The Worst of Road Signs

[kurumi]

The non-standardness alone is enough to make it Worst Of, in my estimation.

If they were a traditional BGS it wouldn't be standard anyway, since you're only supposed to list cities/towns.

By default, for Disney's purposes, the sign can't be standard.

And...Disney should know how to properly spell the name of its attractions.

Somebody should notify Epcot via their twitter feed: https://twitter.com/epcotcentre (a parody account that's pretty well done)

[riiga]

I think this is confusing because it could imply to tourists that you can't go straight outside the specified hours, which isn't true.

I guess North Americans aren't used to mandatory movements. Looks perfectly reasonable to me, though I would use blue instead of green to lessen the confusion.

[Scott5114]

The non-standardness alone is enough to make it Worst Of, in my estimation.

If they were a traditional BGS it wouldn't be standard anyway, since you're only supposed to list cities/towns.

By default, for Disney's purposes, the sign can't be standard.

They could at least make the damn thing green.

[UCFKnights]

The non-standardness alone is enough to make it Worst Of, in my estimation.

If they were a traditional BGS it wouldn't be standard anyway, since you're only supposed to list cities/towns.

By default, for Disney's purposes, the sign can't be standard.

They could at least make the damn thing green.

Pfft, one of my very first memories as a child was going to Disney and thinking how cool the purple signs and traffic signals were. I probably would have been happy not even going in the park and just admiring the purpleness, and it not being green.

[Brandon]

I think this is confusing because it could imply to tourists that you can't go straight outside the specified hours, which isn't true.

I guess North Americans aren't used to mandatory movements. Looks perfectly reasonable to me, though I would use blue instead of green to lessen the confusion.

Blue would be for a service.  That's not for a service.  It's a regulatory sign.

[jakeroot]

I think this is confusing because it could imply to tourists that you can't go straight outside the specified hours, which isn't true.

I guess North Americans aren't used to mandatory movements. Looks perfectly reasonable to me, though I would use blue instead of green to lessen the confusion.

Blue would be for a service.  That's not for a service.  It's a regulatory sign.

If we're going by category colors, green wouldn't be correct either.

Riiga is suggesting blue because it's recognized better by colorblind individuals than red or green circles (red circles common all over North America, but green circles are common in Canada).

[riiga]

Also blue is the international color for mandatory signage. 

[jakeroot]

Also blue is the international color for mandatory signage. 

inb4 "North America is different than Europe" comments.

[Brandon]

Also blue is the international color for mandatory signage. 

Blue is the Vienna Convention color, not "international" color when you consider that there are two systems in use.  Many parts of east Asia, North America, South America, and Australia don't use those mandatory signs.  Hell, even Ireland in Europe doesn't use them.

[J N Winkler]

Actually, Ireland does have mandatory blue signs.  It's just the warning signs that follow the North American yellow-diamond convention, which is also an option under Vienna.

[tckma]

Instead of saying which direction you can't turn and at what time, it tells which directions you can only go during the time frame. In other words, for the second example, you can only go straight at noon, but at midnight, you can go also make turns.

I read the top sign as saying you can't go straight outside of the specified hours... during those hours you can go straight but you can also turn too?

Looking at the photo again, it looks like the traffic light has a green straight ahead arrow under the green ball.  I wonder if that's the only one that lights up during the specified hours, whereas both the green arrow and green ball light up outside those hours.

[7/8]

Instead of saying which direction you can't turn and at what time, it tells which directions you can only go during the time frame. In other words, for the second example, you can only go straight at noon, but at midnight, you can go also make turns.

I read the top sign as saying you can't go straight outside of the specified hours... during those hours you can go straight but you can also turn too?

Looking at the photo again, it looks like the traffic light has a green straight ahead arrow under the green ball.  I wonder if that's the only one that lights up during the specified hours, whereas both the green arrow and green ball light up outside those hours.

Your post proves my point that this sign is confusing to most North Americans. An easier way of signing this would be to change the straight arrow in green circle to left and right arrows in a red crossed-out circle.

The green straight arrow signal is a Montreal thing. It goes on for a couple seconds before giving the full green ball to give pedestrians a head start.

