Quotes mine - I'm not sure how revolutionary this is, but I have been by it a few times and it certainly seems to confuse some drivers:
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_28955237/revolutionary-new-pedestrian-traffic-signal-being-tested-san
It's not revolutionary because we've had a few of them here for several years now (off the top of my head I know of three of them and I think there's at least one more), but it may be new to the West Coast.
The one I encounter most often is the one on Eisenhower Avenue in Alexandria behind the Patent and Trademark Office. It gets a lot of use at lunchtime due to some restaurants across the street from the PTO. I find most drivers seem to stop at the steady red signal well enough, but it's what comes next that seems to be a crapshoot. Some people seem to think it means stop and then proceed when the pedestrian is gone (wrong, if the light is steady red, it's a red light and you have to wait even if the way is clear). Some people seem not to understand the flashing red part of the cycle and will continue to wait until the light turns off (wrong again, flashing red is equivalent to a stop sign). The HAWK lights in the District of Columbia have a sign noting that if it's flashing red you must stop but can go if the way is clear. The ones in Virginia don't have that sign.
Of course, there are some people who just run the light.
Also, I have an issue with calling it revolutionary. It's the exact same concept as a sensor-activated light change for automobiles at an intersection with a stop light. It's merely a modification of the technology and the activation method (button vs sensor).
Interestingly, (Hoo, have you seen this?), in Ballston as you're on Glebe Road, just north of Wilson (near the Green Turtle and World of Beer) is a standard stop light, but there's no perpendicular street. It's simply a stoplight control for the crosswalk (instead of a HAWK light). It's at a mid-block cross, so as to allow pedestrians to cross the street there and avoid a long walking loop.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8807048,-77.1149949,3a,75y,314.83h,76.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFQ-zlTPhFdEko3u8zTugog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
You'll note that the median on Glebe requires one-way turns (to the right), so the light doesn't really do anything for traffic (such as the black bus in the photo, or the white pickup truck to the left), outside of maybe giving a brief window of opportunity to make a right-hand turn.
I haven't been on Glebe Road through there recently, so I can't say whether I'd ever noticed that. Usually when I'm in that area I use Carlin Springs Road and I park at the garage underneath the Capitals' practice facility.
I did a search and found this image of one of the HAWK installations in DC. I don't know whether the additional signage helps people distinguish between the light phases. I wonder if the upper sign ought to stay "STOP ON STEADY [red circle icon]" to clarify.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fblogs%2Fdr-gridlock%2Ffiles%2F2013%2F04%2FDrivers-view.jpg&hash=c2e166f09bea51b17d1a67ec255ba69185a38e9f)
There are a few in Vancouver WA as a deleted forum user pointed out. I believe I've seen them all on either Mill Plain Blvd or Fourth Plain Blvd. I've seen a couple in Idaho as well close to the Nampa area.
There are also two HAWK-like signals I've seen used as emergency signals for fire stations. One is behind Magic Kingdom, and the other is from my hometown of Biloxi MS.
I don't have much of a problem with them. Their normal operation is dark, but the unusual shape should give away the fact that they're dark under normal operation. If however the area isn't adequately lit, or there is a lack of retroreflective signage, I can see where a problem might arise at night, either with a driver seeing the dark signal and treating it like a stop sign (not realizing it's a HAWK signal) or the light activating and a driver not expecting a flashing yellow light to all of a sudden appear out of nowhere.
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.4178486,-81.5902181,3a,75y,23.87h,96.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2yJLk58nqQNBwh0xURnjlA!2e0!7i3328!8i1664
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4012519,-88.9823149,3a,22.4y,291.38h,95.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX5_zZBAa6sIGlSOSzupggg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: Ace10 on October 12, 2015, 05:34:25 PMI can see ... a driver seeing the dark signal and treating it like a stop sign (not realizing it's a HAWK signal)
Maybe I just haven't read other people's comments very well, but I hadn't thought of this problem until now. I actually think this is a big deal. It's a reasonable expectation that drivers would suddenly come to a stop upon realizing they're facing a dark signal.
The problem I have with the HAWK is the alternating flashing red lights are similar to railroad crossings. At one set of flashing red lights drivers are taught to stop and wait (railroad crossing) while at another drivers are taught to stop and proceed when clear (HAWK). It's confusing.
