Triangular Signals

[mrpablue]

Recently, some triangular traffic signals have popped up near me. The have two red lights in the top row and a yellow light centered under them. What is the purpose of these signals?

[jakeroot]

Something like this?

https://youtu.be/87k7EVo8KkQ

These are HAWK signals. I'm not the biggest fan of them. They're used at pedestrian crossings. They provide an exclusive, protected crossing phase for a few seconds (with a solid red light), followed by a permissive phase, whereby cars must stop, before proceeding if clear. As you can tell by my video, the rules are not yet fully understood.

[US 89]

Something like this?

https://youtu.be/87k7EVo8KkQ

These are HAWK signals. I'm not the biggest fan of them. They're used at pedestrian crossings. They provide an exclusive, protected crossing phase for a few seconds (with a solid red light), followed by a permissive phase, whereby cars must stop, before proceeding if clear. As you can tell by my video, the rules are not yet fully understood.

I had never heard of these before around five years ago, then they started poppping up everywhere in Utah, especially SLC downtown. I actually prefer them for pedestrian safety over just pushing a button to turn on a flashing yellow light, since it actually requires the drivers to stop. People figure if the yellow lights are flashing “some idiot pushed the button” and blast right through.
They are also preferable to full traffic lights at ped crossings because if someone finishes crossing early at a full light, there is no reason for traffic to stop but the light is still red.

[index]

Something like this?
These are HAWK signals. I'm not the biggest fan of them. They're used at pedestrian crossings. They provide an exclusive, protected crossing phase for a few seconds (with a solid red light), followed by a permissive phase, whereby cars must stop, before proceeding if clear. As you can tell by my video, the rules are not yet fully understood.

Wouldn't HAWK signals be in violation of the MUTCD due to this?

Section 4L.02 Intersection Control Beacon

05 If two horizontally aligned red signal indications are used on an approach for an Intersection Control Beacon, they shall be flashed simultaneously to avoid being confused with grade crossing flashing-light signals. If two vertically aligned red signal indications are used on an approach for an Intersection Control Beacon, they shall be flashed alternately.

[briantroutman]

If I approached that intersection at the 23-second mark in the video, my first thought would be: Where's the train?

I haven't encountered one of these signals in person, but if I did, I probably wouldn't assume that an alternating left-right red flashing wigwag light indicates the same thing as a single red flashing light (i.e. stop, then proceed if clear).

I don't see what advantage a HAWK signal has over a standard R-Y-G setup–which nearly everyone understands instantly and obeys. Other than the possible overuse of R-Y-G lights and the erosion of respect for them that might result, I can't see any downside to using the standard traffic signal.

[freebrickproductions]

I don’t see what advantage a HAWK signal has over a standard R-Y-G setup—which nearly everyone understands instantly and obeys. Other than the possible overuse of R-Y-G lights and the erosion of respect for them that might result, I can’t see any downside to using the standard traffic signal.

The only advantage I can see that a HAWK has over a traditional RYG signal is that drivers and continue through the clearance phase once they've stopped and there's no-one crossing, therefor you'll only have to wait the 7 seconds or so (depending on the length of the crosswalk) before you could proceed, rather than waiting the 7 seconds + the length of the clearance phase (depending on the length of the crossway, so let's assume 20 seconds for that) that you'd get with an RYG signal, assuming that only one person is crossing and they clear the crosswalk by the end of the walk phase.

We only have one here in Huntsville, and no others have been put up since it was installed.

[jakeroot]

I like the idea of a short protected phase for pedestrian crossing, followed by a permissive phase where you only have to stop if necessary. But the implementation with the HAWK is not the best in my opinion.

Why not a standard RYG setup, where a solid red is shown for a few moments, followed by a flashing red? When the pedestrian hits the button the light would either go solid green or flash yellow, either way followed by a solid yellow, then red.

The UK uses pelican crossings that operate like this. Solid red for a little bit, followed by flashing amber. The flashing amber displays when the solid green man changes to a flashing green man.

[jeffandnicole]

If I approached that intersection at the 23-second mark in the video, my first thought would be: Where's the train?

