I was wondering how common a "taper" is in the United States. I thought we Dutchies copied it from the Americans, but when I look at the numerous freeway videos available on Youtube, I don't see any at all.
A taper is a second lane from an entrance to a freeway which has to merge immediately, unlike the regular merging lanes which allows for traffic to pick up speed before merging to the left. If you're into a taper, you have to find a gap between traffic on the right lane of the upcoming freeway, and then merge between it.
A lot of people are scared of it, frightened that they can't find a spot to merge into, and get "squashed" between the traffic. The following photo was shot in my city, and shows a taper. It was closed at the time, because traffic had stalled because of a truck breakdown further downstream. Leaving the taper open would exacerbate the traffic congestion, because traffic has to stop to merge.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2668%2F4031948584_2c0c3a9f66_o.jpg&hash=ac9b2ed7bf633df0265714e07b886ca5ab0bd565)
There are also tapers that split off the freeway, adding an additional exit lane, increasing capacity. Unfortunately, their usage is usually low, and until recently, signage in the Netherlands didn't support this type of road configuration.
Old signage, you don't see the exiting taper unless you're already at the spot.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.static.flickr.com%2F3381%2F3334882007_98c276df6a.jpg%3Fv%3D0&hash=1927d9dbed039d3d44dc3d2fa860ebff9118af1e)
New signage, the taper is signed, and comes with additional signage showing the taper on the signs.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2451%2F3546289950_a93a8aac36.jpg%3Fv%3D0&hash=4f5787b2ef890581e4c5ddb5c5259e12346bc276)
Cases of the "taper" on on-ramps do exist within the U.S (there's a few in the DC area if you know where to look, and also at I-94/494/694 in Maple Grove, MN), but are fairly rare. And they're also frowned upon by FHWA.
Having the "taper" on exit ramps (I've heard the term "Decision Lane" used before) is much more common in the states.
I've encountered a few, and didn't know I had to merge until the last minute, because it wasn't signed well.
Here's an example of one that I encountered. The taper is about 1:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR8j3yNdjWY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR8j3yNdjWY)
Be well,
Bryant
I've seem them in Boston quite a bit.
For example: Where you merge onto I-90 WB from Route 128 NB.
Quite dangerous in my opinion.
Here's one from Fort Wayne, which may be gone now because of the construction. The corresponding SB exit on I-69 also seems to fit, although exit configurations like that are not uncommon:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.140288,-85.129897&spn=0.001501,0.003433&t=k&z=19 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.140288,-85.129897&spn=0.001501,0.003433&t=k&z=19)
Most places I've seen do the "taper" before the actual merge onto the freeway. A 2 lane on-ramp will merge to 1 lane before it gets close enough to the freeway to merge, as seen here along I-95:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=27.999567,-80.63069&spn=0.00176,0.003433&t=k&z=19 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=27.999567,-80.63069&spn=0.00176,0.003433&t=k&z=19)
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.035905,-89.451467&spn=0.004988,0.009645&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=790+N+4th+St,+Platteville,+Grant,+Wisconsin+53818&ll=43.035905,-89.451467&spn=0.004988,0.009645&t=k&z=17)
This one in Madison has a four lane ramp caused by a two lane left turn from NB connecting with a two lane right turn - it tapers to 2 lanes almost immediately, then to one as it merges onto the mainline.
There are at least two in Richmond: at the point that I-64 east merges onto I-95 south, and at the end of the onramp from VA 161 to I-95 south. The latter tends to create major traffic problems during rush hour.
Minnesota is full of them. Don't get me started.
CT has one on the 4-lane C&D road off Exit 23 on I-84 EB in Waterbury. 2-lanes from each side merging into one another. However, there isn't much traffic, so it isn't much of an issue.
Mississippi used to have them on the northern stretch if I-55 in Jackson, but they were removed during when the highway was resurfaced.
The only one I'm personally aware of in PA (which by no means makes it the only one), is where the 2 lane ramp coming from the borough of Millvale meets PA-28 (southbound) right before the 40th St. bridge.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=15212&sll=43.035905,-89.451467&sspn=0.005583,0.009645&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Pittsburgh,+Allegheny,+Pennsylvania+15212&ll=40.47577,-79.970799&spn=0.001453,0.003433&t=k&z=19 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=15212&sll=43.035905,-89.451467&sspn=0.005583,0.009645&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Pittsburgh,+Allegheny,+Pennsylvania+15212&ll=40.47577,-79.970799&spn=0.001453,0.003433&t=k&z=19)
This situation should be changed in a couple of years when they redo Rt. 28 between here and I-279.
