Department of Redundancy Department

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/oyDpc9NpND9Mf2Uv5
South US 1-9 SB.

[SkyPesos]

I get why one "wrong way" sign on each side of the road is useful over just one altogether, but two stacked on top of each other seems redundant to me.

[machias]

I get why one "wrong way" sign on each side of the road is useful over just one altogether, but two stacked on top of each other seems redundant to me.

I believe this is a new standard for many states. It's to help with drivers going the wrong way on limited access highways.

When I was a kid it was "WRONG WAY / GO BACK", but I guess they don't want people doing that anymore.

[hbelkins]

https://goo.gl/maps/oyDpc9NpND9Mf2Uv5
South US 1-9 SB.

That took me to a photo of construction underneath a bridge.

[thenetwork]

I get why one "wrong way" sign on each side of the road is useful over just one altogether, but two stacked on top of each other seems redundant to me.

CDOT has been quickly installing wrong way detection systems which, when a sensor detects a wrong way driver on an exit ramp, will activate red flashing LED lights that border new WRONG WAY signs. Most looked to be single sign assemblies ‐ one on each side of ramp -- but I have seen some ramps with two WW signs on a post.

I saw them on I-70 from at least Dillon, CO on the east. CDOT has been working their way west since late summer and now they are almost up to Grand Junction.  Seems like they are taking 1-2 days per interchange.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/oyDpc9NpND9Mf2Uv5
South US 1-9 SB.

Up on top look.

That took me to a photo of construction underneath a bridge.

Up on top look

[renegade]

I get why one "wrong way" sign on each side of the road is useful over just one altogether, but two stacked on top of each other seems redundant to me.

There are two on each post because studies have shown that intoxicated drivers tend to look downward while they are driving, and the idea is that they'll see them.  This came about after the three college students on spring break were killed after their murderer got on I-75 going south in the northbound lanes near Bowling Green a few years ago.

https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/03/02/students-killed-in-wrong-way-i-75-crash/

The final report on the crash recommended duplicate signs on each side of the ramps to call additional attention that a driver is going the wrong way.  Seems totally unnecessary, sure, but if it prevents one accident, it's worth its weight in gold.

[roadfro]

I get why one "wrong way" sign on each side of the road is useful over just one altogether, but two stacked on top of each other seems redundant to me.

There are two on each post because studies have shown that intoxicated drivers tend to look downward while they are driving, and the idea is that they'll see them.  This came about after the three college students on spring break were killed after their murderer got on I-75 going south in the northbound lanes near Bowling Green a few years ago.

https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/03/02/students-killed-in-wrong-way-i-75-crash/

The final report on the crash recommended duplicate signs on each side of the ramps to call additional attention that a driver is going the wrong way.  Seems totally unnecessary, sure, but if it prevents one accident, it's worth its weight in gold.

Nevada DOT's approach in its recent wrong way driver detection/warning installations is to mount a first set of wrong way signs with red RRFB-style flashers at a lower height then a second set further back at normal height–and often signs on both sides of the ramp even when the ramp is fairly narrow. example via Street View). Lots of redundancy, but for these warning systems redundancy is kinda the point. (You might also notice small red reflectors on the backside of the normal edge delineator reflectors. I think they ought to use red reflective tape on all the sign posts as well.)

[jakeroot]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

[roadfro]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

I doubt this. This would be a passive system, which would introduce a larger maintenance cost (for operating a permanently flashing beacon) for minimal benefit and potential reduced effectiveness over time if drivers get used to a constant flashing device in the area.

The kinds of systems NDOT and others have installed are active systems that only flash when a wrong way driver is detected, which have more up front costs for the detection but only activate when necessary. Active systems also have the ability to alert a DOT/highway patrol monitoring center when the wrong way driver is detected and the flashers begin, and (depending on how it's set up) activate VMS or other warning signs upstream to alert other drivers of the potential hazard.

[jakeroot]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

I doubt this. This would be a passive system, which would introduce a larger maintenance cost (for operating a permanently flashing beacon) for minimal benefit and potential reduced effectiveness over time if drivers get used to a constant flashing device in the area.

Understood. I was thinking the same thing, that drivers tend to begin ignoring things that are always on. But, I would have thought this might be different as the only time a driver would see it would be in their rear-view mirrors, or (importantly) directly in front of them if they were heading in the wrong direction. Even those drivers who may get used to seeing it in their rear-view, or as they pass by the ramps along the cross-road, perhaps only one in one-hundred thousand of those drivers would need to actively respond to the reason for the beacons' existence (basically: this is the wrong way).