[jakeroot]

Also blue is the international color for mandatory signage. 

Blue is the Vienna Convention color, not "international" color when you consider that there are two systems in use.  Many parts of east Asia, North America, South America, and Australia don't use those mandatory signs.  Hell, even Ireland in Europe doesn't use them.

Even in countries that haven't signed the Vienna Convention in Road Traffic, you'll find that blue is, more often than not, the color used behind mandatory messages. Most African nations use blue "command" signage, as does Japan, China, most Middle-Eastern countries, and plenty of countries in South America. Mexico is a Vienna signatory, but I'm not sure if they use blue mandatory signage.

I swear, Australia, and particularly NZ, bare more resemblance to the US than Canada, at least in terms of signage and fonts.

[Voyager75]

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8514608,-87.3432839,3a,49.9y,317.28h,103.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sytC9cRiHJzqSIBWc64W1KA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Not the worst by any means but the I-22 sign is too big and off centered. It does regain some brownie points for being a state named shield.


The old US 78 sign on here didn't give it much of a foundation to start with. Good size but poor placement, AL 118 side included.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.851364,-87.3432122,3a,75y,339.92h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy327Nyz1fpd5CwDzPiPOKQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[7/8]

The left two signs look stretched out, while the right sign looks squished. The arrows on the centre sign are also much larger than the arrows on the left and right signs . This is on Kenaston Blvd in Winnipeg, MB

[roadfro]

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8514608,-87.3432839,3a,49.9y,317.28h,103.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sytC9cRiHJzqSIBWc64W1KA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Not the worst by any means but the I-22 sign is too big and off centered. It does regain some brownie points for being a state named shield.


The old US 78 sign on here didn't give it much of a foundation to start with. Good size but poor placement, AL 118 side included.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.851364,-87.3432122,3a,75y,339.92h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy327Nyz1fpd5CwDzPiPOKQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Looks like they just covered the US 78 shield with a bigger I-22 shield... Can't improve much on what was already off center.

[CanesFan27]

then there are when birds get in the way.

Wash me please! by Adam Prince, on Flickr

When birds attack.... by Adam Prince, on Flickr

[Hurricane Rex]

then there are when birds get in the way.

Wash me please! by Adam Prince, on Flickr

When birds attack.... by Adam Prince, on Flickr

Clean up on exit 140.

There are cleaning crews right? It would be less expensive than a new sign.

[kphoger]

Instead of saying which direction you can't turn and at what time, it tells which directions you can only go during the time frame. In other words, for the second example, you can only go straight at noon, but at midnight, you can go also make turns.

I read the top sign as saying you can't go straight outside of the specified hours... during those hours you can go straight but you can also turn too?

Looking at the photo again, it looks like the traffic light has a green straight ahead arrow under the green ball.  I wonder if that's the only one that lights up during the specified hours, whereas both the green arrow and green ball light up outside those hours.

Your post proves my point that this sign is confusing to most North Americans. An easier way of signing this would be to change the straight arrow in green circle to left and right arrows in a red crossed-out circle.

The green straight arrow signal is a Montreal thing. It goes on for a couple seconds before giving the full green ball to give pedestrians a head start.

I think the whole thing could be cleared up by simply adding "ONLY" to the signage.

Mexico is a Vienna signatory, but I'm not sure if they use blue mandatory signage.

No, blue signs in México are for "tourist and service signs".  México uses a red circle for restrictions in general.

In cases where there is a restriction but not a prohibition, a red circle without a slash is used.  For example, the sign below is used where parking is generally allowed, but it would carry a plaque indicating what hours are the exception.  It basically means "Parking only between the hours below".



On the other hand, the sign below is used where parking is prohibited.  If there are any hours when parking is not prohibited, then it would carry a plaque indicating those hours, but it would stand alone otherwise.  It simply means "No parking", and any exceptions are listed on a plaque.



The sign below is used especially for right turn lanes at stoplights.  Right turns are allowed, but drivers are restricted in that they must give way to cross traffic and pedestrians.  It basically means "Right turn yield on red".



On the other hand, the sign below is used to prohibit right turns.  It can carry a plaque to indicate if only specific classes of vehicle (trucks) are prohibited from making the movement.  It basically means "No right turn".