First off, I hate articles that make something sound more extreme than it is. The article even was generous enough to state that this 'revolutionary' signal has existed for 15 years!
However, I think the signage is the real problem here. Multiple signs state 'Stop on Red'. Well, regardless if the light is a solid red or flashing red, the light is red, and the signs are pretty clear to always stop on red. After all, using the train signal analogy, whenever the lights are flashing red, you are to remain stopped.
Using signage as 1995hoo shows, which details exactly what to do when you see the flashing red lights, clears up the majority of the confusion.
Quote from: tradephoric on October 13, 2015, 01:39:08 AM
The problem I have with the HAWK is the alternating flashing red lights are similar to railroad crossings. At one set of flashing red lights drivers are taught to stop and wait (railroad crossing) while at another drivers are taught to stop and proceed when clear (HAWK). It's confusing.
This is somewhat related, but I read that one city is experimenting with HAWK beacons with simultaneously flashing red lights due to a complaint by the railroad company. Apparently the railroad company thinks that the alternating flashing red lights can easily be mistaken for railroad signals from a distance, especially if they are near railroad tracks.
All of the concerns listed previously in this thread contribute to my dislike of the HAWK pedestrian crossing signal style.
A similar operation could have been designed using a standard signal head, with slight modification, which wouldn't have needed a new signal arrangement design or light pattern to interpret. For example, my suggestion is below [with current HAWK equivalent in brackets]:
1. Normal standby: Vehicle signal green [HAWK is dark]
2. Ped pushes button: Vehicle signal cycles from green to yellow then red [HAWK cycles from dark to flashing yellow to steady yellow, then double red]
3. Ped walk phase: Vehicle signal stays solid red [HAWK stays double red]
4. Ped clearance (FDW): Vehicle signal goes to flashing red (or maybe a flashing yellow) [HAWK goes to flashing red wig wag]
5. Reset: Vehicle signal returns to green [HAWK returns to dark]
We have some HAWKs here in Huntsville, AL, though they are only on UAH.
Huntsville isn't a big fan of mid-block signalized crosswalks that I've seen. The only other signalized crosswalk that's not an intersection that I can think of is the one in downtown Huntsville where Church Street goes through Big Spring Park, and that one uses standard signals.
Quote from: roadfro on October 14, 2015, 02:53:48 AM
A similar operation could have been designed using a standard signal head, with slight modification, which wouldn't have needed a new signal arrangement design or light pattern to interpret. For example, my suggestion is below [with current HAWK equivalent in brackets]:
1. Normal standby: Vehicle signal green [HAWK is dark]
2. Ped pushes button: Vehicle signal cycles from green to yellow then red [HAWK cycles from dark to flashing yellow to steady yellow, then double red]
3. Ped walk phase: Vehicle signal stays solid red [HAWK stays double red]
4. Ped clearance (FDW): Vehicle signal goes to flashing red (or maybe a flashing yellow) [HAWK goes to flashing red wig wag]
5. Reset: Vehicle signal returns to green [HAWK returns to dark]
I'm with you on this. Why do we need a completely new light arrangement and signal pattern when we can adapt the ones we already have and are familiar with?
For example, consider this traditional signal at a crosswalk between intersections at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.212591,-92.0192562,3a,75y,122.88h,83.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s--wPfg7EqAgH8PWU3HrKnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Thousands of students use this crosswalk every day. How would a HAWK improve this?
The UK's Pelican Crossing seems just as good as the HAWK without the misleading double-flashing red:
(also don't force traffic to stop for non-existent ped traffic after the protected phase is complete -- this is only difference between the phases that roadfro is proposing and what we see here)
https://youtu.be/aI3FiOf4rJI
Quote from: jakeroot on October 14, 2015, 03:12:57 PM
The UK's Pelican Crossing seems just as good as the HAWK without the misleading double-flashing red:
(also don't force traffic to stop for non-existent ped traffic after the protected phase is complete -- this is only difference between the phases that roadfro is proposing and what we see here)
https://youtu.be/aI3FiOf4rJI
I agree with Jake. That Pelican crossing seems less ambiguous than the HAWK. What i have also noticed is even when the wig-wag flashing red is being displayed at the HAWK many drivers aren't coming to a complete stop if the crosswalk is clear. Drivers are the HAWK are treating the wig-wag flashing red similar to the flashing yellow of the Pelican crossing. Has anyone else noticed this type of driving behavior?
