New MUTCD announced

[Quillz]

I always liked the underline tenths of miles. I wish that stuck around.

I'm also a fan of putting location names in boxes, similar to what New York does. (Although I'd suggest green-on-white instead of an actual outline).

[ran4sh]

Another error I have found is that Figure 2B-7 contradicts section 2B.34 paragraph 8 . (Regarding signage for reversible lanes that do not use changeable signs or signals but rather list the times on the sign)

The text says the prohibition time message must be listed "first" (to the left if arranged horizontally). But the figure depicts, for one direction, signs with the prohibition time listed second/in the middle.

This error is new, as the figure from the 09 MUTCD correctly complied with the text as shown here: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2r3/part2/fig2b_07_longdesc.htm

Edit - It looks like the 09 version had its own error - one direction of signs is shown with the wrong times for prohibited and permitted lane use. But at least that error is in just the figure and does not have contradiction with the text.

[Tom958]

Bay City and Somerset were the fictional locales in which the soap opera "Another World" was set when I watched it as a teen in the seventies. The show was successful enough that "Somerset" was introduced as a spinoff, with the original series set in Bay City.

On Page 350, cities of Brookfield and Green Bay changed to fictional cities of Somerset and Bay City.

Bay City, MI, would like a word.

As would Somerset, WI...

[-- US 175 --]

Bay City and Somerset were the fictional locales in which the soap opera "Another World" was set when I watched it as a teen in the seventies. The show was successful enough that "Somerset" was introduced as a spinoff, with the original series set in Bay City.

On Page 350, cities of Brookfield and Green Bay changed to fictional cities of Somerset and Bay City.

Bay City, MI, would like a word.

As would Somerset, WI...

I wondered if someone would bring up the Another World angle -- and if someone in the midst of the new MUTCD's production might have been a soap fan.

[Duke87]

The Hutch doesn't really have any examples of a single exit having two different numbers, though (aside from some not-updated signs at the CT border).  The closest is the NY 120 exit, 16B NB, 16 SB, but that situation isn't really unusual in a part of the country where one side of an exit being split by direction and the other side not is routine (even though that isn't the reason for it here).  Someone going SB looking for 16B would probably clue in to having to take 16 (especially if the rest of the state finally converts, and stuff like the 21/21B/21A/22 sequence on the Thruway goes away).

4, 5, 6, and 9 also have suffixes for multiple exits in one direction while remaining vanilla in the other.

Really more the "WTF really?" issue with the Hutch is that vanilla exit 8 exists in both directions but goes to two completely different places depending on which direction. SB it's the Cross County (former exit 15). NB it's Webster Ave (former exit 16).

[Henry]

Anyone find it funny that an unsigned Interstate is labeled on an APL sign for an exit that is one interchange too late in the real world? (At least they got the route and exit numbers right.)

[CovalenceSTU]

I went through the new MUTCD's pictures and while I won't list everything, there's lots of neat additions such as U turn arrows, seagull intersections (sort of), "YOUR SPEED" standardized, units of sign info (similar to the Texas MUTCD), optional dotted line (instead of no line) before lanes end, no more three-lane roundabout examples (good riddance), and separated bike lanes.

US-99 makes a cameo:


New APL split arrow with no curve:


New section for instructing people to zipper merge: (edit: what have I done)

[JoePCool14]

I like that new arrow for two straight ahead options for APLs. Definitely gives another good option, especially for express-local lane setups.

Zipper merge signage needs to be more common. I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

[Brandon]

I'm also a fan of putting location names in boxes, similar to what New York does. (Although I'd suggest green-on-white instead of an actual outline).

The Ohio Turnpike used to to exactly that (green on white box) for one exit back in the 1990s and 2000s.  It has since been changed.

[kphoger]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

[kalvado]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

And that's probably the best approach in many cases.

[RobbieL2415]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

And that's probably the best approach in many cases.

Even better would be to double solid stripe the lanes and prohibit passing within 1000ft of the taper.

The law should also be made abundantly clear that if you are in the lane that's merging, you must remain in it through the merge.

[kphoger]

Even better would be to double solid stripe the lanes and prohibit passing within 1000ft of the taper.

The law should also be made abundantly clear that if you are in the lane that's merging, you must remain in it through the merge.

Well, then, the new MUTCD zipper merge signage wouldn't see much use, then, would it?

Can we please not turn this thread into a debate about the zipper merge's benefits and drawbacks? especially considering nobody ever seems to come up with real data to back up their side of the argument...

[kalvado]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

And that's probably the best approach in many cases.

Even better would be to double solid stripe the lanes and prohibit passing within 1000ft of the taper.

The law should also be made abundantly clear that if you are in the lane that's merging, you must remain in it through the merge.

well, question is about placement of the merge. For free flowing traffic I would argue at least 30 seconds upstream. For congestion that 1/2 mile looks about right as well.

[jeffandnicole]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

And that's probably the best approach in many cases.

Even better would be to double solid stripe the lanes and prohibit passing within 1000ft of the taper.

The law should also be made abundantly clear that if you are in the lane that's merging, you must remain in it through the merge.

well, question is about placement of the merge. For free flowing traffic I would argue at least 30 seconds upstream. For congestion that 1/2 mile looks about right as well.

What's the point of merging a 1/2 mile before the end of the lane?  You're still leaving 1/2 mile of open lane unused.

[kalvado]

I'm tired of drivers merging a mile from the merge point, and semi drivers playing traffic cop to block the open lane.

