and co-investigator on the UF project with civil engineering Professor Dave Bloomquist. The DOT now requires the structures at new intersections or intersections where traffic lights are replaced within 10 miles of the coast."
FDOT has changed the installs of mastarms to make them more wind resistant, but I have not seen any data that says they can withstand high winds in the way that mastarm signals can. Here's a picture from the hurricanes in Lafayette, LA this year that is encapsulates why communities should use mastarms:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/08/27/USAT/071f588e-a37e-4765-969f-dcd4bf571346-004_GTY_1269114333.jpg?crop=2999,1687,x0,y172&width=660&height=372&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Notice that the mastarm signals survived essentially without issue, while all of the above ground telephone poles failed.
I find it appalling that FDOT does not have a universal mastarm standard here in Florida. Rather than do things right the first time, they would apparently rather be cheap and be forced to spend more money over the long run by having to replace these trash span wire assemblies when they fail. FDOT can whine about cost all it wants, but plenty of other low tax jurisdictions (Nevada, Arizona, the Dakotas, etc.) have universal mastarm installation without issue.
That intersection doesn't have any pedestrian signals, and new installations require it. You would have to have mast arms wrap three fourths the way around the entire intersection to cover all the posts for above ground wiring for ped signals. I think I have seen installations like that and they are odd looking.
Couple of things here: mast arms, like those in the US, are a fairly unique American invention. Big mast arms with several signals on them, hanging over the street, isn't really something seen in other countries. Other countries use mast arms to mount overhead signals, but it's usually just one, maybe two; most signals are mounted using posts. The Netherlands and perhaps China are two unique cases, where overhead signals seem very common. Japan only uses overhead signals, but they only use one per mast arm (per direction...usually two are mounted back-to-front), so they're not especially bulky.
Basically: if you're asking for stuff like this (https://goo.gl/maps/uA4GmEgJX99wtBBV7) (in Seattle, by the way!), you're asking for something not really seen outside the US. Outside the US, this image (https://goo.gl/maps/KWqjy8wBNUEVLfES6) shows more common practices.
On overhead wires: Here in Seattle, as in Vancouver, many buses are trolleybuses. They rely on overhead catenary to supply electricity, like streetcars, but there are far more lines than most cities with streetcar systems, so overhead wiring is common throughout the city. It's not that it's impossible to use trolleybus catenary (this image (https://goo.gl/maps/QBa5KmNwDAPXoPwK6) clearly shows how it would work), it's just that it wasn't super common to integrate mast arms with overhead trolleybus wire. However, the practice has changed and Seattle does use overhead mast arms now, as I've already said, even at major intersections like this (https://goo.gl/maps/Y95uveyFuuqfJvrp6) where trolleybuses and streetcars mix.
Those mast arms happened when the streetcar was put in, though I'm curious why they didn't do the usual downtown style (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0999497,-84.5126568,3a,75y,352.1h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s590D6OntJRSp8TsMu1LRSQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D590D6OntJRSp8TsMu1LRSQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D159.16216%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192). Cost, perhaps, since the streetcar went so far over?
Anecdotally, I have driven around parts of Nevada, Arizona, and California that have mastarms installed decades ago that are still holding up well. For example, here's a Las Vegas signal outside of Circus Circus casino on Las Vegas Blvd. in 2020 https://goo.gl/maps/2xhSZEUAqxD28u7M9 (https://goo.gl/maps/2xhSZEUAqxD28u7M9) versus 1978 (I think) https://i.pinimg.com/originals/65/d9/cd/65d9cda0864f6dbd9634826084ab7232.jpg (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/65/d9/cd/65d9cda0864f6dbd9634826084ab7232.jpg). When you are talking about getting 40-50 years out of a traffic signal setup, that's pretty good. Los Angeles still has many guy-wire mastarms that were installed in the 60's in use. While I can't speak for other jurisdictions, Florida has spent a lot of money replacing span wire installations either due to failure in high-winds/hurricanes, or functional obsolescence. Rarely does one see signals here that have been in place for 40+ years. Almost all have been replaced with new span wire signals or mastarm signals.
Another thing that people often forget about with mast arms is that they can be reused almost as often as span wire signals as long as it isn't some weird skewed intersection with custom masts. Pretty much any time mast arms can be reused, they are (at least in my area). Typically an installation has to be at least 40 or 50 years old or there has to be a major reconstruction project that significantly alters the footprint of the intersection for the masts to be replaced outright. For example, this (https://goo.gl/maps/whhoo3RVKhmBTtUs8)traffic signal (which wasn't very old) was replaced with a roundabout so three of the four mast arms got reused here (https://goo.gl/maps/az7XEDoMFvv2vCsg7), albeit with slightly different signal components. I'm sure this practice of reusing masts differs by jurisdiction, and some areas definitely seen more keen on it than others, but at least it can be done if $$ are a concern.
Due to the typical placement of NJ's mast arms, they are relatively often taken down by a tractor trailer turning tightly or a vehicle hitting it pretty good.
The time to fully repair it is usually hours, not some theoretical long term project you're guessing at.
The pole and mast are usually reusable, and a bucket truck or lift contraption can often lift it back into place. The trucks that respond to these incidents have spare signals on them to replace any that were destroyed in the crash. The employees are on call to respond to such incidents.
For larger incidents, there are contractors on call that can replace a signal structure within hours as well.
They're just placed way too close to the roadway. Trucks making tight right turns often can snag it, or a crash within the intersection can send a car into it.
I'll use a few examples here:
https://goo.gl/maps/qfZdj2WSL6sYhZL88 (right turns are now banned at this particular intersection due to this light pole being hit, but the movement can be made at the previous intersection). https://goo.gl/maps/Fs19Pnv8FR28gQ3u9
https://goo.gl/maps/5cf48w2pKgAA4iFY9
(BTW, I specifically posted these 3 because they've all been hit, numerous times. The pole and masts are still reused...only the light itself may have been replaced. In all cases, the repairs were done same day.
As a side note, when I was young my parents and grandparents said that the traffic signal at that intersection in Woodbury was manually operated by a cop. There was a small telephone booth like spot where the cop would operate the signal.
I don't have definitive data on this, but I recall reading something several years ago about this. Installation cost for span wire is cheaper than mast arm. Regular operating costs should be identical. But ongoing maintenance costs are greater for span wire than mast arm. Span wire setups are more likely to need the signal heads realigned due to getting turned by weather, and the span wires themselves occasionally need to be re-tensioned...these costs are ongoing for the life of the signal and are almost completely absent with a mast arm or similar setup.
DC does actually use near side post-mounted signals, just not at every intersection.
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
Near sided post mounted signals can be used to address the width of the cross street, and like jakeroot mentions do exist in many places in DC without running afoul of the aesthetic rules.
The problem is the width of the street you may be on, and those can only be addressed with signal faces in the middle of the street. The common ways of handling that are mast arms, span wire, or post mounted signals on a cement island. Span wire, to my knowledge, does not exist in DC at all except temporary installations. Pennsylvania Avenue does post mount signals in the median. But Constitution and Independence through much of Downtown are 8 lanes wide without an island and generally without mast arms. With the benefit of experience, I can tell you that if you are driving in the left lane on those streets, it can be quite easy to miss one of the sidemounted signals because the streets are so wide.
Great memory!
Yep, when *I* remember it, the small shack was located on this corner, about where the control boxes are located: https://goo.gl/maps/p8GCe1ZMMp91aUxp7 . I want to say the traffic signal was upgraded in the 1980's, and as a result the new signal wouldn't permit an override function the old signal had (I find that a little hard to believe as I've seen even more modern signals in the state operated by police, but I remember that being reported at the time).
I tried looking on the web for that shack and couldn't find a picture, but I did come across this picture which shows an even earlier version of the traffic lights at the intersection and a shack house which would've been across the street of that above image (https://www.flickr.com/photos/nat507/4781232743/) , which would be this corner: https://goo.gl/maps/zkfFVV5aGFZ2VV496. As you can see, the old courthouse remains, and even has the same monument out front.
"Neither does the District of Columbia" is a stretch when you cite an article from 1988. More accurately, I think it's best stated that DC "has traditionally not used span wire as they are not in keeping with the aesthetics of the district". Comparetively, span wire is not as much of an aesthetic concern in Seattle given the sheer number of existing non-signal wires overhead along many city streets. DC does not have this problem so span wire signals would look very odd.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that span wire is always worse. I would say that, in 90% of circumstances, span wire is worse. But there are situations where span wire can be appropriate. The catch is that it's not just span wire vs mast arm vs post-mounted...it's span wire versus an indeterminate number of overhead signals, mast arm thickness, and mast arm length ...versus post-mounted. There is a wide range of mast arm designs, and they are rarely created equal: DC's short mast arms are far better than this hulking behemoth (https://goo.gl/maps/weKRyMfBRAWZMpZ39) in Seattle, for example, despite both being mast arm signals. Many of LA's mast arms with a single overhead signal (as you already linked to above) are indeed a great setup that really should be used far more often than it is. DC could stand to use a variation of that.
If you think that Seattle signal is a behemoth, you would really hate some of these Florida mastarms, as I do. Some links:
https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9 (https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9)
https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7 (https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7)
https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9 (https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9)
It seems a bit unfair to assume that it's always worse. Even that ancient article you cited indicates that most agencies that use mast arms chose to do so purely out of aesthetic preference. For those areas that use them to better weather storms, Seattle does not meet this criteria: mild weather, no hurricanes, wind is only an occasional issue, etc. At this point, the possibility of choosing span wire for aesthetics becomes possible. For years, Seattle's preference was simply to use one or the other, depending on the circumstances (Seattle has used mast arms for decades), but those circumstances seemed to dictate that the downtown core would use span wire or post mounted signals, and the suburbs would largely use mast arm or span wire depending on the individual circumstances.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that span wire was likely most common early on because larger mast arms weren't available (these (https://goo.gl/maps/V4JtZhTSDUweSYxD6) are typical old Seattle mast arms). In the downtown core, where you'd have four or five through lanes along a one-way street, having a small mast arm on one side wasn't considered "good enough" so they used span wire to centre the signals. This is probably why, for decades, only 4th Ave downtown ever used span wire: most of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 7th used post mounted only signals because 4th was the widest (2nd was close in width, but still used post-mounted signals). Span wire briefly became common along some streets (chiefly 2nd in the Belltown area and parts of 6th and 7th), but mast arms have since become far more common: 2nd (https://goo.gl/maps/wMRP1pqwLKXuse4k8), 5th (https://goo.gl/maps/4Y1cEvUodkpegWXN8), 6th (https://goo.gl/maps/aujZo8FLqTWjzoHs5), 7th (https://goo.gl/maps/A1mYC3ocP5xFGUiR9)...these streets all have multiple examples along them, almost all new within the last ten years.
tl;dr...Seattle likely had reasons to use span wire in the past, be it for aesthetic or technical reasons, but new span wire is not installed downtown (simply maintained, such as long 4th Ave), and mast arms or post mounted signals are now the norm only (new span wire installations seem to have ended about 8 or 10 years ago). Don't worry about maintaining a fight here, since you already won! :-D
Also, yes, those signals in Florida are awful. Although it should be noted that those are all suburban environments where massive, hulking mast arms don't necessarily look out of place. They do look stupid there (way overbuilt IMO), but they'd look hilariously stupid in a downtown core.
Designed by none other than Minoru Yamasaki, perhaps most noted for the original World Trade Center towers. It is a rather odd building. According to this article (http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/building/5087/) from the University of Washington:
"[t]he unusual tapered base was selected for multiple reasons. First, its form proved highly effective in resisting huge seismic jolts that could affect Seattle. Second, Yamasaki wanted to preserve the "green" character of Downtown Seattle, and therefore wanted to minimize the building's footprint on the site. Third, he wanted to devote much of the ground space to a retail shopping plaza. Fourth, clearly, Yamasaki also was enamored of the base's soaring, curved form."
With the adjacent Rainier Square Tower now complete, it's fair to say that this block has more curving buildings than any other part of Seattle!
BTW, I can give you the bulky mastarms downtown here too: https://goo.gl/maps/QXENvi9Ei6RzC2298 (https://goo.gl/maps/QXENvi9Ei6RzC2298) https://goo.gl/maps/5VyBoQEsBU5jxWbW6 (https://goo.gl/maps/5VyBoQEsBU5jxWbW6) https://goo.gl/maps/7K4Q58Qiw9QBiPXm6 (https://goo.gl/maps/7K4Q58Qiw9QBiPXm6)
Here, the masts are typically placed on the far side of the sidewalk from the intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2184791,-97.4236947,3a,42.8y,261.41h,93.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szKOEx4kVIwXO0g5nHzsvJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). If, for some reason, the mast has to be placed closer, it is protected by a much higher curb than seems to be the case in NJ. (You can see this at one of the other corners of this intersection.)
Question: Which do you prefer
Option 1: Span Wire
votes: 17
Option 2: Mast Arm
votes: 75
Title: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 04, 2019, 08:28:18 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 04, 2019, 08:28:18 PM
This is a question I think all signal fans have an opinion on, I want to hear all the reasons and try to settle the debate.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Rick1962 on January 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
Post by: Rick1962 on January 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
For most applications, mast arms. For intersections with unusual geometry or that otherwise require odd signal placement, span wires.
SM-T580
SM-T580
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 04, 2019, 09:19:16 PM
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 04, 2019, 09:19:16 PM
Quote from: Rick1962 on January 04, 2019, 09:13:23 PM
For intersections with unusual geometry or that otherwise require odd signal placement, span wires.
I don't even think this is the case. There are states that use mast arms almost 100 percent, and I'm sure there are some oddball intersections in all of them.
That said, I am Team Mast Arm. Span wires are ugly and should only be used for temporary setups.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 04, 2019, 11:30:57 PM
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on January 04, 2019, 11:30:57 PM
Spanwires in my part of NY are basically the default, so I don't have much of an opinion on them. Mast arms are less common and look nicer to me.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: index on January 05, 2019, 02:14:57 AM
Post by: index on January 05, 2019, 02:14:57 AM
NCDOT makes sporadic use of mast arms, although there seems to be more use in hurricane-prone areas like the Outer Banks where spanwires wouldn't fare too well. IIRC, mast arms are almost exclusively used in the OBX with little to no spanwires at all.
I'd guess a ballpark figure of 95% of the time, outside of urban areas, the preferred choice here is spanwires. It's a lot cheaper to just take some wooden poles and spanwires and slap some signals on them so that's what a lot of southern DOTs do. It's not too pretty but I personally like it and it gets the job done good enough. Signs mounted to spanwires is also something I like.
With FDOT's use of spanwires at some of their larger intersections, they somehow manage to make them look not cheap, IMO.
I'd guess a ballpark figure of 95% of the time, outside of urban areas, the preferred choice here is spanwires. It's a lot cheaper to just take some wooden poles and spanwires and slap some signals on them so that's what a lot of southern DOTs do. It's not too pretty but I personally like it and it gets the job done good enough. Signs mounted to spanwires is also something I like.
With FDOT's use of spanwires at some of their larger intersections, they somehow manage to make them look not cheap, IMO.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: signalman on January 05, 2019, 07:33:55 AM
Post by: signalman on January 05, 2019, 07:33:55 AM
I like span wire installs. Part of it may be that I'm from NJ where span wire is pretty rare aside from temporary installs. I honestly can't pinpoint what it is about it that I like, but I tend to admire it more than mast arms. I really enjoy busy diagonal spans with many signal heads on one wire.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: 1995hoo on January 05, 2019, 09:20:42 AM
Post by: 1995hoo on January 05, 2019, 09:20:42 AM
I grew up mostly seeing span wire. I think it's ugly and often lends a cluttered look to an intersection.
Regarding hurricanes, my brother-in-law and his family live in Broward County and they seem to have a lot of span wire, which surprised me. I'd have expected more mast arms. I remember for Hurricane Fran in 1996 the city of Durham, NC, removed the span-wire-mounted signals in advance of the storm and wrapped the wire around the support poles.
(My autocorrect keeps trying to change it to "spam wire." )
Regarding hurricanes, my brother-in-law and his family live in Broward County and they seem to have a lot of span wire, which surprised me. I'd have expected more mast arms. I remember for Hurricane Fran in 1996 the city of Durham, NC, removed the span-wire-mounted signals in advance of the storm and wrapped the wire around the support poles.
(My autocorrect keeps trying to change it to "spam wire." )
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: UCFKnights on January 05, 2019, 10:36:08 AM
Post by: UCFKnights on January 05, 2019, 10:36:08 AM
Quote from: signalman on January 05, 2019, 07:33:55 AMThe diagonal installs are the absolute worst, there is almost always some very severe visibility issues on intersections with 90 degree angles. The only type I hate more are the X patterns. FDOT used to do some nice span wire installations, and many of them typically used to include a nearby signal centered on the roadway, and a single per lane on the far side, which the mast arms typically left off all nearby signals, giving me a preference for span wires in their installs, but they seem to have mostly cut that out, and without that, I prefer mast arms for sure.
I like span wire installs. Part of it may be that I'm from NJ where span wire is pretty rare aside from temporary installs. I honestly can't pinpoint what it is about it that I like, but I tend to admire it more than mast arms. I really enjoy busy diagonal spans with many signal heads on one wire.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 10:48:01 AM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 10:48:01 AM
I'll say my opinion. I really do prefer mast arms, especially in like towns, but if the road is larger than 6 lanes wide, then I think span wires would look better, I've seen some really boxy Florida mast arm installations and I know they are to prevent hurricane damage but still they look awful. I'll send some intersections and say which is better for which: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg/381px-Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg
This one a span wire is better, I cannot get over how ugly this is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Definitely prefer mast arm here, in a downtown area, wish the signals were attached to the crossing signal cantilevers.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Mast arm would be much better here, the road isn't that big, and the angles are normal.
This one a span wire is better, I cannot get over how ugly this is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Definitely prefer mast arm here, in a downtown area, wish the signals were attached to the crossing signal cantilevers.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Mast arm would be much better here, the road isn't that big, and the angles are normal.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: index on January 05, 2019, 08:04:23 PM
Post by: index on January 05, 2019, 08:04:23 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 10:48:01 AM
I'll say my opinion. I really do prefer mast arms, especially in like towns, but if the road is larger than 6 lanes wide, then I think span wires would look better, I've seen some really boxy Florida mast arm installations and I know they are to prevent hurricane damage but still they look awful. I'll send some intersections and say which is better for which: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg/381px-Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg/381px-Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg)
This one a span wire is better, I cannot get over how ugly this is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Definitely prefer mast arm here, in a downtown area, wish the signals were attached to the crossing signal cantilevers.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Mast arm would be much better here, the road isn't that big, and the angles are normal.