(The reverse "taper", where it is an exiting ramp, is found pretty often.)
Quote from: Chris on November 04, 2009, 06:19:02 AM
I was wondering how common a "taper" is in the United States. I thought we Dutchies copied it from the Americans, but when I look at the numerous freeway videos available on Youtube, I don't see any at all.
Chicagoland is chock full of them in the suburban areas. They're more common for exits than entrances, but there's a fair number of entrances that have them.
Inside lane merges are used quite extensively on the British motorway network, but with a special striping arrangement (called "tiger tails") which is designed to establish lateral separation between the merges for ramp lane 2 and ramp lane 1. Tiger tails are also used for lane drops with optional lanes, which is the reverse of the merging situation.
In the US lane drops with optional lanes are used quite extensively, but are considered difficult to sign. As others have noted, inside lane merges are deprecated but are still used by a number of agencies, including in new construction (Illinois portion of Borman Expressway comes to mind).
QuoteMinnesota is full of them. Don't get me started.
Do tell. The only one I recall is at 94/494/694 in Maple Grove (as I already mentioned).
Tennessee seems to uses them often both on exits and entrances.
For example, on I-65 south of Nashville,
The SB exit and NB entrances of Exit 53, Saturn Pkwy.; Exit 59, TN 840; and Exit 65, TN 96 among many others.
To me, these so called "tapers" look like a design flaw or problem in the highway plan.I mean, the lane is practically getting smashed.I wouldn't use that lane anyway.
I-95 southbound merging onto the Cross Bronx has a situation like that (street view) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York&ll=40.829008,-73.842888&spn=0,359.98071&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.828983,-73.842999&panoid=9e0tWB4jAx2yVNndBEnPMA&cbp=12,266.67,,0,-2.49).
The New Jersey Turnpike at the end of the quad-carriageway system also sort of does (seen here) (https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey050/i-095_nj_tpk_sb_exit_008_02.jpg). That one gives you a significant amount of space to merge, although it does still fly in the face of the typical convention that you make the right or left lane end before or after the merge point rather than having two lanes in the middle forced together. Usually it's safer that way, hence the convention.
As for diverging/exiting, "optional lanes" are all over the place.
In Oklahoma, there are several situations where a taper *could* exist, but generally how it is handled is to have the left-hand lane end before the ramp reaches the mainline. Kansas generally handles the situation by simply adding two lanes then having one or both end after a reasonable period.
The exit taper situation generally presents itself not in the way that is shown, but more like the second-to-right lane merely bifurcating itself at the exit point. This is often signed like so:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Di%252F435%252Fi435_03.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=5a5a08fa945a3d38bddb572d421f6b5067843bc0)
In the new MUTCD, this will be disallowed, and the new signs will be more like the Canadian ones in the same situation. These signs in Milwaukee illustrate the future of diagrammatic signing in the U.S.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3209.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=aa065ca958a09bd2dbdd2b121b26b798f6a59582)
^^ That first sign is hard to comprehend at 60 - 65 mph. The second one is better, also more like international standards (though that's not really an important issue in the U.S.)
QuoteIn Oklahoma, there are several situations where a taper *could* exist, but generally how it is handled is to have the left-hand lane end before the ramp reaches the mainline. Kansas generally handles the situation by simply adding two lanes then having one or both end after a reasonable period.
Agreed, and I wonder if people are perhaps getting confused. What you described is what I see *FAR MORE OFTEN* than a true "taper"...
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 04, 2009, 10:31:55 PM
In the new MUTCD, this will be disallowed, and the new signs will be more like the Canadian ones in the same situation. These signs in Milwaukee illustrate the future of diagrammatic signing in the U.S.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3209.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=aa065ca958a09bd2dbdd2b121b26b798f6a59582)
Up arrows instead of down now for through lanes?
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 04, 2009, 10:31:55 PMIn the new MUTCD, this [stippled-arrow diagrammatics] will be disallowed, and the new signs [one-arrow-per-lane diagrammatics] will be more like the Canadian ones in the same situation. These signs in Milwaukee illustrate the future of diagrammatic signing in the U.S.
