Any other states besides Florida and Maryland actively still installing and maintaining overhead sign lighting?
North Carolina and Virginia used to be good about it, but more recent sign replacements in both states include the removal of lighting fixtures.
Georgia wholesale did away with their signing lighting on their Interstates when they renumbered the exits system wide in 1999.
Delaware dropped sign lighting around 2000.
Alabama generally stopped lighting signs sometime in the 1990s, though some signs in the Birmingham area remain with lights.
I know of a number of other states that dropped sign lighting a long time ago or never really used it. Any light fixtures remaining in Louisiana date back to the early Interstate years and the only lit signs I ever saw in Mississippi were on I-110 in Biloxi.
New Jersey still has lights on some of its overhead BGSs, although I'm not sure if they are actually still maintained and working (have to look next time).
Examples:
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.775817,-75.34173&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.775737,-75.342349&panoid=2DPOaHyMNOfycE8spgfl4A&cbp=12,50.74,,0,-0.11 (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.775817,-75.34173&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.775737,-75.342349&panoid=2DPOaHyMNOfycE8spgfl4A&cbp=12,50.74,,0,-0.11)
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=40.1679,-74.105192&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.167836,-74.105156&panoid=iuMmpDOTWTR4ioPo5tYRQw&cbp=12,340.56,,0,-6.05 (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=40.1679,-74.105192&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.167836,-74.105156&panoid=iuMmpDOTWTR4ioPo5tYRQw&cbp=12,340.56,,0,-6.05)
I always liked the lighting over the LGSs at some of the circles on NJ 70 - for example:
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.886953,-74.739832&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.88682,-74.740363&panoid=N0x7rI87by-7mWI-mfrhJQ&cbp=12,41.23,,0,8.16 (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.886953,-74.739832&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.88682,-74.740363&panoid=N0x7rI87by-7mWI-mfrhJQ&cbp=12,41.23,,0,8.16)
I absolutely love overhead sign lighting! However, they - like button copy - seem to be going the way of the dinosaur. Ohio is eliminating overhead lighting - as is New York City. Especially eliminating non-reflective button copy, to me anyway, seems to make the sign stand out at night.
Granted, in times of snow maybe not so much, but for all other times and again just one man's opinion, it looks great! :bigass:
West Virginia still uses it.
Kentucky has abandoned it, but there are some vestiges of lighting remaining in some spots, most notably on I-64 in Louisville.
Signs are still lit in Milwaukee; it's also the only place in Wisconsin that has lighted signs (that I can recall.) I do wish more signs were lit, in certain weather conditions the reflective signs don't work well.
Quote from: Jim920 on November 16, 2014, 10:05:46 PM
Signs are still lit in Milwaukee; it's also the only place in Wisconsin that has lighted signs (that I can recall.) I do wish more signs were lit, in certain weather conditions the reflective signs don't work well.
IIRC, the Marquette Interchange was the last project to actually install new lighted guide signs in Wisconsin.
Iowa and Illinois use them. For IL some districts actually use the sulfur lighting for them, which is fugly.
Arizona also installs them - and points them downward from above.
California has not gotten rid of any - and they seem to be poorly maintained along with the signs.
I-705 near Tacoma has a couple of BGSs that have under-mount lighting. Until recently, the left of the two lights was burnt out. They replaced both signs recently (with the new reflective style of course), but kept the lighting and replaced the burnt out light. I would have just removed both the lights to save money, given that new signs don't need lighting.
There are a few signs here in Winnipeg that have lighting, but most do not.
Here's a couple
http://goo.gl/maps/qH8em
http://goo.gl/maps/UNo1T
Nevada is still maintaining overhead sign lighting.
District 1 (Southern Nevada) has continued to install overhead sign lighting on recent projects in the Las Vegas area.