Had to go with masts on the second one. A passing train, especially an intermodal one, wouldn't be very kind to a set of spanwire signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2019, 08:40:57 PM
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2019, 08:40:57 PM
Seattle is big on span wire, and even still has a few pedestrian signals on them
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7885/31681695797_dc8fe5b033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor)Wire-mounted pedestrain signal (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7885/31681695797_dc8fe5b033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor)Wire-mounted pedestrain signal (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 09:01:58 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 09:01:58 PM
Quote from: index on January 05, 2019, 08:04:23 PMNo freight to worry about here, but I agree.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 10:48:01 AM
I'll say my opinion. I really do prefer mast arms, especially in like towns, but if the road is larger than 6 lanes wide, then I think span wires would look better, I've seen some really boxy Florida mast arm installations and I know they are to prevent hurricane damage but still they look awful. I'll send some intersections and say which is better for which: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg/381px-Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg/381px-Traffic_light_at_megasection.jpg)
This one a span wire is better, I cannot get over how ugly this is.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2188244,-70.7865896,3a,60y,66.15h,95.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6J8LcZJ4w9VHGbT3_u7YPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Definitely prefer mast arm here, in a downtown area, wish the signals were attached to the crossing signal cantilevers.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4844545,-71.2198707,3a,60y,129.18h,90.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1she5ZpYUJb4IyyXpw3OHrxw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Mast arm would be much better here, the road isn't that big, and the angles are normal.
Had to go with masts on the second one. A passing train, especially an intermodal one, wouldn't be very kind to a set of span wire signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 09:02:25 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 05, 2019, 09:02:25 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2019, 08:40:57 PMThat's been against the MUTCD for years lol
Seattle is big on span wire, and even still has a few pedestrian signals on them
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7885/31681695797_dc8fe5b033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor)Wire-mounted pedestrain signal (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 10:10:33 AM
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 10:10:33 AM
What bugs me about mast arms is when they try to be works of art. Thick and huge diameters (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/zWz7Y2ca8uq)), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/B4F6XPgrcop)). That's very distracting. Trying to blend in is one thing; being an art exhibit is another. That's not the purpose of a traffic signal.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:57:04 AM
Post by: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:57:04 AM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 10:10:33 AM
What bugs me about mast arms is when they try to be works of art. Thick and huge diameters (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/zWz7Y2ca8uq)), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/B4F6XPgrcop)). That's very distracting. Trying to blend in is one thing; being an art exhibit is another. That's not the purpose of a traffic signal.
Thick and huge is more for complying with recent changes to AASHTO design criteria than being an art installation. A couple years ago now FHWA made it a funding requirement to follow more recent AASHTO standards.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 11:05:02 AM
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 11:05:02 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 06, 2019, 10:57:04 AMQuote from: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 10:10:33 AM
What bugs me about mast arms is when they try to be works of art. Thick and huge diameters (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/zWz7Y2ca8uq)), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this (https://goo.gl/maps/B4F6XPgrcop)). That's very distracting. Trying to blend in is one thing; being an art exhibit is another. That's not the purpose of a traffic signal.
Thick and huge is more for complying with recent changes to AASHTO design criteria than being an art installation. A couple years ago now FHWA made it a funding requirement to follow more recent AASHTO standards.
If that's current AASHTO design criteria, then shame on them. It makes it a lot harder to see the actual signals. Why this is mandated but span wires are still okay, I don't understand.
Minutia sh*t like this is what makes me think AASHTO is now an agency desperately in search of a mission.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: DaBigE on January 06, 2019, 03:24:22 PM
Post by: DaBigE on January 06, 2019, 03:24:22 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 11:05:02 AM
If that's current AASHTO design criteria, then shame on them. It makes it a lot harder to see the actual signals.
That's debatable. One could also say the thicker arm blocks out more landscape noise, similar to the thought behind installing backplates.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 06, 2019, 05:38:11 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 06, 2019, 05:38:11 PM
Yeah, another thought I had was if the spa wires are in 4 spans, showing a box from the top view, poles could be used, but if it's one wire directly across, then spanwires are fine, unless it's a downtown, I just think having the spanwires in boxes is a stupid way.
iPhone
iPhone
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 06:38:35 PM
Post by: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 06:38:35 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 06, 2019, 03:24:22 PMQuote from: wanderer2575 on January 06, 2019, 11:05:02 AM
If that's current AASHTO design criteria, then shame on them. It makes it a lot harder to see the actual signals.
That's debatable. One could also say the thicker arm blocks out more landscape noise, similar to the thought behind installing backplates.
Backplates around the entire fixture blocks out landscape noise. But I find that thick mast arms across the entire roadway and backing only part of the fixture makes it more difficult to see. But as you note, that perception varies by person.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2019, 08:34:58 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2019, 08:34:58 PM
Mast arm 99 times out of 100. But read on since I'm quite particular. Signals can visually clutter spaces, so I'm quite sensitive to their placement.
Span wire used to drive me crazy, because they can swing and look lazy. But newer box-span installs with two wires that keep the signals nice and taut are quite nice. As long as supplementary signals are used on the corners, I'm happy with this style (though I prefer mast arms). Regular single-span and diagonal-span can bugger off.
My everyday preference is for all intersections to be completely controlled by pole-mounted signals, with overhead signals being [# of lanes - 1]. Spokane, WA (http://bit.ly/2VGnnRo) and Pullman, WA (http://bit.ly/2C2wtim) have great examples of unprotected signalization, with poles doing the heavy lifting and the mast arm providing an extra signal. If a median is available, I prefer the left turn signals to be mounted in them (and set back to avoid collisions). This is the standard for dedicated left turn signals in BC (http://bit.ly/2Rav5Vc). If no median is available, regular left turn signal placement is fine (as long as the mast arm ends at the last signal, as is standard in CA).
I also think DC has great signalization (though they are sometimes lacking in left-turn signal redundancy). All the pole-mounted signals and extra tiny mast arms at most new intersections (http://bit.ly/2LV6L3V) make the city much nicer to walk around than a city like Seattle, where you're constantly walking under trolley and signal wires.
Span wire used to drive me crazy, because they can swing and look lazy. But newer box-span installs with two wires that keep the signals nice and taut are quite nice. As long as supplementary signals are used on the corners, I'm happy with this style (though I prefer mast arms). Regular single-span and diagonal-span can bugger off.
My everyday preference is for all intersections to be completely controlled by pole-mounted signals, with overhead signals being [# of lanes - 1]. Spokane, WA (http://bit.ly/2VGnnRo) and Pullman, WA (http://bit.ly/2C2wtim) have great examples of unprotected signalization, with poles doing the heavy lifting and the mast arm providing an extra signal. If a median is available, I prefer the left turn signals to be mounted in them (and set back to avoid collisions). This is the standard for dedicated left turn signals in BC (http://bit.ly/2Rav5Vc). If no median is available, regular left turn signal placement is fine (as long as the mast arm ends at the last signal, as is standard in CA).
I also think DC has great signalization (though they are sometimes lacking in left-turn signal redundancy). All the pole-mounted signals and extra tiny mast arms at most new intersections (http://bit.ly/2LV6L3V) make the city much nicer to walk around than a city like Seattle, where you're constantly walking under trolley and signal wires.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 06, 2019, 09:25:39 PM
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 06, 2019, 09:25:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 06, 2019, 08:34:58 PM
My everyday preference is for all intersections to be completely controlled by pole-mounted signals, with overhead signals being [# of lanes - 1]. Spokane, WA (http://bit.ly/2VGnnRo) and Pullman, WA (http://bit.ly/2C2wtim) have great examples of unprotected signalization, with poles doing the heavy lifting and the mast arm providing an extra signal. If a median is available, I prefer the left turn signals to be mounted in them (and set back to avoid collisions). This is the standard for dedicated left turn signals in BC (http://bit.ly/2Rav5Vc). If no median is available, regular left turn signal placement is fine (as long as the mast arm ends at the last signal, as is standard in CA).
I also think DC has great signalization (though they are sometimes lacking in left-turn signal redundancy). All the pole-mounted signals and extra tiny mast arms at most new intersections (http://bit.ly/2LV6L3V) make the city much nicer to walk around than a city like Seattle, where you're constantly walking under trolley and signal wires.
I like how you can tell that the red minivan (in the Victoria, BC GSV) made an illegal left turn through the red light, when you continue through the images across the overpass. :-D (P.S. Your link is a bit screwed up, I fixed it in my quote though.)
Personally, I don't think the median left turn signals are necessary, although I can appreciate how one might like them. However, I do believe that there should be at least two signal heads for left turns.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2019, 09:41:13 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2019, 09:41:13 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 06, 2019, 09:25:39 PM
I like how you can tell that the red minivan (in the Victoria, BC GSV) made an illegal left turn through the red light, when you continue through the images across the overpass. :-D (P.S. Your link is a bit screwed up, I fixed it in my quote though.)
Personally, I don't think the median left turn signals are necessary, although I can appreciate how one might like them. However, I do believe that there should be at least two signal heads for left turns.
Thank you for the tip on the broken link. Should be fixed now.
I thought someone might bring that up! :-D Believe it or not, that's actually a legal maneuver in British Columbia (alongside a few other PNW states and MI). Left turns onto one-way streets are legal on red, even from two-way streets.
My preference for median mounted left turn signals is simply to declutter overhead space. As long as there are sufficient redundant left turn signals, I'm not completely sold on the requirement for overhead signals. Though, I understand them especially at larger intersections. Totally agree on the requirement for extra signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 06, 2019, 10:04:17 PM
Post by: MNHighwayMan on January 06, 2019, 10:04:17 PM
Huh, I didn't know that. I guess I'd be the foreigner sitting in the turn lane waiting for green, then! :-P
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: CJResotko on January 06, 2019, 10:18:34 PM
Post by: CJResotko on January 06, 2019, 10:18:34 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2019, 08:40:57 PMVery strange yet interesting.
Seattle is big on span wire, and even still has a few pedestrian signals on them
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7885/31681695797_dc8fe5b033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor)Wire-mounted pedestrain signal (https://flic.kr/p/QgAYor) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 06, 2019, 11:05:38 PM
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 06, 2019, 11:05:38 PM
I don't even notice some signals on span wires until I'm very close to them. Especially if the signal heads don't have backplates. Any signal on span wires is wholly inadequate. And quite often, signals on span wires won't even be pointed in the direction necessary to be the most easily noticed by drivers. I'd like to see a signal if I'm supposed to obey or utilize it?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: PurdueBill on January 07, 2019, 10:31:19 AM
Post by: PurdueBill on January 07, 2019, 10:31:19 AM
Probably because of seeing so many in Indiana, where INDOT does span wire setups right (massively overbuilt), I don't mind them. But in my native Massachusetts, MassDOT and their predecessors (MassHighway and DPW) build flimsier ones in comparison that sag and don't look right when you see photos side by side. INDOT does massively overbuild span wire setups but it does seem to pay off. I've seen failed ones in Massachusettts, Ohio, and Delaware, but not Indiana.
It pains me to see places like West Lafayette taking down span wire assemblies left behind by INDOT that had decades of life left in them just because they didn't look good for the streetscape (e.g., Northwestern and Stadium; Northwestern and Lindberg; Grant and Wood; State and River; River and Howard; River and Harrison Bridge offramp just to name a few) to replace them with fancy mast arm assemblies. Do like South Bend did and paint them. Coat of black paint on masts and signals and they appear as all new. A LOT less waste, and could have reused what INDOT left in place free of charge.
It pains me to see places like West Lafayette taking down span wire assemblies left behind by INDOT that had decades of life left in them just because they didn't look good for the streetscape (e.g., Northwestern and Stadium; Northwestern and Lindberg; Grant and Wood; State and River; River and Howard; River and Harrison Bridge offramp just to name a few) to replace them with fancy mast arm assemblies. Do like South Bend did and paint them. Coat of black paint on masts and signals and they appear as all new. A LOT less waste, and could have reused what INDOT left in place free of charge.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 09:56:39 PM
Post by: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 09:56:39 PM
Mast arm. But I also like stoplights mounted to bridges.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 10:28:05 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 10:28:05 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 09:56:39 PM
Mast arm. But I also like stoplights mounted to bridges.
Like bridge assemblies (what I would call a gantry), or actual bridges?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 10:42:50 PM
Post by: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 10:42:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 10:28:05 PMQuote from: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 09:56:39 PM
Mast arm. But I also like stoplights mounted to bridges.
Like bridge assemblies (what I would call a gantry), or actual bridges?
Actual bridges. Like this. (https://goo.gl/maps/KbzQY9v9Jjv)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 10:42:50 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 10:28:05 PMActual bridges. Like this. (https://goo.gl/maps/KbzQY9v9Jjv)Quote from: kphoger on January 07, 2019, 09:56:39 PMLike bridge assemblies (what I would call a gantry), or actual bridges?
Mast arm. But I also like stoplights mounted to bridges.
Ahh, okay. Would something more modern like this count as well? http://bit.ly/2QvZgRE
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PM
Post by: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PM
Then we have the mother of all bridge mounts: https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2 (https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2) (at least in the state of Wisconsin)
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.
Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, 4D.15 (01)The top of the signal housing of a vehicular signal face located over any portion of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall not be more than 25.6 feet above the pavement.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadman65 on January 07, 2019, 11:35:31 PM
Post by: roadman65 on January 07, 2019, 11:35:31 PM
I like Mast arms but in Florida we use both and some span wires are okay, but dislike the ones where they drape two side by side cables like on US 98 in Lakeland north of I-4 or even in some Orlando set ups. One span wire can hold up to 30 or more heads over a wide intersection ( I am talking diagonally) but lately two wires holding two directions each are installed around Orlando and Lakeland.
In Tampa and surrounding Hillsborough County, they seem to be using one wire instead of the two (the support cable on top that sags, and the power supply cable that is level) that Florida always had between concrete strain poles and going like New York, but using super fat (5 feet diameter) metal poles which look so gawky to the eyes. Mast arms are appearing less frequently in the Bay Area despite in the Panhandle and South Florida span wires are getting hard to find.
In Tampa and surrounding Hillsborough County, they seem to be using one wire instead of the two (the support cable on top that sags, and the power supply cable that is level) that Florida always had between concrete strain poles and going like New York, but using super fat (5 feet diameter) metal poles which look so gawky to the eyes. Mast arms are appearing less frequently in the Bay Area despite in the Panhandle and South Florida span wires are getting hard to find.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, 4D.15 (01)The top of the signal housing of a vehicular signal face located over any portion of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall not be more than 25.6 feet above the pavement.
I would personally consider 25.6 feet to be too high up, even if set back. If they lowered the signals from the bridge and/or added some pole-mounted signals (to reduce neck craning), that would make it better.
Quote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PM
Then we have the mother of all bridge mounts: https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2 (at least in the state of Wisconsin)
Holy shit, that's gotta be a record! The record holder in WA is probably this junction in Bellevue, where a measly 18 signals are attached to the bridge in some manner, but it's dwarfed by the number in your Wisconsin example. There's so many, I keep losing count! In no part thanks to Wisconsin's usually excellent signal placement requirements.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadman65 on January 08, 2019, 12:02:43 AM
Post by: roadman65 on January 08, 2019, 12:02:43 AM
Speaking of signals attached to bridges, I noticed NJ most signals that are around overpasses seem to have those needed placement under the structures to be on side mount pedestal poles.
Even NJ with their first SPUI intersection in East Windsor, NJDOT or the NJTA opted to not attach them to the bridge but to place them on poles next to or the horizontal mount arms under the structure. I guess NJDOT has an issue with that or just never thought of.
Even NJ with their first SPUI intersection in East Windsor, NJDOT or the NJTA opted to not attach them to the bridge but to place them on poles next to or the horizontal mount arms under the structure. I guess NJDOT has an issue with that or just never thought of.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 12:18:21 AM
Post by: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 12:18:21 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PM
Then we have the mother of all bridge mounts: https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2 (https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2) (at least in the state of Wisconsin)
Holy shit, that's gotta be a record! The record holder in WA is probably this junction (http://bit.ly/2ABU75o) in Bellevue, where a measly 18 signals are attached to the bridge in some manner, but it's dwarfed by the number in your Wisconsin example. There's so many, I keep losing count! In no part thanks to Wisconsin's usually excellent signal placement requirements.
If I counted the plans correctly, there are 24 attached in some fashion to the bridge structure (vertically in the web, horizontally from the flange, or suspended vertically from the web, but below the flange).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 08, 2019, 12:30:36 AM
Post by: jakeroot on January 08, 2019, 12:30:36 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 12:18:21 AMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMIf I counted the plans correctly, there are 24 attached in some fashion to the bridge structure (vertically in the web, horizontally from the flange, or suspended vertically from the web, but below the flange).Quote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PMHoly shit, that's gotta be a record! The record holder in WA is probably this junction (http://bit.ly/2ABU75o) in Bellevue, where a measly 18 signals are attached to the bridge in some manner, but it's dwarfed by the number in your Wisconsin example. There's so many, I keep losing count! In no part thanks to Wisconsin's usually excellent signal placement requirements.
Then we have the mother of all bridge mounts: https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2 (https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2) (at least in the state of Wisconsin)
I think a SPUI's tight right-of-way seems to necessitate bridge placement. Armed with this knowledge, I scoured other SPUIs in WA that might have a few. I found one with a slightly-more-impressive 22 (http://bit.ly/2TC3o4p) in Vancouver. I can't think of any other situation that would require such a high number of signals beneath a bridge.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 08, 2019, 12:02:43 AM
Speaking of signals attached to bridges, I noticed NJ most signals that are around overpasses seem to have those needed placement under the structures to be on side mount pedestal poles.
Even NJ with their first SPUI intersection in East Windsor, NJDOT or the NJTA opted to not attach them to the bridge but to place them on poles next to or the horizontal mount arms under the structure. I guess NJDOT has an issue with that or just never thought of.
I went on street view (http://bit.ly/2AyNYqq) to check out that SPUI. NJ, as usually, has the best signal placement of any northeastern state. I quite like what they did, and appreciate them trying to keep the signals closer to eye level, something that's harder to do with bridge placement unless they are dropped down in some way.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 08, 2019, 09:16:01 AM
Post by: paulthemapguy on January 08, 2019, 09:16:01 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PM
Then we have the mother of all bridge mounts: https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2 (https://goo.gl/maps/xnU51UXQEcE2) (at least in the state of Wisconsin)
Holy shit, that's gotta be a record! The record holder in WA is probably this junction (http://bit.ly/2ABU75o) in Bellevue, where a measly 18 signals are attached to the bridge in some manner, but it's dwarfed by the number in your Wisconsin example. There's so many, I keep losing count! In no part thanks to Wisconsin's usually excellent signal placement requirements.
I would guess that the record holder in this regard would be somewhere along an Interstate in Texas, but I'm not gonna do any extensive research to back up that guess :-D
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AM
Post by: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AM
Mast arms for me (although lamppost-mounted signals are even cooler!)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 01:32:44 PM
Post by: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AM
Mast arms for me (although lamppost-mounted signals are even cooler!)
Are we talking one mounted to a light pole via a monotube or mast arm, or directly on the light pole support itself? Got the best of both here in one intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/x3tyfH5waKk).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mroad860 on January 08, 2019, 03:19:01 PM
Post by: mroad860 on January 08, 2019, 03:19:01 PM
Depends on the situation. Span wire seems more appropriate for any rural area or rural village area where other utility wires are on poles. Some states do it right (NY, CT, FL) where they make the signals look neatly mounted and balanced.