At the moment that change is only a proposal. I am aware a number of agencies, including MoDOT, have been going for one-arrow-per-lane diagrammatics in a big way, but FHWA tried to make this change in the last major revision (2002) and failed. I would guess that stippled-arrow diagrammatics would be retained as an option (they are useful in indicating left exits and exits on sharp curves) and diagrammatics will not be limited to situations where there is an optional lane, as is also currently proposed.
Here in Canada Tapers are only used for off-ramps.
Here's a quick example:
Approaching the off-ramp:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg687.imageshack.us%2Fimg687%2F9537%2F407dv4eastlg800x600.jpg&hash=0e780d8d4c07f5772661f78979a81e86d9faee5f)
At the off-ramp:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg687.imageshack.us%2Fimg687%2F6301%2F407dv5eastlg800x600.jpg&hash=c6984adad243431311a5ab3c20087e9b1d7f4886)
I would get scared if they were on-ramps because there is very little room for the inside lane to merge with traffic. In an off-ramp, the opposite of merging occurs, so its fine.
The stippled-arrow versus one-arrow-per-lane diagrammatic issue was the subject of my comments to FHWA during the 2008 MUTCD rulemaking process. My submission can be found here:
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064806a56a4&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf (http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064806a56a4&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf)
We have those down here.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 05, 2009, 11:38:14 AM
The stippled-arrow versus one-arrow-per-lane diagrammatic issue was the subject of my comments to FHWA during the 2008 MUTCD rulemaking process. My submission can be found here:
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064806a56a4&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf (http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064806a56a4&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf)
Fantastic job, Mr. Winkler. Said my thoughts on the matter exactly, except you had the history from the '78 MUTCD to back it up. Bravo!
Quote from: Chris on November 05, 2009, 05:33:55 AM
^^ That first sign is hard to comprehend at 60 - 65 mph. The second one is better, also more like international standards (though that's not really an important issue in the U.S.)
It's really not, because diagrammatics such as this are not really meant to designate where individual lanes go. Also, they tend to appear rather far back from the interchange, giving way to more traditional lane-assignment signage as the interchange approaches. As you can see in Mr. Winkler's comments, they are really much more useful for simplifying complex interchanges in a streamlined way. Because the signs are so large (that sign is 4 lanes wide) and unusual compared to normal signs (there is exactly two that I know of in Oklahoma, one in OKC and one in Tulsa), they're very attention-grabbing and really carry a "hey, look, big interchange coming up, pay attention" message.
Here is the same sign from farther away. Notice the size of this behemoth.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Di%252F435%252Fi435_02.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=a552c02f9f4c7f4430260abac7b1a28d48f9713e)
Here are some more examples from other states. Kansas is the best at diagrammatics, but I don't have many more pictures from there online as of yet.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Dmo%252Fst_louis_county%252Fimg_3534.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=5129d1ec957a6d2ad7f56068475673d420a43f21)
MO
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fcabool%252Fimg_0900.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=be665608ec55b1c1751d34079cb25a10c754c663)
MO again. Notice the lack of lane lines.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3193.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=8df0a657f8bb92234e7043e1d7d65a3f0e76b552)
Wisconsin shows us how diagrammatics can help in complex intersections like the Zoo Interchange in Milwaukee. Never mind the lane lines...this diagram concisely gets across the message of "45 to the left, 94 straight, 894 to the right". The exact details of lane assignment isn't important at this point...the main reason of having the diagram IMO is so that people can start filtering to the left or the right as needed, then when the traditional down-arrow signage appears, you can select the correct lane much easier, already being close to it.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3190.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=65226687e9010c0a6050cac9d5a108605905ff30)
An example from the same interchange with NO diagrammatic. See how much easier it is with the diagram?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3201.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=71f4954e112004913ce7536752542098b0cf50af)
Another example from Milwaukee's Stadium Interchange.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Droadtrips%252Fwaukesha%252Fimg_3248.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=e81bc064a43274779eee4cd8a0146ac064da25d4)
Part of one from Madison, as well as the left side of Dan Garnell's head, which really has no navigational value for travelers.
NY uses tapers pretty much for exiting only (in this scenario, they are actually very common). There is actually one used for entering, but it could be easily be removed (it's due to striping).
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=43.076764,-77.623268&spn=0.005016,0.007006&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=43.076764,-77.623268&spn=0.005016,0.007006&t=k&z=17)
What is common, on the other hand, is inadequate acceleration/deceleration lanes, causing ramps to act as tapers even when they aren't.