District 2 (Northwest Nevada) did some removals of overhead sign lighting in select Reno locations, in conjunction with sign replacements in what appeared to be a test of new reflective sheeting. Then, all new signs on the I-80 rebuild through Reno-Sparks left off lighting, except for a few signs on curves and the massive APL signs near US 395 which use LED lighting from above (basically at any location where vehicle lights won't adequately illuminate the whole sign). However, other projects like I-580 installed NDOT standard overhead lighting with signs.
PennDOT does, though not all the time. (And the percentage of use might vary from district to district.)
Sometimes it even varies within the project. Most of the new overheads for the PA-28 project DO have lighting, but there's at least one sign for the 31st St. Bridge exit + arrow sign that doesn't.
The PTC on the other hand pretty much doesn't. Right now the only ones I can think of they inherited on the PennDOT built section of TPK-43 south of I-70 to California.
Quote from: SSOWorld on November 16, 2014, 10:19:10 PM
Iowa and Illinois use them. For IL some districts actually use the sulfur lighting for them, which is fugly.
Arizona also installs them - and points them downward from above.
California has not gotten rid of any - and they seem to be poorly maintained along with the signs.
From what I have seen, new sign installations in Illinois tend to not include highway lighting, or if replacement signs are adding to older sign bridges, light fixtures are often times removed.
I have noted those orange lights in Illinois. Only other places I saw those in place of the white/blue lights was NC, VA and the DRBA maintained stretch of I-295.
Is there a general consensus in regards to whether or not sign lighting is still necessary? I would think with the new reflection guidelines, the answer would be "no", but seeing as a couple states still do it, perhaps it's just a monetary restriction?
The older I get, the more I appreciate it, but I think it's steadily disappearing.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2014, 05:09:20 PM
Is there a general consensus in regards to whether or not sign lighting is still necessary? I would think with the new reflection guidelines, the answer would be "no", but seeing as a couple states still do it, perhaps it's just a monetary restriction?
It is one of those "nice to have" things that costs a lot of money. So most states don't really feel the need, now that signs are much more reflective than they used to be, and can be illuminated adequately by vehicle headlights.
What is up with FDOT having lighting on top and bottom simultaneously on the newly widened I-4 through Tampa?
Also the Florida Turnpike Enterprise with its latest overheads having lights on top and bottom?
For decades it was one or the other. The old tube lighting had them on the top and the later mercury lights were placed on the bottom. I think this is overkill a bit https://flic.kr/p/pMU19u on I-4 Eastbound near Exit 2.
Massachusetts mostly did away with sign lighting by the early 1980s, although the overhead warning signs on Route 2 for the Hairpin Turn remained illuminated until the early 2000s, when the signs and structures were replaced (minus the lighting). The two exceptions are signing approaching and within the Big Dig tunnels, and overhead exit signing on the Mass. Pike. Lighting on the Pike signing will disappear once the signs and structures are replaced beginning late next year, but lighting on the outdoor signing approaching the Big Dig tunnels will likely remain in place for many years to come.
Quote from: Alex on November 17, 2014, 03:39:46 PM
I have noted those orange lights in Illinois. Only other places I saw those in place of the white/blue lights was NC, VA and the DRBA maintained stretch of I-295.
Are you sure that is sulfur lighting? According to Wikipedia sulfur lighting is greenish in color. Orange would either be high-pressure sodium or low-pressure sodium.
They aren't overhead signs, but a few exit signs in the gores on the western end of the N.Y.S. Throughway have had them installed in recent weeks. This comes as a real surprise, as lighting has never been used in Upstate N.Y. in my lifetime, and Diamond-Grade sheeting really does show up well at night without additional illumination. The only overhead structure in the Rochester area that has them is a private sign for Market Place Mall, and the lights haven't been on once in the 20 years I've been here.
The 4 over head sign structure contracts I've worked on in recent years haven't installed a single light, and in many cases actually removed conduits for lighting that were installed decades ago but never used. Next year's contract has no lights either.
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on November 16, 2014, 11:52:41 AM
New Jersey still has lights on some of its overhead BGSs, although I'm not sure if they are actually still maintained and working (have to look next time).