Mast arms (thinner, shorter) look better for an area that has all of its utilities buried underground. NYC, NJ, CA
I'm not a fan of the thicker mast arms. They almost appear toy-like in appearance. They look more appropriate for a shopping area full of big box stores
Ground pedestal or light pole mounted signals looks best (used to be more common in Mass). Aside from overhead visibility issues. Some places (like Ireland) only use overhead signals when needed but most are on ground pedestals which have a neat appearance and there seems to be little visibility issue
Mast arms (thinner, shorter) look better for an area that has all of its utilities buried underground. NYC, NJ, CA
I'm not a fan of the thicker mast arms. They almost appear toy-like in appearance. They look more appropriate for a shopping area full of big box stores
Ground pedestal or light pole mounted signals looks best (used to be more common in Mass). Aside from overhead visibility issues. Some places (like Ireland) only use overhead signals when needed but most are on ground pedestals which have a neat appearance and there seems to be little visibility issue
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 07:12:58 AM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 07:12:58 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, 4D.15 (01)The top of the signal housing of a vehicular signal face located over any portion of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall not be more than 25.6 feet above the pavement.
I would personally consider 25.6 feet to be too high up, even if set back. If they lowered the signals from the bridge and/or added some pole-mounted signals (to reduce neck craning), that would make it better.
For some reason Belmont has way too high cantilevers to a point that I think it is dangerous: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3762972,-71.1588352,3a,60y,116.94h,91.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFW9EjgwtIInOFR0gLGCtFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 11:27:56 AM
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 11:27:56 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 07:12:58 AMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, 4D.15 (01)The top of the signal housing of a vehicular signal face located over any portion of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall not be more than 25.6 feet above the pavement.
I would personally consider 25.6 feet to be too high up, even if set back. If they lowered the signals from the bridge and/or added some pole-mounted signals (to reduce neck craning), that would make it better.
For some reason Belmont has way too high cantilevers to a point that I think it is dangerous: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3762972,-71.1588352,3a,60y,116.94h,91.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFW9EjgwtIInOFR0gLGCtFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
They may be within legal height (barely -- too high IMO) but I wouldn't think those were within the "cone of vision".
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Henry on January 09, 2019, 12:01:08 PM
Post by: Henry on January 09, 2019, 12:01:08 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 01:32:44 PMI was thinking more like these examples in Washington, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9108032,-77.0089893,3a,75y,246.12h,91.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D54.684364%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), where the signals are mounted directly on top of the pole.Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AM
Mast arms for me (although lamppost-mounted signals are even cooler!)
Are we talking one mounted to a light pole via a monotube or mast arm, or directly on the light pole support itself? Got the best of both here in one intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/x3tyfH5waKk).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 11:27:56 AMYeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverseQuote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 07:12:58 AMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:53:12 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2019, 11:33:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 07, 2019, 11:11:38 PM
I'm totally cool with bridge mounting too, as long as it's not too high up.
Too high? If the MUTCD is followed, that should not be possible, in theory.Quote from: 2009 MUTCD, 4D.15 (01)The top of the signal housing of a vehicular signal face located over any portion of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall not be more than 25.6 feet above the pavement.
I would personally consider 25.6 feet to be too high up, even if set back. If they lowered the signals from the bridge and/or added some pole-mounted signals (to reduce neck craning), that would make it better.
For some reason Belmont has way too high cantilevers to a point that I think it is dangerous: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3762972,-71.1588352,3a,60y,116.94h,91.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFW9EjgwtIInOFR0gLGCtFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
They may be within legal height (barely -- too high IMO) but I wouldn't think those were within the "cone of vision".
iPhone
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 09, 2019, 12:01:08 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 01:32:44 PMI was thinking more like these examples in Washington, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9108032,-77.0089893,3a,75y,246.12h,91.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D54.684364%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), where the signals are mounted directly on top of the pole.Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AMAre we talking one mounted to a light pole via a monotube or mast arm, or directly on the light pole support itself? Got the best of both here in one intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/x3tyfH5waKk).
Mast arms for me (although lamppost-mounted signals are even cooler!)
Those are just "poles" or "pedestals", not really lamp-posts. The only time you really see true "lamp + signals" in DC is on some of the newer "short arm" mast arm installs, like this (http://bit.ly/2H0XrfS). I'm not sure I've seen lamps positioned above post-only signals in DC, like in WI example above.
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PM
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Did you stop at the stop line?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PMYes, it's way too high, I had to put my head out the window.Quote from: Henry on January 09, 2019, 12:01:08 PMQuote from: DaBigE on January 08, 2019, 01:32:44 PMI was thinking more like these examples in Washington, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9108032,-77.0089893,3a,75y,246.12h,91.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6U_jTzdcQ9oEZ3JNowALog%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D54.684364%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192), where the signals are mounted directly on top of the pole.Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2019, 11:58:31 AMAre we talking one mounted to a light pole via a monotube or mast arm, or directly on the light pole support itself? Got the best of both here in one intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/x3tyfH5waKk).
Mast arms for me (although lamppost-mounted signals are even cooler!)
Those are just "poles" or "pedestals", not really lamp-posts. The only time you really see true "lamp + signals" in DC is on some of the newer "short arm" mast arm installs, like this (http://bit.ly/2H0XrfS). I'm not sure I've seen lamps positioned above post-only signals in DC, like in WI example above.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PM
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Did you stop at the stop line?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 10:31:47 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 10:31:47 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PMYes, it's way too high, I had to put my head out the window.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PMDid you stop at the stop line?
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Geez. Sounds like someone didn't do any cone of vision study.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 10, 2019, 05:17:46 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 10, 2019, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 10:31:47 PMYeah, maybe has to do with electric bus linesQuote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PMYes, it's way too high, I had to put my head out the window.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PMDid you stop at the stop line?
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Geez. Sounds like someone didn't do any cone of vision study.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadfro on January 11, 2019, 10:58:24 AM
Post by: roadfro on January 11, 2019, 10:58:24 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 10:31:47 PMQuote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PMYes, it's way too high, I had to put my head out the window.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PMDid you stop at the stop line?
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Geez. Sounds like someone didn't do any cone of vision study.
Per MUTCD Section 4D.15 and figure 4D-5, the top of a signal head 40 feet from the stop line can be as high as 21 feet off the ground, ranging up to 25.6 feet high for a signal head 53 feet or more from the stop line.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on January 11, 2019, 01:46:09 PM
Post by: jakeroot on January 11, 2019, 01:46:09 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 11, 2019, 10:58:24 AMQuote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 10:31:47 PMQuote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 08:21:46 PMQuote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2019, 04:37:01 PMYes, it's way too high, I had to put my head out the window.Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 09, 2019, 03:00:36 PMDid you stop at the stop line?
Yeah, when I was at the stop line I couldn't see the signals and had to reverse
Geez. Sounds like someone didn't do any cone of vision study.
Per MUTCD Section 4D.15 and figure 4D-5, the top of a signal head 40 feet from the stop line can be as high as 21 feet off the ground, ranging up to 25.6 feet high for a signal head 53 feet or more from the stop line.
Thanks, I did not know the rules were that liberal; they should really be looked at again. I don't really mind signals that far overhead, as there can be numerous physical restrictions (trolley wire, perhaps), but at least use some signals on poles so that they aren't the only thing to look at.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:11:10 PM
Post by: traffic light guy on January 17, 2019, 08:11:10 PM
I've always been more of a mast-arm man myself
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:07:08 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:07:08 PM
Do you have a reason?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: cjk374 on February 17, 2019, 10:00:03 AM
Post by: cjk374 on February 17, 2019, 10:00:03 AM
I grew up with span wire. Slowly all of these wires are being replaced with mast arms. Arms do clean up the looks of downtown areas full of electric wires criss crossing everywhere.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: traffic light guy on February 23, 2019, 10:10:50 AM
Post by: traffic light guy on February 23, 2019, 10:10:50 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on January 17, 2019, 09:07:08 PMMast-arms have been the DOT standard in my state for the past 50 years. I've grown so used to them.
Do you have a reason?
LG-M327
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 12, 2019, 06:54:34 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 12, 2019, 06:54:34 PM
Look at this perminate span wire in IL :-o https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6540877,-89.6505699,3a,75y,266.99h,83.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srII3z0ZXkJ6Cn7dgJjuEsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: plain on June 12, 2019, 08:42:17 PM
Post by: plain on June 12, 2019, 08:42:17 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 12, 2019, 06:54:34 PM
Look at this perminate span wire in IL :-o https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6540877,-89.6505699,3a,75y,266.99h,83.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srII3z0ZXkJ6Cn7dgJjuEsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Nice.
The very first time I visited Chicago (1994 as a teen), there were a lot of wire spans in its suburbs (I've never seen any in the city itself). Every visit after that it became less and less common, even statewide. I actually thought none existed nowadays.
Also interesting in your link is that sign hanging in between the signals.
I'm a mast arm type of dude, but I'm not mad at this, it's not sloppy. I am frowning upon those wooden poles though, but its in a city so it's understandable.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 13, 2019, 08:46:23 AM
Post by: Amtrakprod on June 13, 2019, 08:46:23 AM
Quote from: plain on June 12, 2019, 08:42:17 PMI prefer mast arms myself, but I have to say I'm not sure how well they would work here. I really don't like the louvers for the opposing direction especially because the signals could tilt. I think for complex intersections like this mast arms are the win. Also, in total, I have to say that Programmable signals are much better than louvers in most situations. I still find it interesting that I found it. IL is a great place for traffic lights, I'm yet to find a terrible intersection. In my other form we are thinking of making IL number 1. Just if they had some more FYAs maybe. Nevada will likely win instead because of that. But my first choice will likely be IL.Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 12, 2019, 06:54:34 PM
Look at this perminate span wire in IL :-o https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6540877,-89.6505699,3a,75y,266.99h,83.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srII3z0ZXkJ6Cn7dgJjuEsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Nice.
The very first time I visited Chicago (1994 as a teen), there were a lot of wire spans in its suburbs (I've never seen any in the city itself). Every visit after that it became less and less common, even statewide. I actually thought none existed nowadays.
Also interesting in your link is that sign hanging in between the signals.
I'm a mast arm type of dude, but I'm not mad at this, it's not sloppy. I am frowning upon those wooden poles though, but its in a city so it's understandable.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: ilpt4u on June 13, 2019, 02:23:32 PM
Post by: ilpt4u on June 13, 2019, 02:23:32 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on June 12, 2019, 06:54:34 PMI thought that one looked familiar...right off I-474 in Bartonville, IL near Peoria
Look at this perminate span wire in IL :-o https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6540877,-89.6505699,3a,75y,266.99h,83.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srII3z0ZXkJ6Cn7dgJjuEsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
There are a few scattered around the state. This one is from the Southern part of the state in Du Quoin, along US 51 (I have posted it previously in another thread):
https://goo.gl/maps/ksGigsvhQ7GcWQbW9
They are odd looking, simply because IL is pretty committed to Mast Arms
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on July 11, 2019, 01:38:00 PM
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on July 11, 2019, 01:38:00 PM
Mast arm signals please. Span wire signals are best used for construction zones and other temporary installations.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Truvelo on July 11, 2019, 06:26:35 PM
Post by: Truvelo on July 11, 2019, 06:26:35 PM
Living in a country where we only have mast arm and pole mounted signal heads I have selected span wire as that is a very traditional American type installation to us. When we have news reports of hurricanes and tornadoes they often show span wire signals blowing about in the wind.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: steviep24 on July 11, 2019, 06:56:27 PM
Post by: steviep24 on July 11, 2019, 06:56:27 PM
NYSDOT does both and sometimes at the same intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0927304,-77.6535081,3a,60y,351.14h,97.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyvS4b1tAcIRkoTWWuaUQg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0927304,-77.6535081,3a,60y,351.14h,97.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyvS4b1tAcIRkoTWWuaUQg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Truvelo on July 11, 2019, 07:10:19 PM
Post by: Truvelo on July 11, 2019, 07:10:19 PM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 11, 2019, 06:56:27 PM
NYSDOT does both and sometimes at the same intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0927304,-77.6535081,3a,60y,351.14h,97.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSyvS4b1tAcIRkoTWWuaUQg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
Looking at the older imagery it was all span wire.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
Post by: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
NYSDOT needs to clean up their mast arm installs, a bunch of them have brackets that stick up or arms that are too long. R10 (Long Island) doesnt seem to install a lot of mast arms, more like monopoles or Nassau county style arms, but even those come out sloppy occasionally.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 01:34:18 PM
Post by: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 01:34:18 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
NYSDOT needs to clean up their mast arm installs, a bunch of them have brackets that stick up or arms that are too long. R10 (Long Island) doesnt seem to install a lot of mast arms, more like monopoles or Nassau county style arms, but even those come out sloppy occasionally.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
This is a relatively unique signal, but I'm familiar with another one in California. It is unusual here, since this doesn't seem like an area with lots of pedestrian crossing, which is usually the reason for a right turn FYA.
The essence of this signal is that the right turns are controlled by this signal phase only, independent of the other signals that are showing.
Red ball - thru traffic must stop, but right turns are allowed after stop. Yield to cross-traffic and cross-traffic pedestrians. This light will be red at all times that the thru signals are red and (perhaps) even for a few seconds after thru signals get green to allow for a leading pedestrian interval (LPI). The LPI is not perfect, since right turns are permitted on red in this jurisdiction. (Many right turn FYAs have red arrow which effectively creates a no turn on red situation.)
Yellow arrow - signifies the clearance phase after a sold green arrow or a flashing yellow arrow
Flashing yellow arrow - denotes that right turns have to yield to pedestrians. It is likely that this is only shown while adjacent thru traffic has green light and when the peds have pushed the button.
Green arrow - denotes protected right turn. This will show when the corresponding left (cross-street) is a green arrow. This may also show when adjacent thru has a green light and the peds have not pushed the button to cross.
Right turn FYA at Venice Blvd and Robertson, Los Angeles, CA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282171,-118.3902918,3a,75y,354.93h,78.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s14_6FrmqaMIEnE9acN1kRQ!2e0!5s20190401T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Mark68 on July 17, 2019, 02:58:32 PM
Post by: Mark68 on July 17, 2019, 02:58:32 PM
Mast arm
Backplates
Pole-mounted supplementals
Aesthetics and safety. It's also what I'm used to, having grown up in California (and living in Denver Metro now).
Also, FWIW, I prefer LED lighting on street lights and mast arm-mounted LED street blades.
I think span wires are ugly and flimsy. Even the double-wired setups still wobble in any good wind gust.
Backplates
Pole-mounted supplementals
Aesthetics and safety. It's also what I'm used to, having grown up in California (and living in Denver Metro now).
Also, FWIW, I prefer LED lighting on street lights and mast arm-mounted LED street blades.
I think span wires are ugly and flimsy. Even the double-wired setups still wobble in any good wind gust.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2019, 03:48:01 PM
Post by: jakeroot on July 17, 2019, 03:48:01 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 01:34:18 PMQuote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
NYSDOT needs to clean up their mast arm installs, a bunch of them have brackets that stick up or arms that are too long. R10 (Long Island) doesnt seem to install a lot of mast arms, more like monopoles or Nassau county style arms, but even those come out sloppy occasionally.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
This is a relatively unique signal, but I'm familiar with another one in California. It is unusual here, since this doesn't seem like an area with lots of pedestrian crossing, which is usually the reason for a right turn FYA.
The essence of this signal is that the right turns are controlled by this signal phase only, independent of the other signals that are showing.
...
Right turn FYA at Venice Blvd and Robertson, Los Angeles, CA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282171,-118.3902918,3a,75y,354.93h,78.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s14_6FrmqaMIEnE9acN1kRQ!2e0!5s20190401T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Washington State is weird in that, although turning against a red arrow is allowed, many of the right-facing flashing yellow arrows (for pedestrian protection) do use red orbs.
Here is an example in Auburn, installed within the last two years: https://goo.gl/maps/vtJFUKvhRA8cVhAb9
Couple of theories as to why this choice was made:
1) Operationally, there is no benefit to using a red arrow; to reduce the chance that drivers interpret the red arrow as "NTOR", an orb was used instead.
2) Left turns have a red arrow "lockout" during the walk phase. If drivers behind tall vehicles could only see the pole-mounted signals, and only see red arrows, they may falsely assume the through signal is green (especially if the other direction has an advanced left turn, and opposing through traffic was proceeding).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: kphoger on July 17, 2019, 09:19:37 PM
Post by: kphoger on July 17, 2019, 09:19:37 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2019, 03:48:01 PM
Operationally, there is no benefit to using a red arrow; to reduce the chance that drivers interpret the red arrow as "NTOR" ...
I had never thought about that, but you're right. At least, in states that allow right turn on red arrow, that is.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on July 18, 2019, 02:24:30 AM
Post by: jakeroot on July 18, 2019, 02:24:30 AM
Quote from: kphoger on July 17, 2019, 09:19:37 PMQuote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2019, 03:48:01 PM
Operationally, there is no benefit to using a red arrow; to reduce the chance that drivers interpret the red arrow as "NTOR" ...
I had never thought about that, but you're right. At least, in states that allow right turn on red arrow, that is.
I've noticed more "disobedience" of red arrows around here lately. Meaning, quite a few people who wait for the green arrow. I don't know if this is the result of new residents who are not used to WA's more liberal turn-on-red laws, or what. But I appreciate red orbs now more than ever, because I do get tired of waiting for a green arrow when it's not necessary.
This in mind, I am not in favor of changing the law to make turns against red arrows illegal. Changing the law would make many regular right turns, many of which still use red arrows, and many left turns onto one-way streets, effective NTOR situations. This would make turning left onto a freeway on-ramp illegal on a red arrow, something I do quite often (https://youtu.be/2Qa7vD0_TkY) (jump to 0:27 and/or 0:46). My preference continues to be either a blanket NTOR law, or signs where necessary.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: steviep24 on July 18, 2019, 05:33:00 PM
Post by: steviep24 on July 18, 2019, 05:33:00 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2019, 03:48:01 PMNew York doesn't allow RTOR at a red arrow so hence the red orb on that signal.Quote from: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 01:34:18 PMQuote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
NYSDOT needs to clean up their mast arm installs, a bunch of them have brackets that stick up or arms that are too long. R10 (Long Island) doesnt seem to install a lot of mast arms, more like monopoles or Nassau county style arms, but even those come out sloppy occasionally.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
This is a relatively unique signal, but I'm familiar with another one in California. It is unusual here, since this doesn't seem like an area with lots of pedestrian crossing, which is usually the reason for a right turn FYA.
The essence of this signal is that the right turns are controlled by this signal phase only, independent of the other signals that are showing.
...
Right turn FYA at Venice Blvd and Robertson, Los Angeles, CA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0282171,-118.3902918,3a,75y,354.93h,78.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s14_6FrmqaMIEnE9acN1kRQ!2e0!5s20190401T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3
Washington State is weird in that, although turning against a red arrow is allowed, many of the right-facing flashing yellow arrows (for pedestrian protection) do use red orbs.
Here is an example in Auburn, installed within the last two years: https://goo.gl/maps/vtJFUKvhRA8cVhAb9
Couple of theories as to why this choice was made:
1) Operationally, there is no benefit to using a red arrow; to reduce the chance that drivers interpret the red arrow as "NTOR", an orb was used instead.
2) Left turns have a red arrow "lockout" during the walk phase. If drivers behind tall vehicles could only see the pole-mounted signals, and only see red arrows, they may falsely assume the through signal is green (especially if the other direction has an advanced left turn, and opposing through traffic was proceeding).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2019, 12:25:18 AM
Post by: jakeroot on July 19, 2019, 12:25:18 AM
Quote from: steviep24 on July 18, 2019, 05:33:00 PM
New York doesn't allow RTOR at a red arrow so hence the red orb on that signal.
