Span Wire Vs Mast Arm

Started by Amtrakprod, January 04, 2019, 08:28:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Which do you prefer

Span Wire
17 (18.5%)
Mast Arm
75 (81.5%)

Total Members Voted: 92

Amtrakprod

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.
Roadgeek, railfan, and crossing signal fan. From Massachusetts, and in high school. Youtube is my website link. Loves FYAs signals. Interest in Bicycle Infrastructure. Owns one Leotech Pedestrian Signal, and a Safetran Type 1 E bell.


Rick1962

For most applications, mast arms. For intersections with unusual geometry or that otherwise require odd signal placement, span wires.

SM-T580


MNHighwayMan

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.

NoGoodNamesAvailable

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.

index

#4
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 love my 2010 Ford Explorer.



Counties traveled

signalman

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.

1995hoo

#6
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." )
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

UCFKnights


Quote from: 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.
The 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.

Amtrakprod

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.
Roadgeek, railfan, and crossing signal fan. From Massachusetts, and in high school. Youtube is my website link. Loves FYAs signals. Interest in Bicycle Infrastructure. Owns one Leotech Pedestrian Signal, and a Safetran Type 1 E bell.

index

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
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.


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.
I love my 2010 Ford Explorer.



Counties traveled

ErmineNotyours

Seattle is big on span wire, and even still has a few pedestrian signals on them

Wire-mounted pedestrain signal by Arthur Allen, on Flickr

Amtrakprod

Quote from: 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
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.


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.
No freight to worry about here, but I agree.
Roadgeek, railfan, and crossing signal fan. From Massachusetts, and in high school. Youtube is my website link. Loves FYAs signals. Interest in Bicycle Infrastructure. Owns one Leotech Pedestrian Signal, and a Safetran Type 1 E bell.

Amtrakprod

Quote from: 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

Wire-mounted pedestrain signal by Arthur Allen, on Flickr
That's been against the MUTCD for years lol
Roadgeek, railfan, and crossing signal fan. From Massachusetts, and in high school. Youtube is my website link. Loves FYAs signals. Interest in Bicycle Infrastructure. Owns one Leotech Pedestrian Signal, and a Safetran Type 1 E bell.

wanderer2575

#13
What bugs me about mast arms is when they try to be works of art.  Thick and huge diameters (like this), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this).  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.

Revive 755

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), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this).  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.

wanderer2575

Quote from: 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), arresting colors, not horizontal over the roadway so multiple signal heads are mounted at different points to keep them level (like this).  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.

DaBigE

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.
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

Amtrakprod

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
Roadgeek, railfan, and crossing signal fan. From Massachusetts, and in high school. Youtube is my website link. Loves FYAs signals. Interest in Bicycle Infrastructure. Owns one Leotech Pedestrian Signal, and a Safetran Type 1 E bell.

wanderer2575

Quote from: 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.

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.

jakeroot

#19
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 and Pullman, WA 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. 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 make the city much nicer to walk around than a city like Seattle, where you're constantly walking under trolley and signal wires.

MNHighwayMan

#20
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 and Pullman, WA 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. 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 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.

jakeroot

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.

MNHighwayMan

Huh, I didn't know that. I guess I'd be the foreigner sitting in the turn lane waiting for green, then! :-P

CJResotko

Quote from: 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

Wire-mounted pedestrain signal by Arthur Allen, on Flickr
Very strange yet interesting.

paulthemapguy

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?
Avatar is the last interesting highway I clinched.
My website! http://www.paulacrossamerica.com Now featuring all of Ohio!
My USA Shield Gallery https://flic.kr/s/aHsmHwJRZk
TM Clinches https://bit.ly/2UwRs4O

National collection status: 361/425. Only 64 route markers remain



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.