Personally I think NY over-does the use of diagrammatic signs, especially the Thruway Authority in Buffalo. Check out this sign, and look at the interchange it leads to (also note that Google misspelled Thruway).
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=42.862785,-78.792036&spn=0,359.985988&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.86286,-78.792022&panoid=C1gVnLHggCcnEzC6hdNc2Q&cbp=12,184.98,,0,-14.98 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=42.862785,-78.792036&spn=0,359.985988&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.86286,-78.792022&panoid=C1gVnLHggCcnEzC6hdNc2Q&cbp=12,184.98,,0,-14.98)
The beauty of those stippled-arrow diagrammatic signs is that if done right, there's no room for ambiguity - it spells out for you exactly what goes where graphically, and a picture is worth a thousand words.
I get the sense, though, that that doesn't always entirely occur to Joe motorist. I have on more than one occasion fascinated a passenger in the car with my ability to read highway signs and get in the proper lane so far in advance of when I absolutely need to be in it. Most people don't seem to be capable of picking out the little details in diagrammatic signs the way I am. People who aren't highway enthusiasts don't notice signs to such a degree. I remember when I was explaining Clearview to my father - he never noticed that the font on highway signs was ever any different until I pointed it out to him.
So the need to grab attention is really important, as otherwise a lot of people will fail to fully notice and end up going the wrong way.
Another such "mind blowing" moment with my father, actually, involves optional lanes. The location in question was the ramp off the Throggs Neck Bridge onto the Cross Island Parkway. He was asking why I wasn't getting in the right lane to get off. I told him the second lane to the right (which we were in) would also allow us to get off, as the signs clearly indicated. To him, it didn't occur to try and actually read the signs in detail. His level of comprehension is nothing more than "I want to get off, I should be in the right lane".
Now, granted, the vast majority of the time that's true, but obviously not always.
Quote from: Chris on November 05, 2009, 05:33:55 AM
^^ That first sign is hard to comprehend at 60 - 65 mph. The second one is better, also more like international standards (though that's not really an important issue in the U.S.)
These diagramatical overheads are always followed with lane-specific arrows. You never have to rely solely on them.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fsplit.jpg&hash=4a99468a8655132a3a5fda92c5fc2589eae89102)
This is my favorite diagrammatic in Kansas City:
Google Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City+KS&sll=42.850721,-78.789139&sspn=0.009218,0.022552&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City,+Wyandotte,+Kansas+66103&ll=39.054485,-94.632626&spn=0.019396,0.045104&z=15&layer=c&cbll=39.054385,-94.632804&panoid=xwqiEFvhMdjUZtv7OaCl1Q&cbp=12,55.63,,0,0.87)
Out here in California, we will never have nice new reflective style signs, let alone a diagram sign. :-/
Our signs are old pieces of crap that make my eyes bleed. X-(
Quote from: Riverside Frwy on November 06, 2009, 12:32:54 AM
Out here in California, we will never have nice new reflective style signs, let alone a diagram sign. :-/
Our signs are old pieces of crap that make my eyes bleed. X-(
Not sure what you're talking about but Caltrans is slowly replacing older button copy signs with new reflective signs that should include exit numbers. IMO, the lack of use of the diagrammatical sign in California is not a big deal.
those old porcelain signs are some of the most attractive signs found anywhere! I fail to see how something like this makes you bleed:
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19580152i1.jpg)
there are diagrammatical signs in CA - I think the one on I-15 southbound at the I-215 split just south of Cajon Pass is still there.
I made a little video of a Dutch taper this morning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VUZPjnKjmM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VUZPjnKjmM)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on November 06, 2009, 09:46:51 AM
those old porcelain signs are some of the most attractive signs found anywhere! I fail to see how something like this makes you bleed:
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19580152i1.jpg)
Agreed...I tend to look at older California BGS as a working history of the road I'm on. I've always loved the "patches" or "shadow" remnants of what route(s) the freeway used to host (like the pic above). I also love the "Dirty white" look of the lettering and the shields along with the shade of green they use.
I absolutely
hate the new Interstate shields they use on the newer signs.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 05, 2009, 11:58:18 PM
This is my favorite diagrammatic in Kansas City:
Google Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City+KS&sll=42.850721,-78.789139&sspn=0.009218,0.022552&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City,+Wyandotte,+Kansas+66103&ll=39.054485,-94.632626&spn=0.019396,0.045104&z=15&layer=c&cbll=39.054385,-94.632804&panoid=xwqiEFvhMdjUZtv7OaCl1Q&cbp=12,55.63,,0,0.87)
Holy arrows! They look like a UFO and its offspring.