Which signal? The ones in my example are in Washington State.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 12:54:06 PM
Post by: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 12:54:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 19, 2019, 12:25:18 AMQuote from: steviep24 on July 18, 2019, 05:33:00 PM
New York doesn't allow RTOR at a red arrow so hence the red orb on that signal.
Which signal? The ones in my example are in Washington State.
This one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0928517,-77.6535742,3a,75y,231.05h,80.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN_USY3UNwFWnLP8P-jojLA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0
For NY (outside of NYC) and CA right turns permitted on red orb after stop. Right turns not permitted at all on red arrow.
I would assume that in both NY and CA (and probably WA as well) a flashing red arrow would also have the meaning of right turn permitted after stop, assuming you yield to whatever traffic actually has the right of way. Curious as to why red orb is used instead of flashing red arrow.
In the L.A. example from above at Venice/Robertson, I can tell you that there is also a "right turn signal" sign. This is because for parts of the signal cycle this red orb is lit, even though the through signal cycle has a straight green arrow. This produces the lead pedestrian interval, right turn cannot simply go even though straight traffic can go. Right turns must stop and yield (to pedestrians). After a few seconds, they get a FYA - no need to stop on right turns, but must still yield to pedestrians who are now in the street for a while. Then a solid yellow arrow to show that the right turn signal is ending and then a red ball again.
What I'm not sure about is what happens next. I believe that the next phase of the signal is the left from Venice to Robertson [NO U TURN], which will produce a right green arrow as this is a complementary turn. But I'm not sure is whether during this phase, the red orb is lit or not. While it is common for many 5 aspect signals to have red orb with green right arrow, since this signal is meant to only control the right turn, I would think that the red orb with green arrow would be contradictory. Regardless, a yellow arrow would follow green arrow and then back to red orb.
But what is important to point out is that in this case the red orb of the right turn signal is not always lit at the same times as the red orb of the thru signal. Thru has red during the right turn protected phase. RIght turns have red during the LPI. When Venice has green, both thru and right signals facing Robertson have red orb. I don't know if that's the case with the NY or WA signals, or whether the red orb is just meant, as Jake said, to provide another signal in case it's blocked by a truck. In the WA and NY cases, there is no "right turn signal" sign.
I don't know if something like this is legal under the MUTCD - to have two separately timed red orb signals facing the same traffic. I know there is a big push to get rid of "left turn signal" red orbs in places like VA and PA and replace those with red left arrows. I don't know if the same exists with regard to these right turn signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Michael on July 19, 2019, 08:48:28 PM
Post by: Michael on July 19, 2019, 08:48:28 PM
Quote from: RestrictOnTheHanger on July 16, 2019, 11:06:52 PM
NYSDOT needs to clean up their mast arm installs, a bunch of them have brackets that stick up or arms that are too long. R10 (Long Island) doesnt seem to install a lot of mast arms, more like monopoles or Nassau county style arms, but even those come out sloppy occasionally.
NYSDOT span wire installs are much cleaner IMO
Also, did anyone notice that one of the signals is actually a right turn FYA with a red ball? Never seen one in person.
I've noticed that since 2012 or so, NYSDOT has started replacing a lot of signals, many of them being converted to mast arms. I have no idea why the conversion is necessary, but many of them have been sloppy like you mentioned. The first intersection I noticed this at was Washington St and the Arterial in Auburn. Compare the old signals (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9309339,-76.5763636,3a,75y,74.88h,94.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saFF6IJykb1AEZuGRFXMPrA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664) to the new ones (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9309649,-76.5763914,3a,75y,74.88h,94.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4qBxvxDphfVDOIC5Nyanxg!2e0!5s20130901T000000!7i13312!8i6656). Even though the older imagery appears to have brackets that are too long, they seemed shorter in person. Even if I'm not remembering correctly, I can say that the new signals weren't level with each other and some were crooked when they were installed.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Revive 755 on July 21, 2019, 12:08:32 PM
Post by: Revive 755 on July 21, 2019, 12:08:32 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 12:54:06 PM
I don't know if something like this is legal under the MUTCD - to have two separately timed red orb signals facing the same traffic. I know there is a big push to get rid of "left turn signal" red orbs in places like VA and PA and replace those with red left arrows. I don't know if the same exists with regard to these right turn signals.
It's allowed for right turn signals if "[a] RIGHT TURN SIGNAL (R10-10) sign (see Sections 4D.21 through 4D.24) is mounted adjacent to the signal face(s) controlling the right-turning movement." (4D.05 Paragraph 11 Item B).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2019, 05:05:37 PM
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2019, 05:05:37 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 21, 2019, 12:08:32 PMQuote from: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 12:54:06 PM
I don't know if something like this is legal under the MUTCD - to have two separately timed red orb signals facing the same traffic. I know there is a big push to get rid of "left turn signal" red orbs in places like VA and PA and replace those with red left arrows. I don't know if the same exists with regard to these right turn signals.
It's allowed for right turn signals if "[a] RIGHT TURN SIGNAL (R10-10) sign (see Sections 4D.21 through 4D.24) is mounted adjacent to the signal face(s) controlling the right-turning movement." (4D.05 Paragraph 11 Item B).
Thanks for that. In fact, there is a clear right turn signal sign at the Venice/Robertson signal. On top of that, the thru signal has a green straight arrow. That is a "hint" that the thru signal only controls thru movements and that turns are either controlled by other signals or are prohibited.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2019, 06:41:39 PM
Post by: jakeroot on July 21, 2019, 06:41:39 PM
Quote from: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 12:54:06 PM
But what is important to point out is that in this case the red orb of the right turn signal is not always lit at the same times as the red orb of the thru signal. Thru has red during the right turn protected phase. RIght turns have red during the LPI. When Venice has green, both thru and right signals facing Robertson have red orb. I don't know if that's the case with the NY or WA signals, or whether the red orb is just meant, as Jake said, to provide another signal in case it's blocked by a truck. In the WA and NY cases, there is no "right turn signal" sign.
I don't know if something like this is legal under the MUTCD - to have two separately timed red orb signals facing the same traffic. I know there is a big push to get rid of "left turn signal" red orbs in places like VA and PA and replace those with red left arrows. I don't know if the same exists with regard to these right turn signals.
(sorry to clip a bunch of your post -- trying to cut down on post length to avoid "tl;dr")
Right-turn leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) are pretty common in Seattle, but very rare (totally unheard of?) elsewhere in WA. The right-facing flashing yellow arrow signals that I see on a regular basis in cities like Auburn, Federal Way, or Bellevue (all WA) do not use leading pedestrian intervals. The FYA comes up immediately with the through signal, often times even when the pedestrian walk sign is in a steady "don't walk" phase. The right-facing FYAs are there simply to aid pedestrian visibility, not to incorporate smarter features like LPIs. In the Auburn examples I posted above, a red orb was used. I 100% guarantee you that a red arrow would have been used if there was an LPI ("...TURN SIGNAL" signs are exceedingly rare in WA).
This is contrary to many of the left turn FYA installations in WA, which not only incorporate leading pedestrian intervals, but often incorporate red arrows throughout the entire WALK phase. This was pioneered in Bellevue and has crept into surrounding areas (and has been adopted by Pierce County entirely, which encompasses almost the entirety of the metro area south of Seattle). These do not work on timed corridors, which are very common in Federal Way, as the walk sign is on for the entire length of the through signals (not allowing any time for a permissive phase). This is probably why I only see these installations in non-timed areas, or in areas where the WALK sign is automatic, but only lasts for about 10-12 seconds.
Normally, not a fan of these. I've had them last the entire length of the through signal before, which is extremely annoying. But places like Puyallup (WA) have actually managed to incorporate some smart features into them. Many of the left turn signals will lag when the pedestrian signal is activated. Through traffic and peds go first. By the time gaps start to develop in through traffic, the FYA activates, and drivers can start turning. Then the green arrow comes up. Not bad, but they're not always that smart. You can sort of see one in action here (https://goo.gl/maps/gQSJbSfLfqNutfx37). Note that there are no cars waiting, but the green arrow has activated. If you spin the camera around, you can see all the cars that just went through while the red arrow, and then FYA, were active.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 08:24:09 AM
Post by: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 08:24:09 AM
I think it's a good thing to have LPI on left turns. Haven't yet seen it in areas that I frequent. I also prefer lagging left turns since in most permissive left turns, there are always people who make the left at the end of the cycle. Putting the left turn at the end of the cycle therefore seems natural to me. Of course all concerns with yellow trap have to be met and the fya does that.
LPI s do not need to be made standard. they are really helpful in areas with significant pedestrian crossing should be utilized more in such areas. There is no need for them to be incorporated in every intersection though.
Nexus 5X
LPI s do not need to be made standard. they are really helpful in areas with significant pedestrian crossing should be utilized more in such areas. There is no need for them to be incorporated in every intersection though.
Nexus 5X
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: tradephoric on July 22, 2019, 10:34:53 AM
Post by: tradephoric on July 22, 2019, 10:34:53 AM
Quote from: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 08:24:09 AM
I also prefer lagging left turns since in most permissive left turns, there are always people who make the left at the end of the cycle. Putting the left turn at the end of the cycle therefore seems natural to me. Of course all concerns with yellow trap have to be met and the fya does that.
Leading lefts should maximize the capacity of an isolated intersection. Suppose a NB LT gaps out early. That extra time can be given to the SB THRU (even as the SB LT is still running). With lagging lefts you can't reintroduce the THRU phase since it has already ran (so when that NB LT wants to gap out early it can't... and that's just wasted green time).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 07:29:03 PM
Post by: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 07:29:03 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 22, 2019, 10:34:53 AMQuote from: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 08:24:09 AM
I also prefer lagging left turns since in most permissive left turns, there are always people who make the left at the end of the cycle. Putting the left turn at the end of the cycle therefore seems natural to me. Of course all concerns with yellow trap have to be met and the fya does that.
Leading lefts should maximize the capacity of an isolated intersection. Suppose a NB LT gaps out early. That extra time can be given to the SB THRU (even as the SB LT is still running). With lagging lefts you can't reintroduce the THRU phase since it has already ran (so when that NB LT wants to gap out early it can't... and that's just wasted green time).
I see you revived the PPLT thread, so I'll reply to your point over there.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: ET21 on July 23, 2019, 09:12:17 AM
Post by: ET21 on July 23, 2019, 09:12:17 AM
Idk why, but I prefer mast arms. Makes the intersection look cleaner
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 10:05:46 PM
Post by: roadman65 on July 23, 2019, 10:05:46 PM
I like Florida and Texas as both states use them both equally.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on July 23, 2019, 10:17:43 PM
Post by: SignBridge on July 23, 2019, 10:17:43 PM
ET21, I believe most in the traffic engineering field regard mast-arms as the cleaner looking, aesthetically pleasing design compared to span-wire installations. However I have to say that on Long Island, New York State DOT Region-10 and Nassau County DPW build the neatest, cleanest diagonal span installations I've ever seen. I was surprised at how sloppy some span-wire signals look in other states in the Northeast.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 24, 2019, 12:17:33 PM
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 24, 2019, 12:17:33 PM
We seem to do both here. Older installations are typically wire-hung, though.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on October 21, 2020, 10:19:25 AM
Post by: democratic nole on October 21, 2020, 10:19:25 AM
Anyone that answered span wire as preferable to mastarms should quit using drugs.
In all seriousness, this has been a pet peeve of mine since I was a child. Florida, where i mostly grew up, historically used almost exclusively span wire signals. I also grew up in Texas where there was a mix. Upon my first trip to Chicago as a kid, I marveled at how every signal in Chicago was on a clean and neat looking mastarm, which greatly improved both visibility and aesthetics.
My general experience is that states that do not make regular use of mastarms do a poor job of installing them. Michigan and Georgia are great examples of this. Florida can be hit or miss on their installation. Tampa is especially annoying in that it is trying to be cheap by combining signals for multiple directions on a single or two mastarms, which not only look terrible but hurt visibility at the stop bar for some approaches. For example: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.963118,-82.4676612,3a,75y,6.16h,81.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1UGWKijIMOi5lzYOBszOKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9519833,-82.4723914,3a,75y,267.29h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHguOJw6LsPe6iFzltWd1_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
With Florida's hurricanes, mastarm installation should be universal here but it is not. When South Florida had its 2004 hurricanes, Broward County lost something like 60% of their traffic signals due to failure in high winds. Rather than just make mastarm installation mandatory, FDOT wasted a bunch of money on a study to find a way to keep installing crappy looking mastarms with higher wind loads, that are still inferior to mastarms. Even when there are not hurricane level winds, we still get severe thunderstorms here that blow the span wire signals around strongly and make visibility difficult. FDOT D7 here in Tampa has started installing this single wire spans (as someone else pointed out) and they are absolutely atrocious in high winds. https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9667829,-82.5054504,3a,75y,15.07h,81.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svizaYgU6YNJTz8xZzEZ1OA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Conversely, states that are essentially universal in installing mastarms, such as California, Nevada, and Arizona, do an excellent job of making the mastarms look sharp. I've always thought California was the gold standard for signal installation, due to universal mastarm installation and almost universal use of supplemental side mounts, both on the far and near side of the intersection. As an example: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8595203,-117.8178331,3a,75y,262.52h,78.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipM3uLZVieS3mEdgIRpg3Kt3Y3qXf5O1-3TlcC8f!2e10!3e11!7i11000!8i5500?hl=en&authuser=0
In all seriousness, this has been a pet peeve of mine since I was a child. Florida, where i mostly grew up, historically used almost exclusively span wire signals. I also grew up in Texas where there was a mix. Upon my first trip to Chicago as a kid, I marveled at how every signal in Chicago was on a clean and neat looking mastarm, which greatly improved both visibility and aesthetics.
My general experience is that states that do not make regular use of mastarms do a poor job of installing them. Michigan and Georgia are great examples of this. Florida can be hit or miss on their installation. Tampa is especially annoying in that it is trying to be cheap by combining signals for multiple directions on a single or two mastarms, which not only look terrible but hurt visibility at the stop bar for some approaches. For example: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.963118,-82.4676612,3a,75y,6.16h,81.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1UGWKijIMOi5lzYOBszOKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9519833,-82.4723914,3a,75y,267.29h,95.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHguOJw6LsPe6iFzltWd1_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
With Florida's hurricanes, mastarm installation should be universal here but it is not. When South Florida had its 2004 hurricanes, Broward County lost something like 60% of their traffic signals due to failure in high winds. Rather than just make mastarm installation mandatory, FDOT wasted a bunch of money on a study to find a way to keep installing crappy looking mastarms with higher wind loads, that are still inferior to mastarms. Even when there are not hurricane level winds, we still get severe thunderstorms here that blow the span wire signals around strongly and make visibility difficult. FDOT D7 here in Tampa has started installing this single wire spans (as someone else pointed out) and they are absolutely atrocious in high winds. https://www.google.com/maps/@27.9667829,-82.5054504,3a,75y,15.07h,81.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svizaYgU6YNJTz8xZzEZ1OA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0
Conversely, states that are essentially universal in installing mastarms, such as California, Nevada, and Arizona, do an excellent job of making the mastarms look sharp. I've always thought California was the gold standard for signal installation, due to universal mastarm installation and almost universal use of supplemental side mounts, both on the far and near side of the intersection. As an example: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8595203,-117.8178331,3a,75y,262.52h,78.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAF1QipM3uLZVieS3mEdgIRpg3Kt3Y3qXf5O1-3TlcC8f!2e10!3e11!7i11000!8i5500?hl=en&authuser=0
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: US 89 on October 21, 2020, 11:27:49 AM
Post by: US 89 on October 21, 2020, 11:27:49 AM
Even mast arms aren't fully immune to wind, as this 2013 article from the Deseret News shows (https://www.deseret.com/2013/8/5/20523840/)...
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/y_Afzv0LrkzPH0X7mPbZBPlxzBA=/2200x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/17648063/1184415.jpg)
To be fair, these probably would have survived if the big power lines next to the highway hadn't taken them out...
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/y_Afzv0LrkzPH0X7mPbZBPlxzBA=/2200x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/17648063/1184415.jpg)
To be fair, these probably would have survived if the big power lines next to the highway hadn't taken them out...
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:36:34 PM
Post by: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:36:34 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on October 21, 2020, 10:19:25 AM
In all seriousness, this has been a pet peeve of mine since I was a child. Florida, where i mostly grew up, historically used almost exclusively span wire signals. I also grew up in Texas where there was a mix. Upon my first trip to Chicago as a kid, I marveled at how every signal in Chicago was on a clean and neat looking mastarm, which greatly improved both visibility and aesthetics.
Without quoting the whole post: I think you and I will get along just fine :-D.
We can certainly agree on California, Illinois, Nevada, Arizona, et al when it comes to signals. Those states all have fairly consistent designs with heavy mast arm use. Aesthetically, I think a typical mast arm install is superior to anything involving excessive wires (including those box span installs with wires along the bottom and top of the signals, even if they "sturdier").
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on October 22, 2020, 09:45:50 AM
Post by: democratic nole on October 22, 2020, 09:45:50 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 21, 2020, 03:36:34 PMYou clearly have superior intelligence lol.Quote from: democratic nole on October 21, 2020, 10:19:25 AM
In all seriousness, this has been a pet peeve of mine since I was a child. Florida, where i mostly grew up, historically used almost exclusively span wire signals. I also grew up in Texas where there was a mix. Upon my first trip to Chicago as a kid, I marveled at how every signal in Chicago was on a clean and neat looking mastarm, which greatly improved both visibility and aesthetics.
Without quoting the whole post: I think you and I will get along just fine :-D.
We can certainly agree on California, Illinois, Nevada, Arizona, et al when it comes to signals. Those states all have fairly consistent designs with heavy mast arm use. Aesthetically, I think a typical mast arm install is superior to anything involving excessive wires (including those box span installs with wires along the bottom and top of the signals, even if they "sturdier").
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 07:06:32 PM
Post by: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 07:06:32 PM
Apparently MO has some new (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1402938,-94.3199541,3a,75y,88.33h,93.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srPpkEp9-EAcAFjh5dsB3Xg!2e0!5s20130501T000000!7i16384!8i8192/) span wires around (this one dates from 2015). It's a decent box span with wires under the signals and FYAs, but still, it's a span wire.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 25, 2020, 09:15:23 PM
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 25, 2020, 09:15:23 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 07:06:32 PM
Apparently MO has some new (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1402938,-94.3199541,3a,75y,88.33h,93.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srPpkEp9-EAcAFjh5dsB3Xg!2e0!5s20130501T000000!7i16384!8i8192/) span wires around (this one dates from 2015). It's a decent box span with wires under the signals and FYAs, but still, it's a span wire.
Clean install. I see nothing wrong with this.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Ned Weasel on October 25, 2020, 09:36:15 PM
Post by: Ned Weasel on October 25, 2020, 09:36:15 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 25, 2020, 09:15:23 PMQuote from: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 07:06:32 PM
Apparently MO has some new (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1402938,-94.3199541,3a,75y,88.33h,93.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srPpkEp9-EAcAFjh5dsB3Xg!2e0!5s20130501T000000!7i16384!8i8192/) span wires around (this one dates from 2015). It's a decent box span with wires under the signals and FYAs, but still, it's a span wire.
Clean install. I see nothing wrong with this.