Examples:
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.775817,-75.34173&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.775737,-75.342349&panoid=2DPOaHyMNOfycE8spgfl4A&cbp=12,50.74,,0,-0.11 (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.775817,-75.34173&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=39.775737,-75.342349&panoid=2DPOaHyMNOfycE8spgfl4A&cbp=12,50.74,,0,-0.11)
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=40.1679,-74.105192&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.167836,-74.105156&panoid=iuMmpDOTWTR4ioPo5tYRQw&cbp=12,340.56,,0,-6.05 (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=40.1679,-74.105192&spn=0.000004,0.00327&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.167836,-74.105156&panoid=iuMmpDOTWTR4ioPo5tYRQw&cbp=12,340.56,,0,-6.05)
More or less, if the lighting is there, it's still maintained by NJDOT. Having said that, they don't rush out to replace the bulbs...many signs, when you look carefully, many have one or more lights not working. For almost all new overhead signage, there is no lighting.
In one unusual example, lighting was added to a new overhead gantry approaching the 295/42/76 interchange: http://goo.gl/maps/gwhGW This was part of the NJ 168 overpass reconstruction, where the signs were removed from the overpass.
West Virginia is replacing all of their older lighting with new LED fixtures. Kentucky long ago abandoned sign lighting, with as HB noted, still exists in some downtrodden fashion in Louisville. I can't think of any place that still has the gantries with the fixtures intact. Ohio is removing the fixtures on sign replacements.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2014, 05:09:20 PM
Is there a general consensus in regards to whether or not sign lighting is still necessary? I would think with the new reflection guidelines, the answer would be "no", but seeing as a couple states still do it, perhaps it's just a monetary restriction?
Is the cost savings apparent when so many DOT's replace signs seemingly every 5-10 years (less in some cases, I am looking at you Delaware)? Lit signs should result in a longer service life, given the reflectivity degradation should be offset by the illumination (thinking of lit button copy signs in California).
Yes, the higher reflectivity standards negate the need for lighting, but in instances of fog or where the temp and dewpoint are close that it results in condensation on the sign, I find the lighting to be helpful.
I agree that lighting is still helpful, especially when condensation forms on the sign. I've run across some situations where unlit reflective signs were rendered unreadable because of condensation on the panel.
Caltrans recently issued a new memo that requires the use of Type IX sheeting on both ground-mounted and overhead signs. When Type IX sheeting is used, sign lighting may be either turned off or removed. I suspect this is because of the rampant theft of copper wiring and the associated costs of repairing the lighting systems.
www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/policy/retroreflective-sheeting-for-guide-sign-policy-signed-7-2-2014.pdf
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 18, 2014, 11:06:26 AM
West Virginia is replacing all of their older lighting with new LED fixtures. Kentucky long ago abandoned sign lighting, with as HB noted, still exists in some downtrodden fashion in Louisville. I can't think of any place that still has the gantries with the fixtures intact. Ohio is removing the fixtures on sign replacements.
Been awhile since I have been on the Cumberland Parkway's western terminus at I-65, but I believe it had lighting fixtures last time I photographed it.
What about I-71 northbound at I-75? Seems like I remember some there too.
Quote from: myosh_tino on November 18, 2014, 02:28:54 PM
I agree that lighting is still helpful, especially when condensation forms on the sign. I've run across some situations where unlit reflective signs were rendered unreadable because of condensation on the panel.
Frost can cause problems, too. Several years ago I drove from Texarkana to Dallas, leaving out before dawn. Some of the signs along I-30 were very hard to read because of a heavy frost.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 18, 2014, 03:50:26 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 18, 2014, 11:06:26 AM
What about I-71 northbound at I-75? Seems like I remember some there too.
As of nine days ago, the illuminated signs at 75 are still there.