Quote from: Riverside Frwy on November 06, 2009, 12:32:54 AM
Out here in California, we will never have nice new reflective style signs, let alone a diagram sign. :-/
Our signs are old pieces of crap that make my eyes bleed. X-(
That blasphemous statement will not be (and apparently has not been) tolerated on here ;-) :)
Quote from: thenetwork on November 06, 2009, 01:52:16 PM
I absolutely hate the new Interstate shields they use on the newer signs.
the surface-level shields that are the wrong shape are even worse!
Quote from: thenetwork on November 06, 2009, 01:52:16 PM
I absolutely hate the new Interstate shields they use on the newer signs.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2Fnew_ca_sign.jpg&hash=b51a84ab13af46b4121827adca81b8f41db89730)
I don't know. This I-40 shield looks OK compared to the older I-15. There are some horrid looking 3-digit interstate shields on signs in the field and as agentsteel53 stated, there's a bunch of awful looking triangular 2-digit interstate shields
used as reassurance markers in existence too. I'm hoping there aren't many left as I have started to see some newer 2-digit interstate shields that look like my avatar starting to pop up around California over the last couple of years.
@Agentsteel53: There's nothing wrong with either the older I-15 and the newer I-40 shields on the sign. The guy I was replying to said he hates the Interstate shields used on the newer signs.
what's wrong with the 15? Both look fine to me. Standard shape, margins, etc.
The California landscape is so stunningly beautiful and its "control cities" so relevant in America's "story" that I consider every single delapidated sign to be a priceless work of art......
The lagrest diagrammatic sign I've ever seen is right in my neck of the woods, at the IH 90 / 190 interchange in southeast Buffalo:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg254.imageshack.us%2Fimg254%2F1858%2F190sign.png&hash=30b4f0d8afb375cbe03cd884c2a4d463ace8d5ab)
Of course, IH 190 is no longer a toll road. :P
You sure it is no longer a toll road? I see on a Rand McNally 2010 atlas that a booth exist just off that interchange.</off topic>
That's an oversight of the map people then. Tolls were removed around 2006 from that stretch of I-190. However, tolls still so exist on the Grand Island bridges further north. There have been discussions in the past about taking those away too.
Why does the Thruway have a diagrammic sign there anyways? There's no reason for it! It's just big and ugly.
Yet another waste of money from the NYSTA . . . :banghead:
I saw 3 California diagrammatic signs this weekend:
15/215 north split
10/60 west split
end of 62 splitting into 10 east/west
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 05, 2009, 11:58:18 PM
This is my favorite diagrammatic in Kansas City:
Google Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City+KS&sll=42.850721,-78.789139&sspn=0.009218,0.022552&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Southwest+Blvd,+Kansas+City,+Wyandotte,+Kansas+66103&ll=39.054485,-94.632626&spn=0.019396,0.045104&z=15&layer=c&cbll=39.054385,-94.632804&panoid=xwqiEFvhMdjUZtv7OaCl1Q&cbp=12,55.63,,0,0.87)
Thats insane...
BigMatt
How about a light up diagrammicle sign?
http://picasaweb.google.com/Iansignal/NewYorkTrafficSignalsAndRoadSigns#5296426618212051234 (http://picasaweb.google.com/Iansignal/NewYorkTrafficSignalsAndRoadSigns#5296426618212051234)
Anyone have a picture of the old button copy diagrammatic in Dallas with the blue reflectors? I think it was in the Mixmaster.
I've seen them in the U.S. and hate them. Mostly because they're usually poorly signed, and it's not common here, so even with proper signage there's no guarantee that people will use it right.
Sykotyk
Quote from: citrus on November 08, 2009, 02:52:15 PM
I saw 3 California diagrammatic signs this weekend:
15/215 north split
10/60 west split
end of 62 splitting into 10 east/west
Just got back from Las Vegas and there is a diagrammatic sign at the I-15/I-40 interchange in Barstow.