The kinds of systems NDOT and others have installed are active systems that only flash when a wrong way driver is detected, which have more up front costs for the detection but only activate when necessary. Active systems also have the ability to alert a DOT/highway patrol monitoring center when the wrong way driver is detected and the flashers begin, and (depending on how it's set up) activate VMS or other warning signs upstream to alert other drivers of the potential hazard.

I would have thought that the costs involved for a permanent flashing beacon that had no detection system would actually be quite low, perhaps even lower over the course of a few decades as there would be very little in the way of maintenance. I was envisioning some sort of pole-mounted permanent-flashing beacon (one on either side of the off-ramp) with an R5-1 or R5-1a sign below it, perhaps using solar power to keep the beacons lit if no other conduit capacity exists nearby (i.e. for a VMS or ATM system).

My other reservation with the active systems, besides the larger upfront costs, is that I haven't heard of any major success stories with any of the systems. At least in Phoenix, I still seem to hear a lot about wrong-way drivers who manage to reach the carriageway. It could be that the overall number of wrong-way drivers has dropped off, but it would be rather specious reasoning to assume the wrong-way systems are to thank (you could easily claim old drivers staying home thanks to the COVID-19 are to thank). Of course, if ADOT's wrong-way systems are indeed to thank, the next major issue is that the systems aren't at every interchange. In the mean-time, I think we need to find a very cheap solution that can be applied quickly at most off-ramps, rather than the high-up front cost, applied-as needed systems currently being deployed.

[roadfro]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

I doubt this. This would be a passive system, which would introduce a larger maintenance cost (for operating a permanently flashing beacon) for minimal benefit and potential reduced effectiveness over time if drivers get used to a constant flashing device in the area.

Understood. I was thinking the same thing, that drivers tend to begin ignoring things that are always on. But, I would have thought this might be different as the only time a driver would see it would be in their rear-view mirrors, or (importantly) directly in front of them if they were heading in the wrong direction. Even those drivers who may get used to seeing it in their rear-view, or as they pass by the ramps along the cross-road, perhaps only one in one-hundred thousand of those drivers would need to actively respond to the reason for the beacons' existence (basically: this is the wrong way).

The kinds of systems NDOT and others have installed are active systems that only flash when a wrong way driver is detected, which have more up front costs for the detection but only activate when necessary. Active systems also have the ability to alert a DOT/highway patrol monitoring center when the wrong way driver is detected and the flashers begin, and (depending on how it's set up) activate VMS or other warning signs upstream to alert other drivers of the potential hazard.

I would have thought that the costs involved for a permanent flashing beacon that had no detection system would actually be quite low, perhaps even lower over the course of a few decades as there would be very little in the way of maintenance. I was envisioning some sort of pole-mounted permanent-flashing beacon (one on either side of the off-ramp) with an R5-1 or R5-1a sign below it, perhaps using solar power to keep the beacons lit if no other conduit capacity exists nearby (i.e. for a VMS or ATM system).

My other reservation with the active systems, besides the larger upfront costs, is that I haven't heard of any major success stories with any of the systems. At least in Phoenix, I still seem to hear a lot about wrong-way drivers who manage to reach the carriageway. It could be that the overall number of wrong-way drivers has dropped off, but it would be rather specious reasoning to assume the wrong-way systems are to thank (you could easily claim old drivers staying home thanks to the COVID-19 are to thank). Of course, if ADOT's wrong-way systems are indeed to thank, the next major issue is that the systems aren't at every interchange. In the mean-time, I think we need to find a very cheap solution that can be applied quickly at most off-ramps, rather than the high-up front cost, applied-as needed systems currently being deployed.

I might be underestimating maintenance costs on an active vs passive system. Passive continuous beacons would have more maintenance from the perspective of replacing burnt out bulbs/LEDs more regularly and constant draw on electricity. But what I didn't think about before with an active system is that it also has a constant electricity draw for the detection, and also has more components to monitor and potentially test on an ongoing basis.

You probably haven't heard much about success stories with these systems for a few potential reasons:
(1) Just hearing about wrong-way drivers in general (at least in the news media) is fairly rare because the ones that make the news are usually the ones where the wrong-way driver made it to the mainline and caused serious injury/fatality.
(2) I would suspect there are far more instances of wrong way incursion to an off ramp than make the news, but the driver realizes their mistake and corrects before getting too far. If such incursions are warded off by an active warning, it's not really a newsworthy event.
(3) Such occurrences are pretty much random, so there's not a big data set to work with. Therefore, effectiveness of the systems takes a few years to study to get some statistically significant results that can be meaningfully reported. Some of these jurisdictions haven't had their systems deployed long enough to be able to report meaningful results. (For example, I think NDOT's first extensive deployment on I-80 western Reno is approaching three years old. Three years of before & after data tends to be a minimum benchmark in traffic safety/improvement studies.)