I wish the road name sign was bigger.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on October 25, 2020, 10:04:21 PM
Post by: SignBridge on October 25, 2020, 10:04:21 PM
It still looks sloppy compared to a good quality mast-arm installation like you'd find in California, Nevada or Chicagoland.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: tdindy88 on October 25, 2020, 10:34:23 PM
Post by: tdindy88 on October 25, 2020, 10:34:23 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 25, 2020, 07:06:32 PM
Apparently MO has some new (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1402938,-94.3199541,3a,75y,88.33h,93.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srPpkEp9-EAcAFjh5dsB3Xg!2e0!5s20130501T000000!7i16384!8i8192/) span wires around (this one dates from 2015). It's a decent box span with wires under the signals and FYAs, but still, it's a span wire.
That's the standard span wire design for Indiana. Nearly all stoplights that use span wires are designed this way and IMO look pretty decent as a result. Certainly compared to what I see in Ohio and Kentucky with their span wires. There's also plenty of mast arm designs throughout the state in the more urbanized parts of the cities. Still, I find Illinois's mast arms to be very nice statewide.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: MCRoads on October 25, 2020, 10:41:46 PM
Post by: MCRoads on October 25, 2020, 10:41:46 PM
I know I'm a bit late, but this bridge (https://goo.gl/maps/Sh31VDGre5YxCJFD6) in CO Springs has the lights hanging from the deck, not the beams! Good way to mount on a bridge and not be so high! I could swear there was a more pronounced exam, but I can't find it right now.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 26, 2020, 01:14:28 AM
Post by: jakeroot on October 26, 2020, 01:14:28 AM
Just as an example, the MO install in the above link compared to a mast-arm install in Puyallup, WA. Both single-lane approaches with right turn bypasses and FYA left turns:
(https://i.imgur.com/z1A19wF.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Us9NuYs.png)
Another mast arm install in Federal Way, WA:
(https://i.imgur.com/sEjm1H5.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/z1A19wF.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Us9NuYs.png)
Another mast arm install in Federal Way, WA:
(https://i.imgur.com/sEjm1H5.png)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 26, 2020, 09:36:56 AM
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 26, 2020, 09:36:56 AM
Many elements of a traffic signal are useful for announcing the signal's presence. These elements include 12-inch sections (which are now standard), backplates, and in my opinion, mast arms. I prefer mast arms because they make a signal more readily visible from a greater distance. An Indiana signal with span wires and naked signal heads without backplates will be anticipated by me much sooner later than an Illinois signal with mast arms and backplates, giving me much less time to react. Plus, with mast arms, you don't have problems with signal heads waving around or rotating to face upward or downward. (edited, see below)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 26, 2020, 10:49:14 AM
Post by: JoePCool14 on October 26, 2020, 10:49:14 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 26, 2020, 09:36:56 AM
Many elements of a traffic signal are useful for announcing the signal's presence. These elements include 12-inch sections (which are now standard), backplates, and in my opinion, mast arms. I prefer mast arms because they make a signal more readily visible from a greater distance. An Indiana signal with span wires and naked signal heads without backplates will be anticipated by me muchsoonerlater than an Illinois signal with mast arms and backplates, giving me much less time to react. Plus, with mast arms, you don't have problems with signal heads waving around or rotating to face upward or downward.
I think you mixed up your words a bit. FIFY.
As for my opinions on this topic, I believe it's just the fact that I'm from Illinois (i.e., the land of mast arms), and when I think of span wire signals, I think of other states. When I think of other states, I think of vacations. So there's definitely bias here that I enjoy a good span wire signal, I won't even try to deny that. I think both have their use cases. And I think both can look good and both can look bad.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on October 26, 2020, 09:08:48 PM
Post by: SignBridge on October 26, 2020, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 26, 2020, 10:49:14 AMQuote from: paulthemapguy on October 26, 2020, 09:36:56 AM
Many elements of a traffic signal are useful for announcing the signal's presence. These elements include 12-inch sections (which are now standard), backplates, and in my opinion, mast arms. I prefer mast arms because they make a signal more readily visible from a greater distance. An Indiana signal with span wires and naked signal heads without backplates will be anticipated by me muchsoonerlater than an Illinois signal with mast arms and backplates, giving me much less time to react. Plus, with mast arms, you don't have problems with signal heads waving around or rotating to face upward or downward.
I think you mixed up your words a bit. FIFY.
As for my opinions on this topic, I believe it's just the fact that I'm from Illinois (i.e., the land of mast arms), and when I think of span wire signals, I think of other states. When I think of other states, I think of vacations. So there's definitely bias here that I enjoy a good span wire signal, I won't even try to deny that. I think both have their use cases. And I think both can look good and both can look bad.
JPC14, I generally dislike span-wire, but the best quality installations I've seen are those done by New York State DOT and Nassau County DPW on Long Island.
And Paul, 12-inch heads are not standard everywhere in the country even nowadays. Regrettably the agencies I mentioned still use a mix of both sizes. Usually 12-inch for the main road and either 12 or 8 inch for a smaller intersecting road. I assume it depends on the judgment of the engineer who spec's it. But I agree that 12-inch should be standard almost everywhere in new and rebuilt installations.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 26, 2020, 11:09:50 PM
Post by: jakeroot on October 26, 2020, 11:09:50 PM
^^^^
I was still seeing 12-8-8 signals installed in WA up until about 2008, but none since that I can recall.
I think 12 inch signal heads are the 'default' in the US, with 8 inch heads being used only as necessary. However, this is not the case in Canada. British Columbia still calls for 8-inch heads under certain circumstances.
I was still seeing 12-8-8 signals installed in WA up until about 2008, but none since that I can recall.
I think 12 inch signal heads are the 'default' in the US, with 8 inch heads being used only as necessary. However, this is not the case in Canada. British Columbia still calls for 8-inch heads under certain circumstances.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Scott5114 on October 26, 2020, 11:33:04 PM
Post by: Scott5114 on October 26, 2020, 11:33:04 PM
What circumstances would call for smaller, and thus less visible, signal heads? I would think 12" signals would be preferable in every situation.
I like 12-8-8 signals on an aesthetic level, and the novelty since Oklahoma never used them much, if at all. But I'm sure the reduced yellow and green lenses are less optimal on a safety level.
I like 12-8-8 signals on an aesthetic level, and the novelty since Oklahoma never used them much, if at all. But I'm sure the reduced yellow and green lenses are less optimal on a safety level.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 26, 2020, 11:56:27 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on October 26, 2020, 11:56:27 PM
I've only seen new 12-12-8 emergency signals recently. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201027/a988e44dcccea04373efbe4e85164365.jpg)
iPhone
iPhone
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: MCRoads on October 27, 2020, 12:27:54 AM
Post by: MCRoads on October 27, 2020, 12:27:54 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2020, 11:33:04 PM
What circumstances would call for smaller, and thus less visible, signal heads? I would think 12" signals would be preferable in every situation.
I like 12-8-8 signals on an aesthetic level, and the novelty since Oklahoma never used them much, if at all. But I'm sure the reduced yellow and green lenses are less optimal on a safety level.
I like 12-8-8 as well, it looks cool. The traffic signal I got is 21-8-8, and green (my favorite color, also pretty uncommon now) to boot!
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 12:53:38 AM
Post by: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 12:53:38 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2020, 11:33:04 PM
What circumstances would call for smaller, and thus less visible, signal heads? I would think 12" signals would be preferable in every situation.
I checked the BC MOT Signal Design Manual (see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-guidelines/electrical-engineering/electrical-traffic-engineering-manual)), and they've actually changed the manual to call for 300mm (12") heads for all new primary, secondary, and auxiliary signals. This change seems to have occurred in the last year or two.
This is actually quite a major change, as 200mm signals are very common for secondary (mounted on poles) and auxiliary (near-side pole) signals, with only some cities (Coquitlam being one example) installing 300mm signals for all installations consistently. Along MOT-maintained roads, 200mm signals were still being installed as of 2019 (see here (https://goo.gl/maps/cm1szJe8TWyqcUby6)).
I think the primary argument was that 300mm signals did not provide enough additional visibility for them to absolutely require it. 300mm signals have always been an option, and they've been installed under all circumstances (primary, secondary, auxiliary) for decades. The difference being that it's never been a requirement. It's similar to the "category b" section of MUTCD 2E: destinations can be 20" UC, but this is not strictly necessary, as 16" UC provides sufficient readability under most circumstances. Similarly, 200mm signals provide sufficient visibility under most circumstances. I suspect the change to 300mm signals will make signals cheaper and easier to install, especially in terms of mounting hardware, with improved visibility being only a small benefit (and only under certain circumstances at that).
This former practice echoes that of Australia, where 200mm signal heads are standard, and 300mm signal heads are only used as warranted (example here (https://goo.gl/maps/aUooECY838uFXjbq5) north of Brisbane).
In my opinion, if you're looking to have the greatest impact on signal visibility, the best practice is not to have only jumbo-sized overhead signals (when will 12" be considered small?), but a series of primary, secondary, and auxiliary signals in different positions. You can combine the two, but I'd recommend 'extra signals' before having only larger primary signals, as is the way in many US states (OR, WA, IN, etc).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: epzik8 on October 27, 2020, 07:54:53 AM
Post by: epzik8 on October 27, 2020, 07:54:53 AM
Lately Maryland has been replacing a lot of span wires with mast arms. They're doing US 40 at MD 132/APG Boulevard in Aberdeen right now.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 01:15:18 PM
Post by: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 01:15:18 PM
Discovered some (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.617298,-94.3491185,3a,60y,245.18h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smJmoHZVm-LCNq_S3WGA81w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) more (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2926943,-93.409384,3a,60y,312.58h,90.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl-yhvG3wfPnuAMtHY1lMyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) newish span wires in MO.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 01:27:00 PM
Post by: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 01:27:00 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 27, 2020, 07:54:53 AM
Lately Maryland has been replacing a lot of span wires with mast arms. They're doing US 40 at MD 132/APG Boulevard in Aberdeen right now.
I'm trying to remember where in Maryland I've seen span wire. Seems like in the DC area, they're mostly mast arm.
MD signals are easy to remember, for me, as there's almost always a near-side signal, and they use those 12-12-8-8-8 doghouses rather frequently.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Post by: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm? I drove past this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6731609,-90.2039431,3a,60y,69.26h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1I0FdslaHIJFEIB6PIrUwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) the other day. I also know that Houston has (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8500393,-95.2622574,3a,60y,331.04h,89.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sls-edvHzKdfjKEc9sX8tyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) several (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.846156,-95.3625578,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR9kwPbSQ_OCbHU7ZpfTrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Any others?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: HTM Duke on October 27, 2020, 11:05:51 PM
Post by: HTM Duke on October 27, 2020, 11:05:51 PM
^Intersection of SR-648/Edsall Rd and Independence Cir / Winter View Dr in Alexandria, VA:
https://goo.gl/maps/AM4yuLw3bs2jZ5Mq6
This installation was originally all mast arms, but something happened between 2017-18 that forced VDOT to remove the mast arm and signals at the southeast corner of the intersection and replace it with a diagonal spanwire. (A bit peculiar as well is the sight of a ped signal mounted to a wooden 4x4.) I'm left to speculate that VDOT is waiting for routine signal replacement before they possibly erect a new mast arm.
https://goo.gl/maps/AM4yuLw3bs2jZ5Mq6
This installation was originally all mast arms, but something happened between 2017-18 that forced VDOT to remove the mast arm and signals at the southeast corner of the intersection and replace it with a diagonal spanwire. (A bit peculiar as well is the sight of a ped signal mounted to a wooden 4x4.) I'm left to speculate that VDOT is waiting for routine signal replacement before they possibly erect a new mast arm.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: EpicRoadways on October 27, 2020, 11:47:13 PM
Post by: EpicRoadways on October 27, 2020, 11:47:13 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm? I drove past this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6731609,-90.2039431,3a,60y,69.26h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1I0FdslaHIJFEIB6PIrUwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) the other day. I also know that Houston has (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8500393,-95.2622574,3a,60y,331.04h,89.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sls-edvHzKdfjKEc9sX8tyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) several (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.846156,-95.3625578,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR9kwPbSQ_OCbHU7ZpfTrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Any others?
For about five years there was an intersection (https://goo.gl/maps/8sehvwjTJxMzjxgc8)near me in which 3 of the 4 directions were span wire. I think the reasoning behind it was that different approaches to the intersection were upgraded at different times. You can see the evolution of the intersection pretty well in GSV, but basically the approach with the one mast arm facing it was completed in 2015 as part of the initial widening project on that approach (which is also when the signal bases/light poles for the other approaches were installed with span wires). However, funding constraints prevented other planned improvements at the intersection from being constructed (notably a dual-left turn lane and some realignment and lengthening of the right turn lanes). Those improvements were completed in 2019 and now the intersection is all mast arms.
Normally in a situation like this in Minnesota if a signal system is upgraded at an intersection where there are improvements planned in the near future either every direction gets mast arms with additional space for more signals (example (https://goo.gl/maps/fBUJUGbY8Nut6HkN9)) or the entire intersection gets a "true" temporary span wire signal (wood vertical bases, etc.) until the work is completed and a new permanent signal is installed. This example is the best (or worst) or both worlds, I guess. I haven't seen anything else like it anywhere in the state.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: renegade on October 28, 2020, 04:07:22 PM
Post by: renegade on October 28, 2020, 04:07:22 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PMYeah, this one in VanBuren Twp, MI:
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm? I drove past this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6731609,-90.2039431,3a,60y,69.26h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1I0FdslaHIJFEIB6PIrUwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) the other day. I also know that Houston has (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8500393,-95.2622574,3a,60y,331.04h,89.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sls-edvHzKdfjKEc9sX8tyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) several (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.846156,-95.3625578,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR9kwPbSQ_OCbHU7ZpfTrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Any others?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2219511,-83.4852147,3a,75y,161.52h,96.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCM-3M0EpoTxxcmdGeGINOg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Belleville Rd. at I-94
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: CardInLex on October 28, 2020, 05:25:36 PM
Post by: CardInLex on October 28, 2020, 05:25:36 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm? I drove past this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6731609,-90.2039431,3a,60y,69.26h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1I0FdslaHIJFEIB6PIrUwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) the other day. I also know that Houston has (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8500393,-95.2622574,3a,60y,331.04h,89.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sls-edvHzKdfjKEc9sX8tyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) several (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.846156,-95.3625578,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR9kwPbSQ_OCbHU7ZpfTrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Any others?
This one in Danville, KY. Since Google Streetview last photographed, the eastern mast arm on Main Street has been replaced with a span wire (the existing mast arm still remains in place with signals moving to the span wire–done to accommodate new left turn signalization). Both of the span wires are temporary, as the city is working with KYTC to replace all signals with a new streetscape project in the next few years.
https://goo.gl/maps/9jHsLH2uKC7N7s7RA
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: epzik8 on October 29, 2020, 07:44:27 AM
Post by: epzik8 on October 29, 2020, 07:44:27 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 27, 2020, 07:54:53 AMHere is some work I caught on this from last month. This is also my 1,000th post:
Lately Maryland has been replacing a lot of span wires with mast arms. They're doing US 40 at MD 132/APG Boulevard in Aberdeen right now.
(https://i.imgur.com/jIV1Skl.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Vm4Q3tG.jpeg)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: epzik8 on October 29, 2020, 07:48:10 AM
Post by: epzik8 on October 29, 2020, 07:48:10 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 01:27:00 PMI know that there are a good amount of span wires along US 301 between the Nice Bridge and Bowie, although there are a lot of mast arms in the Waldorf-St. Charles area. I also seem to recall some span wires along US 50 in the Easton area. Just about all of the span wires on MD 24 between I-95 and US 1 in Harford County have been replaced with mast arms.Quote from: epzik8 link=topic=24214.msg2543s a743#msg2543743 date=1603799693
Lately Maryland has been replacing a lot of span wires with mast arms. They're doing US 40 at MD 132/APG Boulevard in Aberdeen right now.
I'm trying to remember where in Maryland I've seen span wire. Seems like in the DC area, they're mostly mast arm.
MD signals are easy to remember, for me, as there's almost always a near-side signal, and they use those 12-12-8-8-8 doghouses rather frequently.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on October 29, 2020, 01:26:41 PM
Post by: jakeroot on October 29, 2020, 01:26:41 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 29, 2020, 07:48:10 AMQuote from: jakeroot on October 27, 2020, 01:27:00 PMI know that there are a good amount of span wires along US 301 between the Nice Bridge and Bowie, although there are a lot of mast arms in the Waldorf-St. Charles area. I also seem to recall some span wires along US 50 in the Easton area. Just about all of the span wires on MD 24 between I-95 and US 1 in Harford County have been replaced with mast arms.Quote from: epzik8 on October 27, 2020, 07:54:53 AM
Lately Maryland has been replacing a lot of span wires with mast arms. They're doing US 40 at MD 132/APG Boulevard in Aberdeen right now.
I'm trying to remember where in Maryland I've seen span wire. Seems like in the DC area, they're mostly mast arm.
MD signals are easy to remember, for me, as there's almost always a near-side signal, and they use those 12-12-8-8-8 doghouses rather frequently.
I was actually in Waldorf back in January, but I was only on US-301 for a short distance (and not in an area that had any wire span) after coming east on MD-228 via southbound MD-210 heading out of DC. Now that you mention it, I recall seeing some wire span signals along MD-210.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 14, 2020, 04:22:12 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 14, 2020, 04:22:12 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PMFort Worth has a few of those where the mainline road has mastarms and the auxillary road has the span wire signal.
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm? I drove past this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6731609,-90.2039431,3a,60y,69.26h,88.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1I0FdslaHIJFEIB6PIrUwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) the other day. I also know that Houston has (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8500393,-95.2622574,3a,60y,331.04h,89.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sls-edvHzKdfjKEc9sX8tyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) several (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.846156,-95.3625578,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR9kwPbSQ_OCbHU7ZpfTrQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/). Any others?
I am not sure there are uglier traffic signals in the country than Houston area horizontal span wire signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 14, 2020, 04:23:57 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 14, 2020, 04:23:57 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 26, 2020, 01:14:28 AMAs much money is in the Seattle area, I do not understand the City of Seattle's widespread use of terrible span wire signals. Seems like the Seattle suburbs (Bellevue comes to mind) have rather good mastarm installation, but it is frankly embarrassing that one can drive around downtown Seattle and see span wire signals everywhere.
Just as an example, the MO install in the above link compared to a mast-arm install in Puyallup, WA. Both single-lane approaches with right turn bypasses and FYA left turns:
(https://i.imgur.com/z1A19wF.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Us9NuYs.png)
Another mast arm install in Federal Way, WA:
(https://i.imgur.com/sEjm1H5.png)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: davewiecking on December 14, 2020, 09:22:35 PM
Post by: davewiecking on December 14, 2020, 09:22:35 PM
Mast arms 100%. I hate traffic signals dancing in the wind. Especially non-standard non-right angle intersections where you really need to know which light sort of aimed in your direction is the one to be followed.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 14, 2020, 09:35:51 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 14, 2020, 09:35:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 14, 2020, 08:08:31 PMI don't think that's true, especially with their bike infrastructure, but okay.