BTW, citrus, don't copy my avatar! :sombrero:
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 04, 2009, 12:56:24 PM
Inside lane merges are used quite extensively on the British motorway network, but with a special striping arrangement (called "tiger tails") which is designed to establish lateral separation between the merges for ramp lane 2 and ramp lane 1. Tiger tails are also used for lane drops with optional lanes, which is the reverse of the merging situation.
The traditional British design had two lanes on entry and exit ramps but without the "tiger tail" treatment. These are no longer being applied due to safety problems where two vehicles could be side by side on the entry ramp at the point of merge. Newer ramps have just a single lane and many existing ones are being restriped into a single lane. Where traffic levels are high they are being tiger tailed where space allows.
Below is a typical example of the traditional design. As far as I'm aware the UK is the only country to have two lane on-ramps without any separation where there are no lane gains at the merge - unless anyone can tell me different.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsabre-roads.org.uk%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fuserpics%2F10163%2Fnormal_wai0204.jpg&hash=ca104de1b87bbca125365878795156986de6a0a2) (http://sabre-roads.org.uk/gallery/albums/userpics/10163/wai0204.jpg)
Quote from: Truvelo on November 12, 2009, 09:47:50 AM
Below is a typical example of the traditional design. As far as I'm aware the UK is the only country to have two lane on-ramps without any separation where there are no lane gains at the merge - unless anyone can tell me different.
I've seen a similar design in Illinois (and a few other places) where there are two lanes on the ramp, one lane drops just before the merge, and there is no lane gain at the merge. It is commonly used where there are two left turn lanes onto the entrance ramp.
Example: Roosevelt and I-355, northbound:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.859557,-88.038297&spn=0,359.964209&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.859628,-88.040554&panoid=lSBrAD09bo7KvwyPrc9GdQ&cbp=12,12.12,,0,5 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.859557,-88.038297&spn=0,359.964209&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.859628,-88.040554&panoid=lSBrAD09bo7KvwyPrc9GdQ&cbp=12,12.12,,0,5)
Two lane ramp looses a lane before the merge, and no lane is added to I-355 after the merge.
The largest diagrammatic sign I have seen is in Birmingham, AL along I-65 approaching the I-20/59 interchange:
Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=birmingham,+al&sll=36.968598,-82.595623&sspn=0.012292,0.019054&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Birmingham,+Jefferson,+Alabama&ll=33.533127,-86.824136&spn=0.003188,0.004764&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=33.533207,-86.82411&panoid=UiqOiLxNgcCuQNT9SiVrww&cbp=12,200.89,,0,-14.36)
The more I thought of it, there are several merging tapers that were never used on the west side of Cleveland -- they only allow traffic on one of the lanes, then stripe off the other.
- SB I-71 to SB SR 176/Jennings freeway (actually its the ramp coming from I-90 East to I-71 South which includes a crossover ramp to SR-176.
- WB I-480 to SR-237 South (Airport Exit)
- NB I-71/SR 176 to I-490 East.
- (I think) NB I-77 to East 55th Street (Unsigned I-490 East)
And based on the way people drive in Cleveland, it's no wonder why despite the laneage being there for over 30 years, it was never implemented.
There are also some two-lane on-ramps in the Rochester area where there are no lane gains on the freeway. The second lane is usually very short though, and I can't think of a case where it shouldn't be removed altogether.
Quote from: Truvelo on November 12, 2009, 09:47:50 AM
Below is a typical example of the traditional design. As far as I'm aware the UK is the only country to have two lane on-ramps without any separation where there are no lane gains at the merge - unless anyone can tell me different.
These situations are probably a lot more common than you'd think...
I can think of a few examples in Nevada. Most come from having two left turn lanes from the cross street onto the ramp, which must merge into a single lane before making the merge onto the freeway mainline. I-80 EB onramp at McCarran Blvd West in Reno (Google Map (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=N+McCarran+Blvd+%26+Sierra+Highlands+Dr,+Reno,+NV&sll=39.533154,-119.864505&sspn=0.021316,0.045104&g=11000+N+McCarran+Blvd,+Reno,+NV&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=N+McCarran+Blvd+%26+Sierra+Highlands+Dr,+Reno,+Washoe,+Nevada+89503&ll=39.524419,-119.85907&spn=0.00533,0.011276&t=k&z=17)) or US 95 SB onramp at Craig Road in Las Vegas (Google Map (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Craig+Road+%26+Tenaya+Way,+Las+Vegas,+NV&sll=39.524419,-119.85907&sspn=0.00533,0.011276&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=W+Craig+Rd+%26+N+Tenaya+Way,+Las+Vegas,+Clark,+Nevada+89129&ll=36.238129,-115.246292&spn=0.005573,0.011276&t=k&z=17)) are two that come to mind.