The button copy at exit 2 and north to about US 22-OH 3 is still there too. Exit 19 (Mason-Montgomery Rd/Fields Ertel Rd) was button copy southbound and clearview northbound and you can tell that Exit 24 for Western Row Rd/Kings Island was next to go (clearview most likely)/.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 18, 2014, 10:51:31 AM
More or less, if the lighting is there, it's still maintained by NJDOT. Having said that, they don't rush out to replace the bulbs...many signs, when you look carefully, many have one or more lights not working. For almost all new overhead signage, there is no lighting.
With respect to my second GSV example (NJ 34 NB at ramp to 138 EB), none of the lights on the overheads are working. I've passed it enough times at night recently - tonight going in the opposite direction which gave me a good view of the signs without hitting it with the headlights - that I could see they're not on. I think some of the other overheads at that interchange also have them all out, but not entirely sure.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 18, 2014, 11:06:26 AM
West Virginia is replacing all of their older lighting with new LED fixtures. Kentucky long ago abandoned sign lighting, with as HB noted, still exists in some downtrodden fashion in Louisville. I can't think of any place that still has the gantries with the fixtures intact. Ohio is removing the fixtures on sign replacements.
The LED sign lighting replacements in West Virginia are happening as part of larger sign replacement projects. WVDOH is keeping the existing fixtures in place otherwise, even when there are one-off replacements of the overhead BGS.
And actually, it looks like ADOT in Arizona is no longer installing lighting fixtures for their newest installations. The new signs with the graffiti shields lack them, as well as the signs at the Loop 202/SR 24 interchange.
GMSV: http://goo.gl/maps/A97IZ
I'd be surprised if this one still works.
Quote from: Alex on November 16, 2014, 11:25:17 AM
Any other states besides Florida and Maryland actively still installing and maintaining overhead sign lighting?
North Carolina and Virginia used to be good about it, but more recent sign replacements in both states include the removal of lighting fixtures.
Georgia wholesale did away with their signing lighting on their Interstates when they renumbered the exits system wide in 1999.
Delaware dropped sign lighting around 2000.
Alabama generally stopped lighting signs sometime in the 1990s, though some signs in the Birmingham area remain with lights.
I know of a number of other states that dropped sign lighting a long time ago or never really used it. Any light fixtures remaining in Louisiana date back to the early Interstate years and the only lit signs I ever saw in Mississippi were on I-110 in Biloxi.
Sadly, FDOT in January 2014 discontinued sign lighting from future state projects. They do plan to maintain what is in place for now. Caltrans after having researched Florida's studies on the matter, as well as how discontinuing sign lighting worked in Indiana, decided to also discontinue sign lighting in future projects while keeping existing fixtures. On the subject of INDOT, the bulbs in 2010 were removed from all state maintained installations but existing fixtures and wiring are all still in place.
Also, Mississippi has since removed all of the lights from I-110 except for the lighting on the warning signs at the end of the freeway.
I'd say the biggest reason for the reevaluation of sign lighting in DOTs nationwide is due to the ban of import and manufacture of mercury vapor lamps and ballasts that began in 2009. As both supply and demand dwindle in the marketplace, costs have skyrocketed. Also, with high-intensity sheeting performing well without lights and the shortage of highway funding these days, switching to a new modern system using induction or LED lighting (except for limited areas such as airport terminals or tunnels) is less compelling.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 18, 2014, 11:06:26 AM
West Virginia is replacing all of their older lighting with new LED fixtures. Kentucky long ago abandoned sign lighting, with as HB noted, still exists in some downtrodden fashion in Louisville. I can't think of any place that still has the gantries with the fixtures intact. Ohio is removing the fixtures on sign replacements.
I remember here in Louisville it was around 1990 when lighting maintenance was discontinued by the KYTC. To my memory, the fluorescent lights were just left to burn out and then later the power to the light fixtures were cut in the hand holes of the gantries. After the Ohio River Bridges Project is complete, the only remaining signs with light fixtures will be the I-64 East gantry for Grinstead Dr. and the I-71 East gantry's sign for Cincinnati at the I-264 interchange. Outside of Louisville, I know the 2 gantries on the Cumberland Pkwy. westbound approaching I-65 still have their lights. Until the recent US 31 Bypass reconstruction in Elizabethtown, there were several signs with their lights. I found that unfortunate as they were the some of best remaining intact lighting fixtures left in the state.