Quote from: jbnv on October 14, 2015, 03:01:02 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 14, 2015, 02:53:48 AM
A similar operation could have been designed using a standard signal head, with slight modification, which wouldn't have needed a new signal arrangement design or light pattern to interpret. For example, my suggestion is below [with current HAWK equivalent in brackets]:
1. Normal standby: Vehicle signal green [HAWK is dark]
2. Ped pushes button: Vehicle signal cycles from green to yellow then red [HAWK cycles from dark to flashing yellow to steady yellow, then double red]
3. Ped walk phase: Vehicle signal stays solid red [HAWK stays double red]
4. Ped clearance (FDW): Vehicle signal goes to flashing red (or maybe a flashing yellow) [HAWK goes to flashing red wig wag]
5. Reset: Vehicle signal returns to green [HAWK returns to dark]
I'm with you on this. Why do we need a completely new light arrangement and signal pattern when we can adapt the ones we already have and are familiar with?
For example, consider this traditional signal at a crosswalk between intersections at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.212591,-92.0192562,3a,75y,122.88h,83.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s--wPfg7EqAgH8PWU3HrKnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Thousands of students use this crosswalk every day. How would a HAWK improve this?
I agree totally. Every driver knew what a green-yellow-red signal meant. Many localities had traditional signals at crosswalk-only locations. Why do we need to reinvent the traffic signal? Why do we need to spend money on retraining drivers to look for a new confusing signal? We have several HAWK signals now in the South Bend area, and I don't see how they are an improvement.
Nampa just installed one at the intersection of Colorado Ave and 12th Ave Rd (ID-45). Seems to work well. There used to be a marked but unsignalized crosswalk there, but there is so much traffic on 12th that it was dangerous to use (I never like using it). I've crossed here a handful of times with the new HAWK, and drivers generally are good. The biggest problem I noticed is drivers stopping on the flashing yellow before they need to, essentially encouraging us to cross while the DONT WALK is on, and drivers not realizing they can go after stopping when it's flashing red (even though there is a sign stating this fact).
I agree totally. Every driver knew what a green-yellow-red signal meant. Many localities had traditional signals at crosswalk-only locations. Why do we need to reinvent the traffic signal? Why do we need to spend money on retraining drivers to look for a new confusing signal? We have several HAWK signals now in the South Bend area, and I don't see how they are an improvement.
[/quote]
Where are the HAWK signals in South Bend? I've was there quite a bit earlier this year and I've yet to see one.
The first HAWK beacon in the Hampton Roads area (that I know of) went up near Thomas Nelson CC this past spring at a busy crosswalk that frequently held up traffic for several minutes during class changes. Drivers seem pretty good at stopping on the solid red phase, however the required stop and go at the flashing red phase is either ignored and blown through, or treated like a red light for its duration.
I'm not a fan of HAWK beacons, as they they don't seem to be an improvement over placing RYG signals at crosswalks (such as the one near CNU along Warwick)
Nexus 6
Quote from: Mohkfry on October 14, 2015, 06:50:01 PM
I agree totally. Every driver knew what a green-yellow-red signal meant. Many localities had traditional signals at crosswalk-only locations. Why do we need to reinvent the traffic signal? Why do we need to spend money on retraining drivers to look for a new confusing signal? We have several HAWK signals now in the South Bend area, and I don't see how they are an improvement.
Where are the HAWK signals in South Bend? I've was there quite a bit earlier this year and I've yet to see one.
[/quote]
South Bend's HAWK signals are mostly in the Notre Dame area, on Douglas Road and Twyckenham Drive. I'd provide a GSV, but they were installed after the last Google car visit. Here's a dull YouTube of one: https://youtu.be/DHw0-tDqSAk (https://youtu.be/DHw0-tDqSAk)
Quote from: theline on October 14, 2015, 04:10:30 PM
I agree totally. Every driver knew what a green-yellow-red signal meant. Many localities had traditional signals at crosswalk-only locations. Why do we need to reinvent the traffic signal? Why do we need to spend money on retraining drivers to look for a new confusing signal? We have several HAWK signals now in the South Bend area, and I don't see how they are an improvement.
The same can be said for the flashing yellow arrow. Drivers got along fine from the era of dinosaurs to last decade without it.