Alternating flashing reds also indicate that a train is approaching.  They don't simply light up the moment a train is at the crossing.  Also, there's no train crossing signs anywhere.

I haven't encountered one of these signals in person, but if I did, I probably wouldn't assume that an alternating left-right red flashing wigwag light indicates the same thing as a single red flashing light (i.e. stop, then proceed if clear).

There's usually proper signage at these lights to inform you what to do.  It generally will say something to the effect of "Stop on Steady Red, Proceed on flashing red when clear".

I don't see what advantage a HAWK signal has over a standard R-Y-G setup–which nearly everyone understands instantly and obeys. Other than the possible overuse of R-Y-G lights and the erosion of respect for them that might result, I can't see any downside to using the standard traffic signal.

As in the case of the video, once the pedestrian finished crossing the street, there was no reason to remain stopped.  As with any flashing red light, you stop on red, then once it's safe to proceed, you can go.  Of course, the person in the vehicle didn't go during the flashing red.  Then again, it took a few seconds for them to go once the light turned off!

But, also, there's always going to be new ideas that come out.  And there's various rules and traffic setups in some states that differ from many other states.  There's always going to be learning curves to this sort of stuff. 

[jakeroot]

I don't see what advantage a HAWK signal has over a standard R-Y-G setup–which nearly everyone understands instantly and obeys. Other than the possible overuse of R-Y-G lights and the erosion of respect for them that might result, I can't see any downside to using the standard traffic signal.

As in the case of the video, once the pedestrian finished crossing the street, there was no reason to remain stopped.  As with any flashing red light, you stop on red, then once it's safe to proceed, you can go.  Of course, the person in the vehicle didn't go during the flashing red.  Then again, it took a few seconds for them to go once the light turned off!

They were using their phone. You can see me look up at them every few seconds. I kept expecting them to set off, but they never did (not until the signal turned off, anyway).

IMO, at this particular crossing, the signage is not adequate. It doesn't specify the difference between solid red and flashing red, which in this instance, is very important.

[mrsman]

I like the idea of a short protected phase for pedestrian crossing, followed by a permissive phase where you only have to stop if necessary. But the implementation with the HAWK is not the best in my opinion.

Why not a standard RYG setup, where a solid red is shown for a few moments, followed by a flashing red? When the pedestrian hits the button the light would either go solid green or flash yellow, either way followed by a solid yellow, then red.

The UK uses pelican crossings that operate like this. Solid red for a little bit, followed by flashing amber. The flashing amber displays when the solid green man changes to a flashing green man.

I have seen HAWKs implemented both mid-block and at intersections.  At intersections, cross streets do not generally benefit from this signal - they will always face a stop sign and will not usually get a green light or equivalent while the pedestrians get a walk signal.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9814648,-77.026339,3a,75y,287.32h,75.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suoup4uVZtcvaHjUnJ9I54w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Instead of HAWKs, MD uses signals that are reminiscent of firehouse signals.  Instead of RYG, there is R-Y-FY.  FY is usually an 8 inch aspect (R and Y are 12 inch) and it is the standard setting.  In MD, you have solid red for the entire pedestrian phase, I wish they would implement something like the pelican signal where you can stop and then proceed.  Worse, cross traffic sees a RED-RED signal.  Flashing red through most of the phase, solid red during the pedestrian phase.  This means that while main street traffic is stopped for the peds, cross street traffic that is parallel to the peds cannot cross the street.  This was done to discourage traffic on the side street.  [In many areas, where small streets cross busy streets, the local streets with signals induce more traffic than those without, since drivers know they would need the help of a green light to cross the street or make a left turn.]

THe city of Los Angeles has the best implementation for mid-block crossings.  [AFAIK, they only use full traffic signals at every full intersection.]  The traffic signal is RYG, but when the light is red, it is a flashing red.  So you get the benefit of drivers only having to wait for pedestrians to clear.  And also, the RYG nature of the signal is normal and expected and doesn't come at you all of a sudden.  Assume that it's dark and you're driving on an unfamiliar street.  Seeign a green light means that you can proceed, but having the knowledge that it can eventually turn red.  Seeing a HAWK or MD signal, you may never even expect to ever stop.  I have seen plenty of people run the red light at a MD signal that is close to my kids school.  People drive around seeing a flashing yellow, never expecting that it may eventually turn red.