For straight-ahead movements, I believe only the prohibitive sign exists.  I can't find a straight-ahead arrow without a slash in the SCT manual.  Intersections that I've personally encountered where going straight is prohibited use one or both of the following:  (1) the sign shown below; (2) two black one-way arrows, one facing right and the other facing left,  indicating that those are the only two movements allowed.  I've never personally encountered an intersection where turns are only allowed at certain times of day.

[hbelkins]

then there are when birds get in the way.

Wash me please! by Adam Prince, on Flickr

When birds attack.... by Adam Prince, on Flickr

Clean up on exit 140.

There are cleaning crews right? It would be less expensive than a new sign.

That sign has been replaced. Not sure when Adam took the pictures, but this pic is from August.

2017 NC route-clinching trip Day 3 - 223 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

[Brandon]

then there are when birds get in the way.

Wash me please! by Adam Prince, on Flickr

When birds attack.... by Adam Prince, on Flickr

That's a pretty shitty problem.

[chays]

This sign has at least three bad errors, so much so that it could go into three separate existing threads.

Two are fairly obvious, one might take a little more thinking.

Northbound on International Parkway, at Wayside Dr in Sanford, FL.

[tckma]

This sign has at least three bad errors, so much so that it could go into three separate existing threads.

Two are fairly obvious, one might take a little more thinking.

1. Phantom Interstate.  The shield should contain a number.  Google Maps tells me that number ought to be 4.
2. I-4 is not routed on FL-46.  The sign should say EAST [FL-46 shield] TO [I-4 shield].  And there is no mention of FL-400 which appears to be concurrent with I-4 here.
3. Those arrows should not have right angle stems.  They should just be left and right arrows, as they indicate movements at the very next intersection.  The right angle arrows, as I understand it, indicate that you should proceed to the next intersection and THEN turn at the following one.

Did I get them all right?

[chays]

This sign has at least three bad errors, so much so that it could go into three separate existing threads.

Two are fairly obvious, one might take a little more thinking.

1. Phantom Interstate.  The shield should contain a number.  Google Maps tells me that number ought to be 4.
2. I-4 is not routed on FL-46.  The sign should say EAST [FL-46 shield] TO [I-4 shield].  And there is no mention of FL-400 which appears to be concurrent with I-4 here.
3. Those arrows should not have right angle stems.  They should just be left and right arrows, as they indicate movements at the very next intersection.  The right angle arrows, as I understand it, indicate that you should proceed to the next intersection and THEN turn at the following one.

Did I get them all right?

1) Correct.  It would belong with the Faded Beyond Recognition thread.
2) Correct.  It would belong in Signs with Design errors or Erroneous Signs.  However, SR-400 is internal only...I-4 is never co-signed with a SR-400 sign.
3) Not what I had in mind, but you are probably right here as well (I did mention originally that there were at least three errors...you seem to have found another).  I'm not sure what the rule regarding arrows are.

So that still leaves one more problem (at least).

[jakeroot]

3. Those arrows should not have right angle stems.  They should just be left and right arrows, as they indicate movements at the very next intersection.  The right angle arrows, as I understand it, indicate that you should proceed to the next intersection and THEN turn at the following one.

I think how they've used the right-angle arrow is okay. I've seen WSDOT use right-angle arrows in place of APLs on more than one occasion (not that this is an APL, but right-angle arrows seem to have more than one use). In this particular instance, this seems to be a good use of the right-angle arrow, since the movement isn't for (AFAICT) several blocks.

IMO, this isn't a worst-of sign. In fact, nothing seems to be terribly wrong with the sign, apart from the error of forgetting "TO" above the faded I-4 shield (and probably reversing the shield placement). The only other issue seems to be the placement of the sign behind a mast arm. Move the sign back a hundred feet, fix the "TO" message (and replace the shield) and you're good. Do these things combined make it worst-of? I wouldn't say so. When they installed the sign, the signals might have been wire span, making the sign more visible. The I-4 shield used to be visible. And I'm sure most people would figure out that I-4 is to the east, without "TO" being spelled out for them. I doubt a contractor would have batted an eye when installing the sign.