With apologies for bringing up politics on this board, it's not exactly surprising about Seattle considering what we've seen of its city government over the past year. Their priorities are obviously very misplaced.
iPhone
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 14, 2020, 09:42:19 PM
Post by: NoGoodNamesAvailable on December 14, 2020, 09:42:19 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 14, 2020, 08:08:31 PM
With apologies for bringing up politics on this board, it's not exactly surprising about Seattle considering what we've seen of its city government over the past year. Their priorities are obviously very misplaced.
You can complain about seattle all you want, but that city, and the PNW in general, has better and more innovative signalization practices than 90% of the country. That's the only reason you notice the span wire. In places like NY state ugly span wire and poor signal placement are just expected as the norm.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on December 14, 2020, 10:35:27 PM
Post by: SignBridge on December 14, 2020, 10:35:27 PM
Points taken guys. Apparently the issues are more multi-sided than I realized. It's all good.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
Post by: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 14, 2020, 08:08:31 PM
With apologies for bringing up politics on this board, it's not exactly surprising about Seattle considering what we've seen of its city government over the past year. Their priorities are obviously very misplaced.
Yup, posting this was like throwing down a lit bomb. But I digress... :spin:
I've perused Seattle on StreetView and the span wires generally don't look at that great. I know earlier in on this topic I said span wires could be appropriate. However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2020, 11:21:53 PM
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2020, 11:21:53 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 27, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Does anyone know of signal installations that are half wire, half mast arm?
Very unusual for NJ is the traffic light setup at this new intersection on US 322 at the new Inspira Hospital near NJ 55.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/saPN3SezkNXgkoGw9
While shown here in the construction phase, this is how they completed the project. And odder still...the main road: US 322, has the span wire; the side road has the mast arms.
It does appear there are in-ground bases for posts and mast arms for 322. My guess is that there was some sort of issue with those bases or the traffic light structues, and they went with a Plan B for a while.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Caps81943 on December 14, 2020, 11:32:36 PM
Post by: Caps81943 on December 14, 2020, 11:32:36 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on October 27, 2020, 11:05:51 PM
^Intersection of SR-648/Edsall Rd and Independence Cir / Winter View Dr in Alexandria, VA:
https://goo.gl/maps/AM4yuLw3bs2jZ5Mq6
This installation was originally all mast arms, but something happened between 2017-18 that forced VDOT to remove the mast arm and signals at the southeast corner of the intersection and replace it with a diagonal spanwire. (A bit peculiar as well is the sight of a ped signal mounted to a wooden 4x4.) I'm left to speculate that VDOT is waiting for routine signal replacement before they possibly erect a new mast arm.
Random question, would anyone know how old those lights (on the mast) are? I feel like that design of light (with that back) is the oldest traffic light style that's still common in VA.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AM
Post by: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PM
Post by: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AMQuote from: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
There are definitely more examples than just Seattle. Vancouver, BC has an extensive amount of span wire in their downtown. Both Seattle and Vancouver have plenty of mast arms as well. The use of span wire is by no means close to a universal practice in either city. Where I live, in Tacoma, another large PNW city, span wire is also very prevalent throughout the downtown core.
There are many reasons why span wire is preferred in urban areas:
(1) easier to modify later if lane layouts change
(2) easier to work into trolley wire setups (esp. important in Vancouver and Seattle)
(3) mast arms are bulky and can be inappropriate in tighter urban areas. Small mast arms, like in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/aa4bG1ShFAJDk7VXA), are a good compromise.
(4) mast arms do nothing to improve signal visibility, which is better achieved through backplates (which Seattle makes extensive use of).
In downtown Seattle and downtown Vancouver, span wire likely became popular early on because overhead signals showed up pretty quickly over a short period of time, mostly in the 70s and 80s, and the cost to implement overhead signals with mast arms would have far exceeded most budgets given the sheer number of signalized intersections. Few modifications have taken place since then, so span wire remains common. This is especially true in Vancouver, where most signals are post-mounted and where the span wire signals were mostly added only to aid in signal visibility.
It should be noted that both cities have plenty of mast arms. Both old and new examples of both can be found throughout each city. In Downtown Seattle, a large number of intersections use only post mounted signals. Many signals that are not post mounted, such as those along 2nd Ave and 5th Ave, are mast arms. Never mind the huge number of mast arms outside of the downtown area.
Basically: don't rag on Seattle because (A) they're not unique in using span wire, (B) they have good reasons to use it, and (C) many intersections don't use span wire anyway.
Couple other things, too: new span wire is hard to come by in WA no matter where you are. Many cities have never used it. Additionally, in that above photo quote (original quote from me), the only intersection in that picture with span wire is from Missouri, and the other two pictures are not from Seattle. What in the hell made you bring up Seattle?
As to the comments above about politics: get the f*** out of here with that shit. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 15, 2020, 08:20:08 PM
Post by: Amtrakprod on December 15, 2020, 08:20:08 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PMNeverQuote from: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AMQuote from: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
There are definitely more examples than just Seattle. Vancouver, BC has an extensive amount of span wire in their downtown. Both Seattle and Vancouver have plenty of mast arms as well. The use of span wire is by no means close to a universal practice in either city. Where I live, in Tacoma, another large PNW city, span wire is also very prevalent throughout the downtown core.
There are many reasons why span wire is preferred in urban areas:
(1) easier to modify later if lane layouts change
(2) easier to work into trolley wire setups (esp. important in Vancouver and Seattle)
(3) mast arms are bulky and can be inappropriate in tighter urban areas. Small mast arms, like in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/aa4bG1ShFAJDk7VXA), are a good compromise.
(4) mast arms do nothing to improve signal visibility, which is better achieved through backplates (which Seattle makes extensive use of).
In downtown Seattle and downtown Vancouver, span wire likely became popular early on because overhead signals showed up pretty quickly over a short period of time, mostly in the 70s and 80s, and the cost to implement overhead signals with mast arms would have far exceeded most budgets given the sheer number of signalized intersections. Few modifications have taken place since then, so span wire remains common. This is especially true in Vancouver, where most signals are post-mounted and where the span wire signals were mostly added only to aid in signal visibility.
It should be noted that both cities have plenty of mast arms. Both old and new examples of both can be found throughout each city. In Downtown Seattle, a large number of intersections use only post mounted signals. Many signals that are not post mounted, such as those along 2nd Ave and 5th Ave, are mast arms. Never mind the huge number of mast arms outside of the downtown area.
Basically: don't rag on Seattle because (A) they're not unique in using span wire, (B) they have good reasons to use it, and (C) many intersections don't use span wire anyway.
Couple other things, too: new span wire is hard to come by in WA no matter where you are. Many cities have never used it. Additionally, in that above photo quote (original quote from me), the only intersection in that picture with span wire is from Missouri, and the other two pictures are not from Seattle. What in the hell made you bring up Seattle?
As to the comments above about politics: get the f*** out of here with that shit. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
attack Washington when Jake is aroundiPhone
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 08:27:38 PM
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 08:27:38 PM
Since there have been several negative reactions to my earlier post that referenced Seattle city politics as it relates to traffic signals, I have removed the post. Point taken; I probably shouldn't have posted that on this board. My apologies to anyone who was offended.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: kphoger on December 15, 2020, 08:58:51 PM
Post by: kphoger on December 15, 2020, 08:58:51 PM
Quote from: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 08:27:38 PM
My apologies to anyone who was offended.
I'm doing better already, and I only have three more sessions of therapy to go.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SkyPesos on December 15, 2020, 09:02:13 PM
Post by: SkyPesos on December 15, 2020, 09:02:13 PM
Why choose between span wire and mast arms when you can have both in an intersection, like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.098384,-84.5106297,3a,37.5y,151.38h,97.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHVbPysjlBQZQJ37GMPkoQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Cincinnati's downtown : p
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 09:14:33 PM
Post by: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 09:14:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 15, 2020, 08:58:51 PMQuote from: SignBridge on December 15, 2020, 08:27:38 PM
My apologies to anyone who was offended.
I'm doing better already, and I only have three more sessions of therapy to go.
LOL Good to hear you're doing so well. I hope Jakeroot is making as good or better recovery. LOL
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2020, 02:59:19 AM
Post by: jakeroot on December 16, 2020, 02:59:19 AM
I've recovered :-P
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AM
Post by: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PMThis is a good post and appreciate the detail. A couple of points:Quote from: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AMQuote from: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
There are definitely more examples than just Seattle. Vancouver, BC has an extensive amount of span wire in their downtown. Both Seattle and Vancouver have plenty of mast arms as well. The use of span wire is by no means close to a universal practice in either city. Where I live, in Tacoma, another large PNW city, span wire is also very prevalent throughout the downtown core.
There are many reasons why span wire is preferred in urban areas:
(1) easier to modify later if lane layouts change
(2) easier to work into trolley wire setups (esp. important in Vancouver and Seattle)
(3) mast arms are bulky and can be inappropriate in tighter urban areas. Small mast arms, like in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/aa4bG1ShFAJDk7VXA), are a good compromise.
(4) mast arms do nothing to improve signal visibility, which is better achieved through backplates (which Seattle makes extensive use of).
In downtown Seattle and downtown Vancouver, span wire likely became popular early on because overhead signals showed up pretty quickly over a short period of time, mostly in the 70s and 80s, and the cost to implement overhead signals with mast arms would have far exceeded most budgets given the sheer number of signalized intersections. Few modifications have taken place since then, so span wire remains common. This is especially true in Vancouver, where most signals are post-mounted and where the span wire signals were mostly added only to aid in signal visibility.
It should be noted that both cities have plenty of mast arms. Both old and new examples of both can be found throughout each city. In Downtown Seattle, a large number of intersections use only post mounted signals. Many signals that are not post mounted, such as those along 2nd Ave and 5th Ave, are mast arms. Never mind the huge number of mast arms outside of the downtown area.
Basically: don't rag on Seattle because (A) they're not unique in using span wire, (B) they have good reasons to use it, and (C) many intersections don't use span wire anyway.
Couple other things, too: new span wire is hard to come by in WA no matter where you are. Many cities have never used it. Additionally, in that above photo quote (original quote from me), the only intersection in that picture with span wire is from Missouri, and the other two pictures are not from Seattle. What in the hell made you bring up Seattle?
As to the comments above about politics: get the f*** out of here with that shit. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
-- When I was speaking of major cities with span wire signals downtown, I was speaking of North America. Seattle is unique among big cities that I have been by having prevalent span wire use in a downtown core. You will not see span wire in downtown Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc. You do not see them used in most other countries, even developing ones. Pedestal mounts or overhead mastarms are pretty universal outside of North America elsewhere that I have seen.
-- Cities like Boston and San Francisco seem to have no issue using overhead mastarms where streetcar wires are present.
I have long been reading about municipalities make up interesting excuses for why they do not use mastarm signals. This 1988 article from the Washington Post is always one I have enjoyed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/). To quote:
Most of Northern Virginia's signals are controlled by the state, which has long preferred span wires. Anne Didden, the state's area engineer on this subject, says they are about $20,000 cheaper and easier to install. Mast arms require undergound wiring and that can get complicated and expensive because underground utilities sometimes have to be worked around, she said. Asked how California, with 25 million people, seems to surmount this problem and put mast arm signals all over the state, Didden said, "Interesting question."
Many municipalities were using the guy-wire mastarms as early as the 50's. Here's footage driving down Sunset Blvd. in Los Angeles in 1963 where overhead guy-wire signals are standard:(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2tU_zAxuc). About the 1:20 mark forward, you can see what appears to be maybe one of the first left-turn signals at Doheny Drive. Modern mastarms came into use sometime in the 1970's I believe. You can see some in Las Vegas in the 70's at about the 1:15 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI).
My beef is not with Seattle. I just don't think they should use span wire signals in the downtown core. My main beef is with span wire signals generally. I don't think they should be used ever and states like California, Nevada, and Illinois reinforce my viewpoint on that. Florida's continued use of span wire given the threat of hurricane winds is embarrassing. However, even the ones they do install are often terrible. Tampa, where I live, has taken to installing diagonal mastarms that are atrocious and have poor visibility for certain approaches to the intersection. https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6 (https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadman65 on December 18, 2020, 01:09:00 AM
Post by: roadman65 on December 18, 2020, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AMBaltimore is another city to use span wires in the Downtown Area. Even with all the other parts of the state going mast arms, the city is not changing with it.Quote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PMThis is a good post and appreciate the detail. A couple of points:Quote from: democratic nole on December 15, 2020, 09:43:20 AMQuote from: JoePCool14 on December 14, 2020, 11:14:33 PM
However, in any sort of urban core environment, you really need mast arms.
https://goo.gl/maps/NpzScGRasRfnqtp17
That was my main point about the Seattle signals. It is maybe the only large city I am aware of where span wire seems to be the prevalent installation mode for signals in a downtown area. I don't know how they could ever allow https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9 (https://goo.gl/maps/bRdnHPo8v6diWsZd9)
There are definitely more examples than just Seattle. Vancouver, BC has an extensive amount of span wire in their downtown. Both Seattle and Vancouver have plenty of mast arms as well. The use of span wire is by no means close to a universal practice in either city. Where I live, in Tacoma, another large PNW city, span wire is also very prevalent throughout the downtown core.
There are many reasons why span wire is preferred in urban areas:
(1) easier to modify later if lane layouts change
(2) easier to work into trolley wire setups (esp. important in Vancouver and Seattle)
(3) mast arms are bulky and can be inappropriate in tighter urban areas. Small mast arms, like in Spokane, WA (https://goo.gl/maps/aa4bG1ShFAJDk7VXA), are a good compromise.
(4) mast arms do nothing to improve signal visibility, which is better achieved through backplates (which Seattle makes extensive use of).
In downtown Seattle and downtown Vancouver, span wire likely became popular early on because overhead signals showed up pretty quickly over a short period of time, mostly in the 70s and 80s, and the cost to implement overhead signals with mast arms would have far exceeded most budgets given the sheer number of signalized intersections. Few modifications have taken place since then, so span wire remains common. This is especially true in Vancouver, where most signals are post-mounted and where the span wire signals were mostly added only to aid in signal visibility.
It should be noted that both cities have plenty of mast arms. Both old and new examples of both can be found throughout each city. In Downtown Seattle, a large number of intersections use only post mounted signals. Many signals that are not post mounted, such as those along 2nd Ave and 5th Ave, are mast arms. Never mind the huge number of mast arms outside of the downtown area.
Basically: don't rag on Seattle because (A) they're not unique in using span wire, (B) they have good reasons to use it, and (C) many intersections don't use span wire anyway.
Couple other things, too: new span wire is hard to come by in WA no matter where you are. Many cities have never used it. Additionally, in that above photo quote (original quote from me), the only intersection in that picture with span wire is from Missouri, and the other two pictures are not from Seattle. What in the hell made you bring up Seattle?
As to the comments above about politics: get the f*** out of here with that shit. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
-- When I was speaking of major cities with span wire signals downtown, I was speaking of North America. Seattle is unique among big cities that I have been by having prevalent span wire use in a downtown core. You will not see span wire in downtown Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc. You do not see them used in most other countries, even developing ones. Pedestal mounts or overhead mastarms are pretty universal outside of North America elsewhere that I have seen.
-- Cities like Boston and San Francisco seem to have no issue using overhead mastarms where streetcar wires are present.
I have long been reading about municipalities make up interesting excuses for why they do not use mastarm signals. This 1988 article from the Washington Post is always one I have enjoyed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/). To quote:
Most of Northern Virginia's signals are controlled by the state, which has long preferred span wires. Anne Didden, the state's area engineer on this subject, says they are about $20,000 cheaper and easier to install. Mast arms require undergound wiring and that can get complicated and expensive because underground utilities sometimes have to be worked around, she said. Asked how California, with 25 million people, seems to surmount this problem and put mast arm signals all over the state, Didden said, "Interesting question."
Many municipalities were using the guy-wire mastarms as early as the 50's. Here's footage driving down Sunset Blvd. in Los Angeles in 1963 where overhead guy-wire signals are standard:(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2tU_zAxuc). About the 1:20 mark forward, you can see what appears to be maybe one of the first left-turn signals at Doheny Drive. Modern mastarms came into use sometime in the 1970's I believe. You can see some in Las Vegas in the 70's at about the 1:15 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xt7j3BKUpI).
My beef is not with Seattle. I just don't think they should use span wire signals in the downtown core. My main beef is with span wire signals generally. I don't think they should be used ever and states like California, Nevada, and Illinois reinforce my viewpoint on that. Florida's continued use of span wire given the threat of hurricane winds is embarrassing. However, even the ones they do install are often terrible. Tampa, where I live, has taken to installing diagonal mastarms that are atrocious and have poor visibility for certain approaches to the intersection. https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6 (https://goo.gl/maps/q4JqALvwBR4frt5A6)
As far as underground wiring goes, NJ has mast arms with overhead wires as power supply. Cranford was one of them before Union County replaced them with their own mono tube arms using underground conduits. I don’t know why it can’t be done like that in VA.
https://goo.gl/maps/NpzScGRasRfnqtp17
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 12:13:42 PM
Post by: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 12:13:42 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AM
My main beef is with span wire signals generally. I don't think they should be used ever and states like California, Nevada, and Illinois reinforce my viewpoint on that. Florida's continued use of span wire given the threat of hurricane winds is embarrassing.
I think we've had this conversation before, but it was several years ago. Are span-wire installations more hurricane-resistant? That's what I told my sons the other day in the car during a conversation prompted by driving through a span-wire intersection.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 20, 2020, 04:37:44 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 20, 2020, 04:37:44 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 18, 2020, 12:13:42 PMAs far as I have seen, the answer is no. To quote from this 1998 article: https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html (https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html)Quote from: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AM
My main beef is with span wire signals generally. I don't think they should be used ever and states like California, Nevada, and Illinois reinforce my viewpoint on that. Florida's continued use of span wire given the threat of hurricane winds is embarrassing.
I think we've had this conversation before, but it was several years ago. Are span-wire installations more hurricane-resistant? That's what I told my sons the other day in the car during a conversation prompted by driving through a span-wire intersection.
"[Mastarms] are becoming more common in Florida after proving far more reliable than traditional cable-suspended lights during Hurricane Andrew in 1992. State officials said only one was damaged, while more than 2,700 cable-suspended signals broke off and fell, said Ron Cook, a civil engineering professor and co-investigator on the UF project with civil engineering Professor Dave Bloomquist. The DOT now requires the structures at new intersections or intersections where traffic lights are replaced within 10 miles of the coast."
FDOT has changed the installs of mastarms to make them more wind resistant, but I have not seen any data that says they can withstand high winds in the way that mastarm signals can. Here's a picture from the hurricanes in Lafayette, LA this year that is encapsulates why communities should use mastarms:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/08/27/USAT/071f588e-a37e-4765-969f-dcd4bf571346-004_GTY_1269114333.jpg?crop=2999,1687,x0,y172&width=660&height=372&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Notice that the mastarm signals survived essentially without issue, while all of the above ground telephone poles failed.