Also on the subject of the Louisville area:
The lights on INDOT's gantry I-64 West on the Sherman Minton were still operating up until a few months ago.
Also along the Ohio River on the Indiana side, the Old Clarksville Site park has a gantry with maintained fixtures.
And of course the Louisville airport still maintains sign lighting.
Here's a link to them:
http://goo.gl/maps/imdrJ Cumberland Pkwy. @ I-65
http://goo.gl/maps/1UGuK US 31 Bypass (Elizabethtown)
http://goo.gl/maps/hj4wz I-71 E (Louisville)
http://goo.gl/maps/dHZJI I-64 E (Louisville)
http://goo.gl/maps/rcpeH Louisville Airport
http://goo.gl/maps/zZsPT Old Clarksville Site park (Clarksville [Indiana])
http://goo.gl/maps/g9QUZ Sharman Minton Bridge (New Albany [Indiana])
CT has a grand total of one sign with a light and it doesn't work. CT hasn't put up new lighting fixtures since the early 1980s or before.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7282/15908718184_beee3d8c23_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qeNkEy)Original non-reflective button copy. I-84 Hartford, CT. Note: the last sign in CT that has a light. Although the light doesn't work. (https://flic.kr/p/qeNkEy) by mergingtraffic (https://www.flickr.com/people/98731835@N05/), on Flickr
Lighting was installed for the final WB Exit 58 BGS on I-90 in New York (this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.554351,-79.104162,3a,61.3y,250.56h,85.01t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQeDdkuNt6q1w7Rp5Q4QRkw!2e0)) at some point within the past year or so. Ground-mounted and powered by a solar panel on the back of the BGS. Really odd, especially since there haven't been many (if any) BGS installs Upstate since the Exit 24 rebuild.
I'm thinking there is at least one more overhead in Kentucky with the light fixtures still attached, although I can't remember where it is.
I'm not sorry to see them go. New signs are visible enough and why pay for electricity if you don't have to?
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2015, 05:44:54 PM
Lighting was installed for the final WB Exit 58 BGS on I-90 in New York (this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.554351,-79.104162,3a,61.3y,250.56h,85.01t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQeDdkuNt6q1w7Rp5Q4QRkw!2e0)) at some point within the past year or so. Ground-mounted and powered by a solar panel on the back of the BGS. Really odd, especially since there haven't been many (if any) BGS installs Upstate since the Exit 24 rebuild.
The Thruway has also done this at Exits 32 and 34A. I don't know if they're trying to stretch the reflectivity longevity of the sign or something, but this has been done within the past six months.
I'm bumping this because its relevant. The New Jersey Turnpike Authority has been installing new LED gantry lighting on some signs as part of their massive sign replacement project as seen here: https://goo.gl/maps/b2s13D4Ro9q . Very sleek looking, hopefully they require less maintenance than the old mercury vapor or HPS fixtures.
Georgia as a whole has abandoned the overhead sign lighting, can we count the Atlanta Airport signage? https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6445167,-84.449144,3a,75y,139.27h,87.45t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7qTs4avorWbPgNxrlZnlSw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D7qTs4avorWbPgNxrlZnlSw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D105.22382%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
Once in a great while you find a working sign lighting fixture in NW Indiana. The last one I saw working was on Cline Ave (Indiana 912) earlier this year. The most recent sign lighting install was in 2008 when the I-65/I-94 interchange was rebuilt.
WSDOT just installed brand new sign lights on this gantry, along I-90 near its junction with the 5. The signs were only installed maybe a month or two ago, without sign lighting (the signs they replaced had lighting -- the sign on the far left is original, in terms of both the sign, and the light below it). Why they felt the need to install lights again, I'm not sure. I can only assume that the signs were not well made (although they seem well made, based on the reflections in the photo).