[Scott5114]

There aren't many pedestrian-only signals in Norman, but the ones that do exist are typical RYG signals with a ped warning diamond where the cross street name would usually go. I feel like that's the way to go–simple and instantly familiar to the driver.

Fun story about one of those signals...one my friends used to rent a house along with several other people across from a school with a pedestrian signal. Oftentimes, traffic was so busy on the street that it was rather difficult to find a safe gap in traffic. If that was the case, it wasn't unusual to rope one of the roommates into triggering the signal so they could exit the driveway!

[cjk374]

We only have one here in Huntsville, and no others have been put up since it was installed.

Where in HSV is this located? Next time I am in town I would like to see this myself.

[freebrickproductions]

We only have one here in Huntsville, and no others have been put up since it was installed.

Where in HSV is this located? Next time I am in town I would like to see this myself.

Along Holmes Avenue on UAH's campus, right next to the Charger Union (Student Union).
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7278161,-86.6393413,3a,75y,242.48h,95.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYU-peQu2eFMeBBJ6fOIAhQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[US 89]

The HAWKS that have been installed in Utah always come with a sign that explains the signal indications. It reads STOP on Red / Stop on Flashing Red then Proceed if Clear.

On a related note, this is the signal progression I usually see with these:
Flashing Yellow (3 or so flashes)
Solid Yellow
Double Red
Flashing Red

However, at some signals, the initial flashing yellow is omitted. Why do some signals include it and some don't? Is there a reason one way or the other?

[jakeroot]

However, at some signals, the initial flashing yellow is omitted. Why do some signals include it and some don't? Is there a reason one way or the other?

I don't think HAWK signals are allowed to skip the "visibility" (flashing yellow) phase, where it alerts traffic that it's active, and will soon be red. To go from dark, to solid yellow, to red, seems dangerous. Because most drivers aren't expecting dark signals to suddenly go from dark to red.

In Vancouver, the flashing green signals, which are pedestrian crossings, go from flashing green to solid green, before going to yellow, then red. Most drivers proceed through the flashing green signals as though there was no signal there at all, because they know it won't change to red. But if they see it go from flashing green to solid green, (although it usually means hurry up before it changes to red) they know it will change and should prepare to stop.

[Pete from Boston]

We have a lot of these popping up.  Drivers ignore them slightly less than the roadside-mounted signals.  I nearly got hit crossing at one the other day, and the same signal has a blind curve from the other side so drivers are suddenly presented with an unfamiliar signal they didn't see in advance.

I don't think it's good to use the alternating reds as a permissive signal when that is very explicitly used as the least permissive of all signals.  Lights ought to work on an almost intuitive level.

What's HAWK an acronym for?

[jakeroot]

Drivers ignore them slightly less than the roadside-mounted signals.  I nearly got hit crossing at one the other day, and the same signal has a blind curve from the other side so drivers are suddenly presented with an unfamiliar signal they didn't see in advance.

If they've only posted the HAWK signals overhead, then of course drivers aren't going to see it coming around a bend. That's where those roadside (post-mounted) signals are especially handy.

What's HAWK an acronym for?

High-Intensity Activated crossWalK beacon.

[Brandon]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

[jeffandnicole]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

NJ has a few of these type signal crossing warnings as well.  At a hospital near me, then have this setup: https://goo.gl/maps/zgFpqDQYgy32 .  If you look carefully, you'll see several clear LEDs within each yellow diamond that flash a very bright yellow when a nearby button is hit.

The hospital's setup was installed just slightly before the HAWK signal was introduced, I believe.  It works well with most drivers.