I find it appalling that FDOT does not have a universal mastarm standard here in Florida. Rather than do things right the first time, they would apparently rather be cheap and be forced to spend more money over the long run by having to replace these trash span wire assemblies when they fail. FDOT can whine about cost all it wants, but plenty of other low tax jurisdictions (Nevada, Arizona, the Dakotas, etc.) have universal mastarm installation without issue.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 23, 2020, 03:36:44 PM
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 23, 2020, 03:36:44 PM
The only place I know of around here where span wires are rare is Cape Cod. It's mostly ground-mounted signals with a few mast arms for bigger intersections. I think it has to do with wind resistance.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 25, 2020, 10:56:22 PM
Post by: ErmineNotyours on December 25, 2020, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 18, 2020, 01:09:00 AM
As far as underground wiring goes, NJ has mast arms with overhead wires as power supply. Cranford was one of them before Union County replaced them with their own mono tube arms using underground conduits. I don't know why it can't be done like that in VA.
https://goo.gl/maps/NpzScGRasRfnqtp17
That intersection doesn't have any pedestrian signals, and new installations require it. You would have to have mast arms wrap three fourths the way around the entire intersection to cover all the posts for above ground wiring for ped signals. I think I have seen installations like that and they are odd looking.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 26, 2020, 12:22:51 PM
Post by: jakeroot on December 26, 2020, 12:22:51 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AMQuote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PMThis is a good post and appreciate the detail. A couple of points:
[clipped]
-- When I was speaking of major cities with span wire signals downtown, I was speaking of North America. Seattle is unique among big cities that I have been by having prevalent span wire use in a downtown core. You will not see span wire in downtown Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc. You do not see them used in most other countries, even developing ones. Pedestal mounts or overhead mastarms are pretty universal outside of North America elsewhere that I have seen.
-- Cities like Boston and San Francisco seem to have no issue using overhead mastarms where streetcar wires are present.
Couple of things here: mast arms, like those in the US, are a fairly unique American invention. Big mast arms with several signals on them, hanging over the street, isn't really something seen in other countries. Other countries use mast arms to mount overhead signals, but it's usually just one, maybe two; most signals are mounted using posts. The Netherlands and perhaps China are two unique cases, where overhead signals seem very common. Japan only uses overhead signals, but they only use one per mast arm (per direction...usually two are mounted back-to-front), so they're not especially bulky.
Basically: if you're asking for stuff like this (https://goo.gl/maps/uA4GmEgJX99wtBBV7) (in Seattle, by the way!), you're asking for something not really seen outside the US. Outside the US, this image (https://goo.gl/maps/KWqjy8wBNUEVLfES6) shows more common practices.
On overhead wires: Here in Seattle, as in Vancouver, many buses are trolleybuses. They rely on overhead catenary to supply electricity, like streetcars, but there are far more lines than most cities with streetcar systems, so overhead wiring is common throughout the city. It's not that it's impossible to use trolleybus catenary (this image (https://goo.gl/maps/QBa5KmNwDAPXoPwK6) clearly shows how it would work), it's just that it wasn't super common to integrate mast arms with overhead trolleybus wire. However, the practice has changed and Seattle does use overhead mast arms now, as I've already said, even at major intersections like this (https://goo.gl/maps/Y95uveyFuuqfJvrp6) where trolleybuses and streetcars mix.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SkyPesos on December 26, 2020, 02:20:47 PM
Post by: SkyPesos on December 26, 2020, 02:20:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 26, 2020, 12:22:51 PMThere’s a picture I posted on an unrelated topic thread with a mast arm in China on it (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28175.0). In that picture, you have one signal for each direction, unlike here in the US, where it’s generally one per lane. But Chinese Cities can get inconsistent about this. Fuzhou (the city in that thread) is all one signal per direction, but I’ve seen roads in Beijing and Shenzhen where one signal set can have one per lane, with a really long mast arm, then the next set on that road is one per direction.
Couple of things here: mast arms, like those in the US, are a fairly unique American invention. Big mast arms with several signals on them, hanging over the street, isn't really something seen in other countries. Other countries use mast arms to mount overhead signals, but it's usually just one, maybe two; most signals are mounted using posts. The Netherlands and perhaps China are two unique cases, where overhead signals seem very common. Japan only uses overhead signals, but they only use one per mast arm (per direction...usually two are mounted back-to-front), so they're not especially bulky.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 11:50:56 AM
Post by: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 15, 2020, 09:02:13 PM
Why choose between span wire and mast arms when you can have both in an intersection, like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.098384,-84.5106297,3a,37.5y,151.38h,97.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHVbPysjlBQZQJ37GMPkoQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in Cincinnati's downtown : p
Those mast arms happened when the streetcar was put in, though I'm curious why they didn't do the usual downtown style (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0999497,-84.5126568,3a,75y,352.1h,94.68t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s590D6OntJRSp8TsMu1LRSQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D590D6OntJRSp8TsMu1LRSQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D159.16216%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192). Cost, perhaps, since the streetcar went so far over?
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PM
Post by: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PM
I'll be the contrarian that favors span wires.
* I believe someone in an earlier post estimated that mast arms add around $20k to a signal project. When cities convert entire neighborhoods or downtowns to mast arm, that's hundreds of thousands of dollars not going to crumbling roads, bridges, or--since aesthetics do matter--meaningful improvements like plants/trees, sidewalks, lighting, benches, that improve the aesthetics for people (not just cars).
* Span wires are much more subtle than mast arms visually (especially the massive "tree trunks" on modern setups). The signals themselves can still be perfectly visible by adding backplates, and top and bottom wires keep them from whipping around.
* Say a boom truck takes out a signal. With span wire, the harm to passersby is the weight of the signals falling and the risk of getting tangled up in the wires. When that mast arm comes down, that's a lot larger surface area to kill somebody.
* I will admit that mast arms probably hold up better to hurricanes and tornadoes than span wires. They just look freaky as hell flexing up and down in the wind.
Ohio was almost exclusively span wire until the 21st century. Now, jurisdictions are practically tripping over themselves to replace them with mast arms, and I haven't figured out why.
From another thread:
Span wire signals can be hung right back up in a day or two, though. After a recent tornado nearby, crews got the span wires hung back up in a day and the damaged signal heads replaced a day or two after that. If something takes out a mast arm, you'd have to set up a temporary span wire, potentially set some temporary poles, and wire it all in, while you order a new mast arm to arrive in what, weeks?
Edit: If someone can show that TCO of a mast arm is lower, despite the higher initial cost, I might be more amenable to them. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.
* I believe someone in an earlier post estimated that mast arms add around $20k to a signal project. When cities convert entire neighborhoods or downtowns to mast arm, that's hundreds of thousands of dollars not going to crumbling roads, bridges, or--since aesthetics do matter--meaningful improvements like plants/trees, sidewalks, lighting, benches, that improve the aesthetics for people (not just cars).
* Span wires are much more subtle than mast arms visually (especially the massive "tree trunks" on modern setups). The signals themselves can still be perfectly visible by adding backplates, and top and bottom wires keep them from whipping around.
* Say a boom truck takes out a signal. With span wire, the harm to passersby is the weight of the signals falling and the risk of getting tangled up in the wires. When that mast arm comes down, that's a lot larger surface area to kill somebody.
* I will admit that mast arms probably hold up better to hurricanes and tornadoes than span wires. They just look freaky as hell flexing up and down in the wind.
Ohio was almost exclusively span wire until the 21st century. Now, jurisdictions are practically tripping over themselves to replace them with mast arms, and I haven't figured out why.
From another thread:
Quote from: mrsman on December 27, 2020, 11:58:42 AM
Another reason I prefer mastarms to span wire:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MontgomeryCountyMD/comments/kkqrrd/what_i_encountered_on_my_way_to_work_today_at/
https://i.imgur.com/8hZEuZc.jpg
Span wire signals can be hung right back up in a day or two, though. After a recent tornado nearby, crews got the span wires hung back up in a day and the damaged signal heads replaced a day or two after that. If something takes out a mast arm, you'd have to set up a temporary span wire, potentially set some temporary poles, and wire it all in, while you order a new mast arm to arrive in what, weeks?
Edit: If someone can show that TCO of a mast arm is lower, despite the higher initial cost, I might be more amenable to them. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:10:50 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 26, 2020, 12:22:51 PMI think a point I was trying to make which was lost in translation is that it is a lie when certain state DOT's say that certain intersections require span wire installations as opposed to mastarms. Nowhere else in the world (that I am aware of) makes regular use of span wire installations, even in developing countries, which somewhat reinforces my point regarding their inadequacy for use in this country. The signals from Sydney you posted are very similar to the standard California signal installation, which I find to be superior to almost all other installs.Quote from: democratic nole on December 18, 2020, 12:54:30 AMQuote from: jakeroot on December 15, 2020, 07:21:46 PMThis is a good post and appreciate the detail. A couple of points:
[clipped]
-- When I was speaking of major cities with span wire signals downtown, I was speaking of North America. Seattle is unique among big cities that I have been by having prevalent span wire use in a downtown core. You will not see span wire in downtown Chicago, Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc. You do not see them used in most other countries, even developing ones. Pedestal mounts or overhead mastarms are pretty universal outside of North America elsewhere that I have seen.
-- Cities like Boston and San Francisco seem to have no issue using overhead mastarms where streetcar wires are present.
Couple of things here: mast arms, like those in the US, are a fairly unique American invention. Big mast arms with several signals on them, hanging over the street, isn't really something seen in other countries. Other countries use mast arms to mount overhead signals, but it's usually just one, maybe two; most signals are mounted using posts. The Netherlands and perhaps China are two unique cases, where overhead signals seem very common. Japan only uses overhead signals, but they only use one per mast arm (per direction...usually two are mounted back-to-front), so they're not especially bulky.
Basically: if you're asking for stuff like this (https://goo.gl/maps/uA4GmEgJX99wtBBV7) (in Seattle, by the way!), you're asking for something not really seen outside the US. Outside the US, this image (https://goo.gl/maps/KWqjy8wBNUEVLfES6) shows more common practices.
On overhead wires: Here in Seattle, as in Vancouver, many buses are trolleybuses. They rely on overhead catenary to supply electricity, like streetcars, but there are far more lines than most cities with streetcar systems, so overhead wiring is common throughout the city. It's not that it's impossible to use trolleybus catenary (this image (https://goo.gl/maps/QBa5KmNwDAPXoPwK6) clearly shows how it would work), it's just that it wasn't super common to integrate mast arms with overhead trolleybus wire. However, the practice has changed and Seattle does use overhead mast arms now, as I've already said, even at major intersections like this (https://goo.gl/maps/Y95uveyFuuqfJvrp6) where trolleybuses and streetcars mix.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:35:46 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:35:46 PM
Quote from: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PMI don't have the data for this on a whole, but here is a Florida example: https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html (https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html). Miami-Dade went to universal mastarm installation after Hurricane Andrew because they only one mastarm in the county was damaged, while 2,700 span wire signals were damaged. Broward County lost 60% of their signals during a 2004 hurricane because they were predominately span wire. When cities and states are regularly having to replace failed signals, that increases costs.
Edit: If someone can show that TCO of a mast arm is lower, despite the higher initial cost, I might be more amenable to them. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.
Anecdotally, I have driven around parts of Nevada, Arizona, and California that have mastarms installed decades ago that are still holding up well. For example, here's a Las Vegas signal outside of Circus Circus casino on Las Vegas Blvd. in 2020 https://goo.gl/maps/2xhSZEUAqxD28u7M9 (https://goo.gl/maps/2xhSZEUAqxD28u7M9) versus 1978 (I think) https://i.pinimg.com/originals/65/d9/cd/65d9cda0864f6dbd9634826084ab7232.jpg (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/65/d9/cd/65d9cda0864f6dbd9634826084ab7232.jpg). When you are talking about getting 40-50 years out of a traffic signal setup, that's pretty good. Los Angeles still has many guy-wire mastarms that were installed in the 60's in use. While I can't speak for other jurisdictions, Florida has spent a lot of money replacing span wire installations either due to failure in high-winds/hurricanes, or functional obsolescence. Rarely does one see signals here that have been in place for 40+ years. Almost all have been replaced with new span wire signals or mastarm signals.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SignBridge on December 27, 2020, 08:32:30 PM
Post by: SignBridge on December 27, 2020, 08:32:30 PM
I completely agree with democratic nole that California is the benchmark for good quality traffic signal installations. Nevada runs a close second though.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: EpicRoadways on December 27, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
Post by: EpicRoadways on December 27, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
Quote from: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PMIn my area, common practice seems to be to install a temporary mast arm when one is knocked down, generally one left over from an older intersection.
Span wire signals can be hung right back up in a day or two, though. After a recent tornado nearby, crews got the span wires hung back up in a day and the damaged signal heads replaced a day or two after that. If something takes out a mast arm, you'd have to set up a temporary span wire, potentially set some temporary poles, and wire it all in, while you order a new mast arm to arrive in what, weeks?
Quote from: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PMAnecdotally, I have driven around parts of Nevada, Arizona, and California that have mastarms installed decades ago that are still holding up well. For example, here's a Las Vegas signal outside of Circus Circus casino on Las Vegas Blvd. in 2020 https://goo.gl/maps/2xhSZEUAqxD28u7M9 versus 1978 (I think) https://i.pinimg.com/originals/65/d9/cd/65d9cda0864f6dbd9634826084ab7232.jpg. When you are talking about getting 40-50 years out of a traffic signal setup, that's pretty good. Los Angeles still has many guy-wire mastarms that were installed in the 60's in use. While I can't speak for other jurisdictions, Florida has spent a lot of money replacing span wire installations either due to failure in high-winds/hurricanes, or functional obsolescence. Rarely does one see signals here that have been in place for 40+ years. Almost all have been replaced with new span wire signals or mastarm signals.
Another thing that people often forget about with mast arms is that they can be reused almost as often as span wire signals as long as it isn't some weird skewed intersection with custom masts. Pretty much any time mast arms can be reused, they are (at least in my area). Typically an installation has to be at least 40 or 50 years old or there has to be a major reconstruction project that significantly alters the footprint of the intersection for the masts to be replaced outright. For example, this (https://goo.gl/maps/whhoo3RVKhmBTtUs8)traffic signal (which wasn't very old) was replaced with a roundabout so three of the four mast arms got reused here (https://goo.gl/maps/az7XEDoMFvv2vCsg7), albeit with slightly different signal components. I'm sure this practice of reusing masts differs by jurisdiction, and some areas definitely seen more keen on it than others, but at least it can be done if $$ are a concern.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: SkyPesos on December 27, 2020, 11:54:25 PM
Post by: SkyPesos on December 27, 2020, 11:54:25 PM
Going to mention a state that I lived in for 10 years and generally find to be very consistent with signal installations (mast arms, specifically): Missouri. If California is the gold standard for mast arms, I'll say that Missouri is just a hair below that.
Generally, the state uses a plain, straight mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6416567,-90.5108488,3a,16.3y,121.2h,92.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUbRAeEoNYr8_OEz6OObrrQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Another example (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6125196,-90.3495788,3a,75y,82.88h,93.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0LhY-4MDdvFixm6Tp5BgvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Kansas City and St. Louis have their own variants; KC has something similar to California's mast arms with the curve, and St. Louis has this style (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5912865,-90.3344835,3a,67.8y,217.47h,85.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1usExU1OnqpJo94J4WMmDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on its older mast arms (idk what the best way to describe it), but it seems like they're switching to the MoDot standard. They also have mast arms with the ground support pole in the median (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6798728,-90.4991079,3a,65.3y,295.09h,88.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEL80GBO8f7iaZacINVD7Ew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656); probably the only state I know that does that.
But for the very small number of permanent span wire installations MoDot uses, though, they look hideous. Here's an example of MO 141 and Ladue before the former got moved to a freeway in 2012 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6605194,-90.5047365,3a,75y,353.31h,94.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbcZh-SJ2eH6C2tqROkDUUA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664)
Generally, the state uses a plain, straight mast arm (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6416567,-90.5108488,3a,16.3y,121.2h,92.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUbRAeEoNYr8_OEz6OObrrQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Another example (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6125196,-90.3495788,3a,75y,82.88h,93.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0LhY-4MDdvFixm6Tp5BgvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Kansas City and St. Louis have their own variants; KC has something similar to California's mast arms with the curve, and St. Louis has this style (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5912865,-90.3344835,3a,67.8y,217.47h,85.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1usExU1OnqpJo94J4WMmDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on its older mast arms (idk what the best way to describe it), but it seems like they're switching to the MoDot standard. They also have mast arms with the ground support pole in the median (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6798728,-90.4991079,3a,65.3y,295.09h,88.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEL80GBO8f7iaZacINVD7Ew!2e0!7i13312!8i6656); probably the only state I know that does that.
But for the very small number of permanent span wire installations MoDot uses, though, they look hideous. Here's an example of MO 141 and Ladue before the former got moved to a freeway in 2012 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6605194,-90.5047365,3a,75y,353.31h,94.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbcZh-SJ2eH6C2tqROkDUUA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 01:14:29 AM
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 01:14:29 AM
Quote from: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PM
If something takes out a mast arm, you'd have to set up a temporary span wire, potentially set some temporary poles, and wire it all in, while you order a new mast arm to arrive in what, weeks?
Due to the typical placement of NJ's mast arms, they are relatively often taken down by a tractor trailer turning tightly or a vehicle hitting it pretty good.
The time to fully repair it is usually hours, not some theoretical long term project you're guessing at.
The pole and mast are usually reusable, and a bucket truck or lift contraption can often lift it back into place. The trucks that respond to these incidents have spare signals on them to replace any that were destroyed in the crash. The employees are on call to respond to such incidents.
For larger incidents, there are contractors on call that can replace a signal structure within hours as well.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Scott5114 on December 28, 2020, 02:26:06 AM
Post by: Scott5114 on December 28, 2020, 02:26:06 AM
I'm guessing there's something wonky about NJ's signal placement that makes that an ongoing concern. I can't think of any failing around here that weren't due to a strong tornado, and in that situation, not only would a span wire fare just as badly, you are going to have way bigger problems to worry about than a missing traffic signal.
(If a tornado is bad enough, top priority becomes getting street blades up–when those are missing and there are no extant buildings to use as landmarks, it becomes next to impossible for insurance adjusters and cleanup contractors to find addresses they're needed at. After the 2013 Moore tornado, Norman actually donated a batch of signs to make the process quicker.)
(If a tornado is bad enough, top priority becomes getting street blades up–when those are missing and there are no extant buildings to use as landmarks, it becomes next to impossible for insurance adjusters and cleanup contractors to find addresses they're needed at. After the 2013 Moore tornado, Norman actually donated a batch of signs to make the process quicker.)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 28, 2020, 02:46:12 AM
Post by: jakeroot on December 28, 2020, 02:46:12 AM
Just to explain something that might not have been made earlier: I much prefer mast arms to span wire. Assuming they aren't too bulky. California, Illinois, and BC have excellent standards that I wish more places adopted. My defence of places like Seattle and Vancouver was out of respect for considerations that might not necessarily be obvious when simply looking through the windshield of your car. I would love for Seattle to eventually phase out mast arms, but I also recognize that they are bulkier than span wire and are not exactly attractive in tight urban areas. Wires are common in cities so, by all accounts, mast arms are the odd thing. My overall preference in downtown cores is for post-mounted signals only, but I suppose that's not a typical preference.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AM
Post by: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AM
^^^^^
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 11:26:24 AM
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 11:26:24 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 28, 2020, 02:26:06 AM
I'm guessing there's something wonky about NJ's signal placement that makes that an ongoing concern.
They're just placed way too close to the roadway. Trucks making tight right turns often can snag it, or a crash within the intersection can send a car into it.