To the best of my knowledge, WSDOT does not use sign lighting anymore. So it's surprising to see new lights going up.
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5495/30206316453_be3b703b27_o.jpg)
Photo from WSDOT Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/wsdot/30206316453/in/album-72157651139462015/).
Quote from: SSOWorld on November 16, 2014, 10:19:10 PM
Iowa and Illinois use them. For IL some districts actually use the sulfur lighting for them, which is fugly.
ISTHA only uses lighting on the gantries before toll plazas. Everything else is simply fully reflective.
IDOT, on the other hand, still has a lot of lit signs, but their newest ones are unlit.
Going to the subject of Arizona, ADOT no longer requires illumination for new overhead signs except for signs with sheeting types other than type XI within 2-3 miles of freeway-to-freeway interchanges. Overhead signs with type XI sheeting do not use illumination regardless of whether or not they are located near a freeway-to-freeway interchange.
PennDOT still lights their overhead signs.
Still not sure what WSDOT's view on sign lighting is. When I inquired about the new sign lights above (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=13984.msg2185813#msg2185813), they said the following:
Quote from: WSDOT
They are reflective, but headlights don't always hit the overhead signs, especially when it's foggy or in other inclement weather.
They haven't installed new lights in years, so unless this is a one-off case because of complaints from drivers (most likely), this installation may suggest a change in policy.
As noted upthread VDOT seems to be turning away from lighting new BGS's over the last few years, but this one was installed last year
https://goo.gl/maps/brdsNRhb7kG2
Actually, why didn't backlit signs come into vogue for lighting? They wouldn't be any thicker than a VMS, and wouldn't they cost the same as gantries that have lighting?
One would think (or at least hope) that some manufacturer out there is working on such. There's the ones on the West Virginia Turnpike but those are like an early version I guess. I've never had a chance to see them at night, not yet anyway. Maybe the newer versions, if ever made, would have the same thickness as these backlit street blades in Richmond
https://goo.gl/maps/UVf5XJVTHoC2
Quote from: plain on February 26, 2017, 07:37:04 PM
One would think (or at least hope) that some manufacturer out there is working on such. There's the ones on the West Virginia Turnpike but those are like an early version I guess. I've never had a chance to see them at night, not yet anyway. Maybe the newer versions, if ever made, would have the same thickness as these backlit street blades in Richmond
https://goo.gl/maps/UVf5XJVTHoC2
Lexington, Ky. has installed some backlit street blades in recent months.
As to the backlit signs on the WV Turnpike, I have only seen them in the dark hours once. The lighting was not turned on, but they were acceptably visible (the I-64/Richmond, I-77 Charlotte set near the routes' split.)
Backlit street name signs are still commonly installed here in the Phoenix area. The majority of cities install them at most of their signalized intersections, although Mesa only does it on a case-by-case basis (with many of them removed in recent years).
Three cities near me use backlit street blades, using two different styles.
Puyallup, Wash uses a fatter kind, but I think it looks better because the wires are hidden:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJS3Czva.png&hash=efe351f4d24e59ec07d49e58519a2e679a9dad21)
Fife and Lakewood, Wash use a thinner kind, but the wires are (often) highly visible, so I'm not as keen on them. If they hid the wires better, I'd like them a lot more.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fegh1UaA.png&hash=ff91139ddc3c11f2bb61fcefe612c960cd4a8df8)
Orlando and Orange County FL have been lighting street blades for a long time. It has become more common in other parts of Florida over the past decade
LGMS428
Quote from: jakeroot on February 27, 2017, 02:31:49 PM
Three cities near me use backlit street blades, using two different styles.