[1995hoo]

The HAWK signals in Alexandria have signs saying you have to stop and remained stopped on a steady red and that on a flashing red you have to stop and then proceed when it's clear. Here's a Street View link to the one behind the Patent and Trademark Office on Eisenhower Avenue:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8005522,-77.0639493,3a,75y,92.04h,82.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZDdsEBLYFcpo34OU59dWvA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

In my totally unscientific observation, people are pretty good about stopping when the red light comes on, but then it's a crapshoot what happens next. Some people will go as soon as the crosswalk is clear, regardless of what the light is doing. Others won't move when the light is flashing red, even if the crosswalk is clear. The new signs seem to have helped a bit with the latter scenario. Alexandria's HAWKs originally didn't have the explanatory sign about flashing red and a lot of people would remain stopped. It made me feel like a red-light runner because I'd go if the light were flashing and the way were clear, even if nobody else did (and it didn't matter that I knew what I was doing was allowed, I still felt kind of like a red-light runner just because nobody else was going).

I think the District of Columbia used a different type of explanatory signing before Alexandria did and I guess Alexandria liked it. If you click that Street View link back to 2014, you'll see the sign that used to be posted there.

The reason for the HAWK signal at the location shown in that link, BTW, is that the PTO is a major employment center on the north side of the street and there are several restaurants on the south side, so pedestrians crossing are common only at certain times of the day on weekdays.

[briantroutman]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

What's going on in the first example (https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12)? I see the solar panel on top of the school crossing sign and some kind of an electrical box beside it; I also see the "push to cross"  button below, but I don't see a beacon attached to the sign or lights embedded in the crosswalk. Are lights embedded in the sign face or something like that?

As to it being a violation of the MUTCD, I'm not inclined to see it that way. It would be the pedestrian in the crosswalk that requires vehicles to stop (assuming that Illinois has that law as many states do), and the beacon is just drawing attention to the pedestrian. It's a similar rationale to the NO PASSING ZONE pennant being a yellow warning sign rather than a white regulatory one. The sign itself isn't dictating the law; it's just saying "Hey–look at the solid centerline" , which does. Now if the Secretary of State is telling people to stop for a flashing beacon even if there's no one in or waiting to enter the crosswalk, that's another matter.

And that actually brings up a point which I think argues against HAWK signals. While on one hand they could be argued to protect pedestrians by essentially forcing vehicles to stop, they could also be seen as desensitizing motorists to their legal responsibility to stop for pedestrians in any crosswalk–marked or unmarked. HAWKs may be making pedestrians safer at a relative few crosswalks while placing them at increased risk at others.

[bzakharin]

This is how NJ (or the county, I guess) does it where the Patriot's Path hiking trail crosses County Route 510, a rural highway with no other pedestrians.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.788778,-74.5462549,3a,75y,84.45h,86.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZduVvNreIofqVl8KMUTyOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
No traffic light, just flashing yellow lights that start flashing when the hiker hits the button. I guess they rely on the fact that it's a state law to stop for pedestrians without actually invoking it.

[jakeroot]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

When you say "stop on the flashing yellow beacon", do you mean stop, when it's flashing and there's pedestrians, or the entire time it's flashing yellow, regardless if there's pedestrians? If the former, that's totally normal (and the law, judging by the flexible bollard in the second link.). But if the latter, that is indeed some BS.

[Brandon]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

When you say "stop on the flashing yellow beacon", do you mean stop, when it's flashing and there's pedestrians, or the entire time it's flashing yellow, regardless if there's pedestrians? If the former, that's totally normal (and the law, judging by the flexible bollard in the second link.). But if the latter, that is indeed some BS.

They're trying to get the latter put in the Rules of the Road.

[jakeroot]

HAWKs are a far better idea than what Illinois is trying (in severe MUTCD violation) to use for crosswalks.

Here's what Illinois is trying to use:
https://goo.gl/maps/W3tcpAZmPY12
https://goo.gl/maps/R8MtGgRyTqm

I say severe MUTCD violation as the Secretary of State (our version of the DMV) is trying to get people to stop on the flashing yellow beacon for pedestrians.

When you say "stop on the flashing yellow beacon", do you mean stop, when it's flashing and there's pedestrians, or the entire time it's flashing yellow, regardless if there's pedestrians? If the former, that's totally normal (and the law, judging by the flexible bollard in the second link.). But if the latter, that is indeed some BS.

They're trying to get the latter put in the Rules of the Road.

What the fuck. Are they retarded?

Here's a tip, Illinois. If you want traffic to stop, and remain stopped for the entire crossing phase, put in a traffic light. You know, the thing we've been using to stop traffic for 100+ years.