I'll use a few examples here:
https://goo.gl/maps/qfZdj2WSL6sYhZL88 (right turns are now banned at this particular intersection due to this light pole being hit, but the movement can be made at the previous intersection). https://goo.gl/maps/Fs19Pnv8FR28gQ3u9
https://goo.gl/maps/5cf48w2pKgAA4iFY9
(BTW, I specifically posted these 3 because they've all been hit, numerous times. The pole and masts are still reused...only the light itself may have been replaced. In all cases, the repairs were done same day.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 28, 2020, 12:11:06 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 28, 2020, 12:11:06 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AMAgree with this post. DC would benefit from the installation of pedestal mounted signals on the near side of the intersection (because they do not permit mastarms for aesthetic reasons).
^^^^^
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: DrSmith on December 28, 2020, 02:14:49 PM
Post by: DrSmith on December 28, 2020, 02:14:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 11:26:24 AM
I'll use a few examples here:
https://goo.gl/maps/Fs19Pnv8FR28gQ3u9
As a side note, when I was young my parents and grandparents said that the traffic signal at that intersection in Woodbury was manually operated by a cop. There was a small telephone booth like spot where the cop would operate the signal.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: roadfro on December 28, 2020, 04:55:11 PM
Post by: roadfro on December 28, 2020, 04:55:11 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:35:46 PMQuote from: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PMI don't have the data for this on a whole, but here is a Florida example: https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html (https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html). Miami-Dade went to universal mastarm installation after Hurricane Andrew because they only one mastarm in the county was damaged, while 2,700 span wire signals were damaged. Broward County lost 60% of their signals during a 2004 hurricane because they were predominately span wire. When cities and states are regularly having to replace failed signals, that increases costs.
Edit: If someone can show that TCO of a mast arm is lower, despite the higher initial cost, I might be more amenable to them. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.
I don't have definitive data on this, but I recall reading something several years ago about this. Installation cost for span wire is cheaper than mast arm. Regular operating costs should be identical. But ongoing maintenance costs are greater for span wire than mast arm. Span wire setups are more likely to need the signal heads realigned due to getting turned by weather, and the span wires themselves occasionally need to be re-tensioned...these costs are ongoing for the life of the signal and are almost completely absent with a mast arm or similar setup.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 10:10:06 AM
Post by: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 10:10:06 AM
Quote from: roadfro on December 28, 2020, 04:55:11 PMI believe you are correct. I feel like someone posted that on this forum at some point, but I don't specifically remember.Quote from: democratic nole on December 27, 2020, 02:35:46 PMQuote from: marleythedog on December 27, 2020, 01:35:30 PMI don't have the data for this on a whole, but here is a Florida example: https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html (https://news.ufl.edu/archive/1998/05/new-dampener-makes-traffic-light-poles-safer-longer-lasting.html). Miami-Dade went to universal mastarm installation after Hurricane Andrew because they only one mastarm in the county was damaged, while 2,700 span wire signals were damaged. Broward County lost 60% of their signals during a 2004 hurricane because they were predominately span wire. When cities and states are regularly having to replace failed signals, that increases costs.
Edit: If someone can show that TCO of a mast arm is lower, despite the higher initial cost, I might be more amenable to them. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.
I don't have definitive data on this, but I recall reading something several years ago about this. Installation cost for span wire is cheaper than mast arm. Regular operating costs should be identical. But ongoing maintenance costs are greater for span wire than mast arm. Span wire setups are more likely to need the signal heads realigned due to getting turned by weather, and the span wires themselves occasionally need to be re-tensioned...these costs are ongoing for the life of the signal and are almost completely absent with a mast arm or similar setup.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PM
Post by: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 28, 2020, 12:11:06 PMQuote from: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AMAgree with this post. DC would benefit from the installation of pedestal mounted signals on the near side of the intersection (because they do not permit mastarms for aesthetic reasons).
^^^^^
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
DC does actually use near side post-mounted signals, just not at every intersection.
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PMI don't agree that span wires are better for aesthetics. Neither does the District of Columbia: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/)Quote from: democratic nole on December 28, 2020, 12:11:06 PMQuote from: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AMAgree with this post. DC would benefit from the installation of pedestal mounted signals on the near side of the intersection (because they do not permit mastarms for aesthetic reasons).
^^^^^
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
DC does actually use near side post-mounted signals, just not at every intersection.
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on December 29, 2020, 05:07:28 PM
Post by: mrsman on December 29, 2020, 05:07:28 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PMQuote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PMI don't agree that span wires are better for aesthetics. Neither does the District of Columbia: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/)Quote from: democratic nole on December 28, 2020, 12:11:06 PMQuote from: mrsman on December 28, 2020, 11:14:09 AMAgree with this post. DC would benefit from the installation of pedestal mounted signals on the near side of the intersection (because they do not permit mastarms for aesthetic reasons).
^^^^^
Post mounted would work great as being non-obstrusive and is my recommendation as well for narrower streets.
The problem, of course, on wider streets is that if you are driving in the middle of a very wide street, you may not even see the signal.
Washington DC and San Francisco are two cities that come to mind with extensive use of post mounted and very little mast arm usage. Chicago also has a lot of signals in the loop without mast arms, but almost every signal outside of the loop has them.
More and more signals in DC are getting mast arms, but the arms are very short. Due to aesthetic issues, certain streets in the core do not have mast arms at all, even very wide streets like Pennsylvania, Constitution, and Independence.
IMO, skipping mast arms works fine where streets are narrow like here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8876148,-77.0006817,3a,75y,89.3h,90.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjfOe5UzkX2To3PkK4ZVK4Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
but not fine for here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8874352,-77.0218142,3a,75y,331.59h,93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DTLPHCC7C22zV2bAE45_G2Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D106.30299%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
DC does actually use near side post-mounted signals, just not at every intersection.
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
Near sided post mounted signals can be used to address the width of the cross street, and like jakeroot mentions do exist in many places in DC without running afoul of the aesthetic rules.
The problem is the width of the street you may be on, and those can only be addressed with signal faces in the middle of the street. The common ways of handling that are mast arms, span wire, or post mounted signals on a cement island. Span wire, to my knowledge, does not exist in DC at all except temporary installations. Pennsylvania Avenue does post mount signals in the median. But Constitution and Independence through much of Downtown are 8 lanes wide without an island and generally without mast arms. With the benefit of experience, I can tell you that if you are driving in the left lane on those streets, it can be quite easy to miss one of the sidemounted signals because the streets are so wide.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 29, 2020, 05:33:06 PM
Post by: jeffandnicole on December 29, 2020, 05:33:06 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on December 28, 2020, 02:14:49 PMQuote from: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 11:26:24 AM
I'll use a few examples here:
https://goo.gl/maps/Fs19Pnv8FR28gQ3u9
As a side note, when I was young my parents and grandparents said that the traffic signal at that intersection in Woodbury was manually operated by a cop. There was a small telephone booth like spot where the cop would operate the signal.
Great memory!
Yep, when *I* remember it, the small shack was located on this corner, about where the control boxes are located: https://goo.gl/maps/p8GCe1ZMMp91aUxp7 . I want to say the traffic signal was upgraded in the 1980's, and as a result the new signal wouldn't permit an override function the old signal had (I find that a little hard to believe as I've seen even more modern signals in the state operated by police, but I remember that being reported at the time).
I tried looking on the web for that shack and couldn't find a picture, but I did come across this picture which shows an even earlier version of the traffic lights at the intersection and a shack house which would've been across the street of that above image (https://www.flickr.com/photos/nat507/4781232743/) , which would be this corner: https://goo.gl/maps/zkfFVV5aGFZ2VV496. As you can see, the old courthouse remains, and even has the same monument out front.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 04:03:13 AM
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 04:03:13 AM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PMQuote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PMI don't agree that span wires are better for aesthetics. Neither does the District of Columbia: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/)
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
"Neither does the District of Columbia" is a stretch when you cite an article from 1988. More accurately, I think it's best stated that DC "has traditionally not used span wire as they are not in keeping with the aesthetics of the district". Comparetively, span wire is not as much of an aesthetic concern in Seattle given the sheer number of existing non-signal wires overhead along many city streets. DC does not have this problem so span wire signals would look very odd.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that span wire is always worse. I would say that, in 90% of circumstances, span wire is worse. But there are situations where span wire can be appropriate. The catch is that it's not just span wire vs mast arm vs post-mounted...it's span wire versus an indeterminate number of overhead signals, mast arm thickness, and mast arm length ...versus post-mounted. There is a wide range of mast arm designs, and they are rarely created equal: DC's short mast arms are far better than this hulking behemoth (https://goo.gl/maps/weKRyMfBRAWZMpZ39) in Seattle, for example, despite both being mast arm signals. Many of LA's mast arms with a single overhead signal (as you already linked to above) are indeed a great setup that really should be used far more often than it is. DC could stand to use a variation of that.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: mrsman on December 30, 2020, 11:23:13 AM
Post by: mrsman on December 30, 2020, 11:23:13 AM
Slightly off-topic, but if you click on the link in jakeroot's post, you see a very interesting building. I read up a little on it and its called Rainier Tower. It is 40 stories tall, but 29 stories are offices that sit on an 11 story concrete pedestal, shaped like an inverted pyramid. Its so odd to see a building like that where 11 stories are essentially unused for retail, offices, or parking.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 30, 2020, 12:52:39 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 30, 2020, 12:52:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 04:03:13 AMI do operate under the assumption that span wire is always worse. The upfront install cost is what drives DOT's to use span wire more than almost anything else. Even at large intersections, I would rather have multiple mastarms than use of span wire. However, I also have the belief that cities and municipalities should not be installing 8-10 lane uncontrolled access roads with signals. If the road needs to be that large, build a freeway.Quote from: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PMQuote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PMI don't agree that span wires are better for aesthetics. Neither does the District of Columbia: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/)
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
"Neither does the District of Columbia" is a stretch when you cite an article from 1988. More accurately, I think it's best stated that DC "has traditionally not used span wire as they are not in keeping with the aesthetics of the district". Comparetively, span wire is not as much of an aesthetic concern in Seattle given the sheer number of existing non-signal wires overhead along many city streets. DC does not have this problem so span wire signals would look very odd.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that span wire is always worse. I would say that, in 90% of circumstances, span wire is worse. But there are situations where span wire can be appropriate. The catch is that it's not just span wire vs mast arm vs post-mounted...it's span wire versus an indeterminate number of overhead signals, mast arm thickness, and mast arm length ...versus post-mounted. There is a wide range of mast arm designs, and they are rarely created equal: DC's short mast arms are far better than this hulking behemoth (https://goo.gl/maps/weKRyMfBRAWZMpZ39) in Seattle, for example, despite both being mast arm signals. Many of LA's mast arms with a single overhead signal (as you already linked to above) are indeed a great setup that really should be used far more often than it is. DC could stand to use a variation of that.
If you think that Seattle signal is a behemoth, you would really hate some of these Florida mastarms, as I do. Some links:
https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9 (https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9)
https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7 (https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7)
https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9 (https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 02:31:59 PM
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 02:31:59 PM
Quote from: democratic nole on December 30, 2020, 12:52:39 PMQuote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 04:03:13 AMI do operate under the assumption that span wire is always worse. The upfront install cost is what drives DOT's to use span wire more than almost anything else. Even at large intersections, I would rather have multiple mastarms than use of span wire. However, I also have the belief that cities and municipalities should not be installing 8-10 lane uncontrolled access roads with signals. If the road needs to be that large, build a freeway.Quote from: democratic nole on December 29, 2020, 03:51:17 PMQuote from: jakeroot on December 29, 2020, 02:16:15 PMI don't agree that span wires are better for aesthetics. Neither does the District of Columbia: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1988/06/10/in-california-easy-to-see-traffic-signals-and-street-signs-are-no-dream/5578117f-5420-4d07-a71b-28afd27c39dc/)
For wider intersections, like Independence/7th, mast arms would definitely be wise but I think something like those used in Australia would be better, with a single mast arm with one signal head maybe extending over two lanes at most (CA has a lot of signals like this, although newer variations are longer). Multiple overhead signals and a mast arm that extends over three or four lanes becomes a very ugly sight in areas where there are additional concerns related to clear visibility of nearby landmarks or other aesthetic needs (with this also being a reason to use span wire, as wires are substantially thinner than mast arms and are easier to "look past" than a mast arm).
"Span-wire traffic signals are banned in the District of Columbia because the people in charge of aesthetics won't allow them to befoul the capital. Full-size span arm signals are out because they'd seem overpowering on the mostly narrow city streets, according to George Schoene, the District's traffic chief."
I think the smaller California mastarms would be fine, like this:https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1sP37EENhKgSGnsG6)
"Neither does the District of Columbia" is a stretch when you cite an article from 1988. More accurately, I think it's best stated that DC "has traditionally not used span wire as they are not in keeping with the aesthetics of the district". Comparetively, span wire is not as much of an aesthetic concern in Seattle given the sheer number of existing non-signal wires overhead along many city streets. DC does not have this problem so span wire signals would look very odd.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that span wire is always worse. I would say that, in 90% of circumstances, span wire is worse. But there are situations where span wire can be appropriate. The catch is that it's not just span wire vs mast arm vs post-mounted...it's span wire versus an indeterminate number of overhead signals, mast arm thickness, and mast arm length ...versus post-mounted. There is a wide range of mast arm designs, and they are rarely created equal: DC's short mast arms are far better than this hulking behemoth (https://goo.gl/maps/weKRyMfBRAWZMpZ39) in Seattle, for example, despite both being mast arm signals. Many of LA's mast arms with a single overhead signal (as you already linked to above) are indeed a great setup that really should be used far more often than it is. DC could stand to use a variation of that.
If you think that Seattle signal is a behemoth, you would really hate some of these Florida mastarms, as I do. Some links:
https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9 (https://goo.gl/maps/6RxerGSw9psJabwy9)
https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7 (https://goo.gl/maps/io3gQ2b1Y3nRRhgt7)
https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9 (https://goo.gl/maps/u8KTseeY47mjWC8f9)
It seems a bit unfair to assume that it's always worse. Even that ancient article you cited indicates that most agencies that use mast arms chose to do so purely out of aesthetic preference. For those areas that use them to better weather storms, Seattle does not meet this criteria: mild weather, no hurricanes, wind is only an occasional issue, etc. At this point, the possibility of choosing span wire for aesthetics becomes possible. For years, Seattle's preference was simply to use one or the other, depending on the circumstances (Seattle has used mast arms for decades), but those circumstances seemed to dictate that the downtown core would use span wire or post mounted signals, and the suburbs would largely use mast arm or span wire depending on the individual circumstances.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that span wire was likely most common early on because larger mast arms weren't available (these (https://goo.gl/maps/V4JtZhTSDUweSYxD6) are typical old Seattle mast arms). In the downtown core, where you'd have four or five through lanes along a one-way street, having a small mast arm on one side wasn't considered "good enough" so they used span wire to centre the signals. This is probably why, for decades, only 4th Ave downtown ever used span wire: most of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 7th used post mounted only signals because 4th was the widest (2nd was close in width, but still used post-mounted signals). Span wire briefly became common along some streets (chiefly 2nd in the Belltown area and parts of 6th and 7th), but mast arms have since become far more common: 2nd (https://goo.gl/maps/wMRP1pqwLKXuse4k8), 5th (https://goo.gl/maps/4Y1cEvUodkpegWXN8), 6th (https://goo.gl/maps/aujZo8FLqTWjzoHs5), 7th (https://goo.gl/maps/A1mYC3ocP5xFGUiR9)...these streets all have multiple examples along them, almost all new within the last ten years.
tl;dr...Seattle likely had reasons to use span wire in the past, be it for aesthetic or technical reasons, but new span wire is not installed downtown (simply maintained, such as long 4th Ave), and mast arms or post mounted signals are now the norm only (new span wire installations seem to have ended about 8 or 10 years ago). Don't worry about maintaining a fight here, since you already won! :-D
Also, yes, those signals in Florida are awful. Although it should be noted that those are all suburban environments where massive, hulking mast arms don't necessarily look out of place. They do look stupid there (way overbuilt IMO), but they'd look hilariously stupid in a downtown core.
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 02:41:21 PM
Post by: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 02:41:21 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 30, 2020, 11:23:13 AM
Slightly off-topic, but if you click on the link in jakeroot's post, you see a very interesting building. I read up a little on it and its called Rainier Tower. It is 40 stories tall, but 29 stories are offices that sit on an 11 story concrete pedestal, shaped like an inverted pyramid. Its so odd to see a building like that where 11 stories are essentially unused for retail, offices, or parking.
Designed by none other than Minoru Yamasaki, perhaps most noted for the original World Trade Center towers. It is a rather odd building. According to this article (http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/building/5087/) from the University of Washington:
"[t]he unusual tapered base was selected for multiple reasons. First, its form proved highly effective in resisting huge seismic jolts that could affect Seattle. Second, Yamasaki wanted to preserve the "green" character of Downtown Seattle, and therefore wanted to minimize the building's footprint on the site. Third, he wanted to devote much of the ground space to a retail shopping plaza. Fourth, clearly, Yamasaki also was enamored of the base's soaring, curved form."
With the adjacent Rainier Square Tower now complete, it's fair to say that this block has more curving buildings than any other part of Seattle!
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: democratic nole on December 30, 2020, 04:39:23 PM
Post by: democratic nole on December 30, 2020, 04:39:23 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 30, 2020, 02:31:59 PMLOL. I think the reason I always get fired up about the availability of mastarms argument is that California never used span wire and managed to use guy-wire mastarms going back probably to the 50's at larger intersections.
tl;dr...Seattle likely had reasons to use span wire in the past, be it for aesthetic or technical reasons, but new span wire is not installed downtown (simply maintained, such as long 4th Ave), and mast arms or post mounted signals are now the norm only (new span wire installations seem to have ended about 8 or 10 years ago). Don't worry about maintaining a fight here, since you already won! :-D
Also, yes, those signals in Florida are awful. Although it should be noted that those are all suburban environments where massive, hulking mast arms don't necessarily look out of place. They do look stupid there (way overbuilt IMO), but they'd look hilariously stupid in a downtown core.
BTW, I can give you the bulky mastarms downtown here too: https://goo.gl/maps/QXENvi9Ei6RzC2298 (https://goo.gl/maps/QXENvi9Ei6RzC2298) https://goo.gl/maps/5VyBoQEsBU5jxWbW6 (https://goo.gl/maps/5VyBoQEsBU5jxWbW6) https://goo.gl/maps/7K4Q58Qiw9QBiPXm6 (https://goo.gl/maps/7K4Q58Qiw9QBiPXm6)
Title: Re: Span Wire Vs Mast Arm
Post by: Scott5114 on December 30, 2020, 06:25:43 PM
Post by: Scott5114 on December 30, 2020, 06:25:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 28, 2020, 11:26:24 AMQuote from: Scott5114 on December 28, 2020, 02:26:06 AM
I'm guessing there's something wonky about NJ's signal placement that makes that an ongoing concern.
They're just placed way too close to the roadway. Trucks making tight right turns often can snag it, or a crash within the intersection can send a car into it.
Here, the masts are typically placed on the far side of the sidewalk from the intersection (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2184791,-97.4236947,3a,42.8y,261.41h,93.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szKOEx4kVIwXO0g5nHzsvJg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). If, for some reason, the mast has to be placed closer, it is protected by a much higher curb than seems to be the case in NJ. (You can see this at one of the other corners of this intersection.)