Puyallup, Wash uses a fatter kind, but I think it looks better because the wires are hidden:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJS3Czva.png&hash=efe351f4d24e59ec07d49e58519a2e679a9dad21)
Fife and Lakewood, Wash use a thinner kind, but the wires are (often) highly visible, so I'm not as keen on them. If they hid the wires better, I'd like them a lot more.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fegh1UaA.png&hash=ff91139ddc3c11f2bb61fcefe612c960cd4a8df8)
The thinner kind uses LEDs for lighting. The fatter kind traditionally uses fluorescent tubes, although some cities have retrofitted them with LED strips.
Here in the Phoenix area most cities have their illuminated signs attached to a side post, although Glendale uses the hanging type.
The Cook County Highway Department (in Illinois) uses backlit street name signs on all of their signalized intersections. Most of them have a Cook County emblem on the left-hand side. Several Chicago suburbs (usually affluent ones) use these as well--Bolingbrook, for example.
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 26, 2017, 06:57:49 PM
Actually, why didn't backlit signs come into vogue for lighting? They wouldn't be any thicker than a VMS, and wouldn't they cost the same as gantries that have lighting?
I interpreted this question as as referring to backlit BGSs on freeways and such, not the lighted street name signs attached to traffic signal assemblies.
Nevada DOT has tried this with one set of signs on I-15 SB at Flamingo Road (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.114865,-115.1809436,3a,75y,177.72h,90.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spUQTlfm0lhSZ_vuQKYMnbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1). This assembly has a housing that is probably 1/2 to 1/3 the thickness of the VMS signs NDOT typically installs. The Street View is from 2015, but these were around at least as far back as 2009, and possibly several years before that.
I'm only in Vegas a few times a year now, but I can't recall having seen these signs lit at night for a while now (and actually, they might have been replaced with conventional signs within the last year). That might be part of the issue with why such signs haven't taken off in popularity. While backlit signs have the plus of not needing catwalks for lighting assembly maintenance (thus reducing graffiti potential), they're probably more difficult to maintain the lighting for if there's no internal access. What I can remember when NDOT had fluorescent lighting on signs in Las Vegas, the lighting didn't seem to work very well in the elements there (or maybe it just wasn't that bright). So these two items together probably explains why this didn't catch on further.
NDOT has since developed a luminaire retrieval system that eliminates the need for the catwalk on bridge structures (very common in Las Vegas), and has been increasingly deploying non-lit urban freeway signage with better reflective sheeting that better lights signage from vehicle headlights (more so in Reno/Sparks than elsewhere).
I think this thread is fine for revival, North Carolina stopped using lighting I think in 2009/2010 or so, but the ones that have lighting still light up at night.
I can't remember what state I was in (coming from N.C.) must of been a LED replacement but the lamp was flashing on and off about every second while the other two were fine.. pretty distracting.
Quote from: MikeCL on October 30, 2021, 03:59:57 PM
I can't remember what state I was in (coming from N.C.) must of been a LED replacement but the lamp was flashing on and off about every second while the other two were fine.. pretty distracting.
And to add to this: When I was on the Knightdale bypass (I-87) at night, most of the lighting on the signs don't work anymore and I kinda find that a hazard because the signs are meant to require lighting on them. They are not retroreflective, they are just reflective. They either need to replace the bulbs or replace the signs totally.
Same thing with I-795 in Wilson (although hopefully those get replaced when I-587 comes in).
Quote from: MikeCL on October 30, 2021, 03:59:57 PM
I can't remember what state I was in (coming from N.C.) must of been a LED replacement but the lamp was flashing on and off about every second while the other two were fine.. pretty distracting.
Yes, the industry switching from electronic circuit boards to miniature microprocessors has created a mess. This problem occurs because the light reflects off of something, which activates the daylight sensor and turns the light off. It wasn't that this effect didn't occur with the electronic versions, but the circuitry tended to have a snubber component (often a Zener diode over a relay coil) that would keep the lamp control circuit energized long enough to avoid the flash process.
No wonder why VDOT is sticking with older technology. They last longer and are more economical. https://goo.gl/maps/vFZLe9aAPBRLZvvh9
Otherwise you'll end up with signs like these: https://goo.gl/maps/uqrFHzGzQgBqxAL68