In Oklahoma, many drivers find it difficult to ignore the big "STATE LAW / MERGE NOW" signs that are posted a half-mile upstream of the merge point...

And that's probably the best approach in many cases.

Even better would be to double solid stripe the lanes and prohibit passing within 1000ft of the taper.

The law should also be made abundantly clear that if you are in the lane that's merging, you must remain in it through the merge.

well, question is about placement of the merge. For free flowing traffic I would argue at least 30 seconds upstream. For congestion that 1/2 mile looks about right as well.

What's the point of merging a 1/2 mile before the end of the lane?  You're still leaving 1/2 mile of open lane unused.

time and distance for the flow stabilization. What do we get by filling that 1/2 mile, though?

[kphoger]

time and distance for the flow stabilization. What do we get by filling that 1/2 mile, though?

*uggggh*  OK, here we go . . .

There is a point at which that argument breaks down, though, isn't there?  Why not merge 1½ miles early? 3 miles early? 5 miles early?

Why does the flow stabilization have to happen at a specific point?

[kalvado]

time and distance for the flow stabilization. What do we get by filling that 1/2 mile, though?

*uggggh*  OK, here we go . . .

There is a point at which that argument breaks down, though, isn't there?  Why not merge 1½ miles early? 3 miles early? 5 miles early?

Why does the flow stabilization have to happen at a specific point?

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

[kphoger]

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

Single-file traffic passing through the physical merge point?

[kalvado]

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

Single-file traffic passing through the physical merge point?

Point as in... ?

[jeffandnicole]

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

Single-file traffic passing through the physical merge point?

Point as in... ?

Upstream issues where the roadway is constricted impact the overall flow.  A construction worker stopping traffic; a narrowed available lane, trucks occasionally being very close to the lane, or an unusual site that people are looking at will constrict flow.

[kphoger]

Point as in... ?

As in, the point at which it is no longer physically practicable for two lines of traffic to flow.  Is it quantifiably better or worse to have that be approximately where traffic merges, a half-mile past where traffic merges, or four miles past where traffic merges?

[kalvado]

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

Single-file traffic passing through the physical merge point?

Point as in... ?

Upstream issues where the roadway is constricted impact the overall flow.  A construction worker stopping traffic; a narrowed available lane, trucks occasionally being very close to the lane, or an unusual site that people are looking at will constrict flow.

not what i asked.. lets try again.
let's consider more or less vanilla lane drop due to roadwork, as shown in MUTCD:

lets assume lane is closed for 1/2-1 mile so there is enough room to talk about traffic pattern in narrow area,  and no active work to interfere with the flow. Just simplest one.  Instead of suggesting last minute drop, lets add some room between merge and lane drop point, effectively moving all signs a bit back - same 1/2-1 mile, enough to talk about patterns.  And there is enough traffic to create some congestion.

Now, in which areas you expect free-flow, and where it would be congested stop-and-go, and what causes mode swtiches?

[jeffandnicole]

OK, what is the rate limiting step of the lane drop from your perspective? (and this may go to a separate thread, actually)

Single-file traffic passing through the physical merge point?

Point as in... ?

Upstream issues where the roadway is constricted impact the overall flow.  A construction worker stopping traffic; a narrowed available lane, trucks occasionally being very close to the lane, or an unusual site that people are looking at will constrict flow.

not what i asked.. lets try again.
let's consider more or less vanilla lane drop due to roadwork, as shown in MUTCD:

lets assume lane is closed for 1/2-1 mile so there is enough room to talk about traffic pattern in narrow area,  and no active work to interfere with the flow. Just simplest one.  Instead of suggesting last minute drop, lets add some room between merge and lane drop point, effectively moving all signs a bit back - same 1/2-1 mile, enough to talk about patterns.  And there is enough traffic to create some congestion.

Now, in which areas you expect free-flow, and where it would be congested stop-and-go, and what causes mode swtiches?

Again: Upstream issues where the roadway is constricted impact the overall flow.  A construction worker stopping traffic; a narrowed available lane, trucks occasionally being very close to the lane, or an unusual site that people are looking at will constrict flow.

In other words, there are several issues that go into when traffic moves slow, and traffic moves fast. 

Use a traffic light for instance.  If you have 10 cars approaching and going thru a green light, there's no real constriction.  If you have 10 cars at a red light, there's heavy constriction.  When that light turns green, the first car goes, then the second, then the third, etc.  They don't all move at the same time.  In the meantime, approaching traffic comes up behind the 10th car, which hasn't moved yet even though the light is green, because it's waiting for the vehicles in front to move.  The 11th and 12th cars only saw a green light though, so in their minds the vehicles stopped in front of them shouldn't be there.

A work zone, or even general congestion, operates the same way.  Traffic piles in, and ultimately there's going to be a slowdown if there's a constriction ahead.  Once that constriction is removed, traffic starts to move again, but everyone doesn't suddenly go from slow to fast at the same time.  It takes time.  And the reduction of the lane will constrict traffic, regardless if everyone merges over at the merge point, 1/2 mile away, or 3 miles away. 

So use the available lanes till they end, because the constriction point won't change because traffic vacates an open lane early.

[kalvado]

So use the available lanes till they end, because the constriction point won't change because traffic vacates an open lane early.

Try again with a better picture:


Zone A: incoming free-flowing traffic slows down due to congestion ahead and merges into a single file, proceding like that into Area B
....
....
Area D: outgoing traffic is now not restricted, and accelerates to a highway  free-flow speed

Can you describe zone B and C?  assume no lane jumpers, everyone merges.

PS pardon my crazy image editing, don't shoot the piano player