Ann Arbor, MI started using HAWK signals about 3 years ago. The number of pedestrian fatalities has increased drastically, because there are many out-of-town drivers that don't have a clue what those lights are. PLEASE USE TRADITIONAL STOPLIGHTS!
Quote from: tradephoric on October 13, 2015, 01:39:08 AM
The problem I have with the HAWK is the alternating flashing red lights are similar to railroad crossings. At one set of flashing red lights drivers are taught to stop and wait (railroad crossing) while at another drivers are taught to stop and proceed when clear (HAWK). It's confusing.
They mandated that red flashing beacons 12 feet apart over separate lanes flash in unison to avoid confusion for a railroad signal with alternating flashing heads, and then introduced HAWK....with wigwag alternating flashing beacons with a meaning completely separate from that of other signals with the same appearance. Way to go. Clap clap.
Not a fan of HAWK. The dark default phase, the wigwag flashing....a solution in search of a problem.
I'm not sure why the wigwag pattern is a problem. If a car proceeds through it, somebody will probably die. (My problem is why we need a new signal pattern at all.)
Quote from: jbnv on October 18, 2015, 08:40:40 AM
I'm not sure why the wigwag pattern is a problem. If a car proceeds through it, somebody will probably die. (My problem is why we need a new signal pattern at all.)
The wigwags are for when the flashing don't walk phase; cars are allowed to proceed after a stop if the crosswalk is clear. Of course, if Quantum Pedestrian is occupying all lanes simultaneously, it won't be safe for anyone to go.
I hate the wigwag phase. We already had a signal indication for "stop, then proceed if clear" called flashing red. Flashing DON'T WALK also already had a meaning--finish crossing if safe to do so; do not expect traffic PERPENDICULAR to your path to be allowed to cross your path (traffic starting parallel and turning could possibly cross your path, but never before traffic starting 90 degrees from the crosswalk in question). We had an interpretation of all-dark traffic signals: treat as all-way stop because signals would never be dark if functioning properly. Wigwag flashing red at a railroad crossing or atop a school bus has always meant DO NOT MOVE until the lights go out completely.
HAWK violates expectations and redefines existing signal interpretations.
At mid-block signalized crosswalks, Los Angeles has a signal that operates with green-yellow-flashing red sequence. Flashing red during the entire pedestrian phase (WALK and FLASHING DON'T WALK). THey exist primarily in Downtown LA and on select retail corridors like Fairfax Ave. People seem to understand that you need to stop for any pedestrian, but once you are clear of pedestrians, you can make a quick stop and then continue (i.e. no need to wait for green).
I believe that HAWK signals were meant to address ped crossing at full intersections (peds and auto traffic on the side street) without inducing more traffic on the side streets. I know from experience that where two parallel side streets meet a major street, the side street that meets the major at a signal will have more traffic then the street with the stop sign, because most drivers know that it would be easier to make a left or go through with a signal. (A very clear example of this in LA is Orlando Ave providing traffic signals at 3rd, Beverly, and Melrose, but the streets at either side Croft and Kings have much less traffic. Orlando Ave has become a de facto La Cienega bypass while Croft and Kings are largely quiet residential streets by LA standards -even thoguh all streets are the same width.) The HAWK signals that I have seen do not provide a traffic signal for auto traffic on the side street, even though they provide a traffic signal for pedestrians.
Now, IMO, this does not justify the addition of a new confusing traffic signal. I prefer a standard RYG signal in such a circumstance. To allay concerns over side street traffic, I would force right turns at the main street (so that left turns and through traffic is not induced). I am not aware of any installed in the City of LA, but there are plenty that I see in the DC area.
Quote from: mrsman on November 02, 2015, 06:15:07 AM
I believe that HAWK signals were meant to address ped crossing at full intersections (peds and auto traffic on the side street) without inducing more traffic on the side streets. <...> The HAWK signals that I have seen do not provide a traffic signal for auto traffic on the side street, even though they provide a traffic signal for pedestrians.
According to the MUTCD, a HAWK signal is just used at unsignalized marked crosswalks. However, guidance in Section 4F.02 indicates that they are not supposed to be used at unsignalized intersections:
QuoteGuidance:
04 When an engineering study finds that installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon is justified, then:
A. The pedestrian hybrid beacon should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs,
A HAWK couldn't really provide a vehicle indication to a side street anyway (at least nine that would make sense). If that were needed, a full signal would be a better idea.
EDIT: Fix formatting.