Didn't mean to derail this thread...I think there's a wrong-way driver thread in this board we can take this to.

[PurdueBill]

I might be underestimating maintenance costs on an active vs passive system. Passive continuous beacons would have more maintenance from the perspective of replacing burnt out bulbs/LEDs more regularly and constant draw on electricity. But what I didn't think about before with an active system is that it also has a constant electricity draw for the detection, and also has more components to monitor and potentially test on an ongoing basis.

You probably haven't heard much about success stories with these systems for a few potential reasons:
(1) Just hearing about wrong-way drivers in general (at least in the news media) is fairly rare because the ones that make the news are usually the ones where the wrong-way driver made it to the mainline and caused serious injury/fatality.
(2) I would suspect there are far more instances of wrong way incursion to an off ramp than make the news, but the driver realizes their mistake and corrects before getting too far. If such incursions are warded off by an active warning, it's not really a newsworthy event.
(3) Such occurrences are pretty much random, so there's not a big data set to work with. Therefore, effectiveness of the systems takes a few years to study to get some statistically significant results that can be meaningfully reported. Some of these jurisdictions haven't had their systems deployed long enough to be able to report meaningful results. (For example, I think NDOT's first extensive deployment on I-80 western Reno is approaching three years old. Three years of before & after data tends to be a minimum benchmark in traffic safety/improvement studies.)


Didn't mean to derail this thread...I think there's a wrong-way driver thread in this board we can take this to.

As far as redundancy, ODOT has been known to leave the old Wrong Way signs in place and add the doubles especially when the existing ones were mounted back to back with other signs (e.g., one here was behind a BGS and the other behind a turn lane assignment sign; removing neither would result in taking any posts down; they just left the signs.  See this a lot around my neck of the woods.

[UCFKnights]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

I know I have seen one in Florida before, 10+ years ago, but I can't recall at all where it was, or if its still there.

[plain]

I-44/H.E. Bailey Tpk takes you to Oklahoma City and Oklahoma City.

Also, like so many Oklahoma signs, this qualifies for WORST OF.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/gxZqfeW4nuPYUZEj6

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Courtesy of Big Rig Steve, in Minooka, Illinois:
https://twitter.com/BigRigTravels/status/1470751855118594050

[PurdueBill]

Has any DOT ever installed permanent red flashing beacons facing downstream (aka, towards wrong-way traffic)? It could be flashing 24/7. As long as it's not facing traffic coming off the freeway, no one except those going the wrong way would see it.

I know I have seen one in Florida before, 10+ years ago, but I can't recall at all where it was, or if its still there.

Mass Pike did them at rest areas but they were a Turnpike Authority thing that never caught on elsewhere in the state.  They still hang around and some do still flash at least.

[akotchi]

https://goo.gl/maps/oyDpc9NpND9Mf2Uv5
South US 1-9 SB.

This is a ramp designation, for which signs have been starting to appear on highway interchanges.  They are probably more for agency maintenance workers and may not mean as much to motorists.

Up on top look.

That took me to a photo of construction underneath a bridge.

Up on top look

[roadman65]

The pier on the right has both a warning strip on a sign and on the pier itself on the near right bridge column.

[webny99]

I found this pair of "No Outlet" signs and immediately thought of this thread. 

[LilianaUwU]

There's no question about it, the right lane has 2.8m of clearance (the signs say "VOIE DE DROITE - 2.8m"). As long as the signal mast was horizontal, such a sign was on it.

Voie de droite - 2.8m... over and over by Liliana Vess, on Flickr

[Scott5114]

From the Cimarron Turnpike: No No U-Turn. U-Turn Strictly Enforced.

[webny99]

From the Cimarron Turnpike: No No U-Turn. U-Turn Strictly Enforced.
[img]

Because of the location of the U-turn symbol, that almost seems more contradictory than redundant. If you read the bottom part by itself, it sounds a variant of "Speed Limit Strictly Enforced", which would mean you have to U-turn.

[ethanhopkin14]

From the Cimarron Turnpike: No No U-Turn. U-Turn Strictly Enforced.
[img]

Because of the location of the U-turn symbol, that almost seems more contradictory than redundant. If you read the bottom part by itself, it sounds a variant of "Speed Limit Strictly Enforced", which would mean you have to U-turn.

Exactly what I thought.  It sounds like if you don't U-turn, you are gonna be in trouble. 

[hbelkins]

From the Cimarron Turnpike: No No U-Turn. U-Turn Strictly Enforced.

Alanland will be stealing that design for their MUTCD.