The difference between these examples and the photo above is that the two lanes on the onramp merge into one further upstream from the gore, which greatly reduces the likelihood of having two vehicles next to each other at the end of the ramp.
Quote from: codyg1985 on November 12, 2009, 11:52:42 AM
The largest diagrammatic sign I have seen is in Birmingham, AL along I-65 approaching the I-20/59 interchange:
Street View (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=birmingham,+al&sll=36.968598,-82.595623&sspn=0.012292,0.019054&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Birmingham,+Jefferson,+Alabama&ll=33.533127,-86.824136&spn=0.003188,0.004764&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=33.533207,-86.82411&panoid=UiqOiLxNgcCuQNT9SiVrww&cbp=12,200.89,,0,-14.36)
Like This:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs761.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx260%2Fjdbarnes1234%2F100_0370.jpg&hash=fb5b7031e91c853aec86f9c781ee83196da0bc29)
Quote from: myosh_tino on November 12, 2009, 12:35:57 AM
Quote from: citrus on November 08, 2009, 02:52:15 PM
I saw 3 California diagrammatic signs this weekend:
15/215 north split
10/60 west split
end of 62 splitting into 10 east/west
Just got back from Las Vegas and there is a diagrammatic sign at the I-15/I-40 interchange in Barstow.
BTW, citrus, don't copy my avatar! :sombrero:
Heh....sorry about that...but I can see "the 5" when I walk out my apartment door...
Quote from: citrus on November 13, 2009, 01:17:41 AM
Heh....sorry about that...but I can see "the 5" when I walk out my apartment door...
No problem but the "5" on your interstate shield is too big for California standards.
BTW, when you say "the 5", is it safe to assume you're living in southern California? When people use the word "the" in front of a route number (like "the 5" or "the 101" or "the 405") it makes us northerners shudder. :sombrero:
Quote from: jdb1234 on November 12, 2009, 09:42:24 PM
Like This:
http://s761.photobucket.com/albums/xx260/jdbarnes1234/100_0370.jpg (http://s761.photobucket.com/albums/xx260/jdbarnes1234/100_0370.jpg)
What's that, a Christmas tree? :sombrero:
Never seen such signs in Europe, although fork-signs (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Old_Autobahn_DE.jpg) are common.
Quote from: myosh_tino on November 13, 2009, 03:50:03 AM
Quote from: citrus on November 13, 2009, 01:17:41 AM
Heh....sorry about that...but I can see "the 5" when I walk out my apartment door...
No problem but the "5" on your interstate shield is too big for California standards.
BTW, when you say "the 5", is it safe to assume you're living in southern California? When people use the word "the" in front of a route number (like "the 5" or "the 101" or "the 405") it makes us northerners shudder. :sombrero:
Yes, I live in San Diego (unfortunately). It does feel natural to use the definite article when I'm down there though....but it sounds weird when people refer to highways elsewhere though.
Back on topic, here (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=warwick,+ri&sll=32.881,-117.238&sspn=0.042239,0.090895&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Warwick,+Kent,+Rhode+Island&ll=41.67881,-71.477137&spn=0.037566,0.090895&z=14&layer=c&cbll=41.678634,-71.47716&panoid=T1IoIgxNoIoeA8ylCWj33A&cbp=12,233.94,,0,-9.41)'s a diagrammatic sign that I absolutely hate. The "tail" is way too long. This sign is relatively new (replaced sometime in the early 2000's), and I thought the old one looked a lot better.
^^ Yeah, I agree the tail is too long. It could be shortened at least a 1/4.
Be well,
Bryant
In NYSDOT's rather slow but ongoing effort to modernize the signage on the Cross Bronx, a shiny diagrammatic has shown up eastbound for a junction that at this point is actually three exits away:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg18.imageshack.us%2Fimg18%2F4614%2Fdscn6057b.jpg&hash=234e480212b399ffd75f799ff1aa5dbc057b8dbf)
Brand new sign bridge, too. This isn't a replacement, there previously was no signage in that particular location of any sort (as the street view demonstrates) (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York&ll=40.834252,-73.863723&spn=0,359.990355&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=40.834216,-73.863606&panoid=oX_oMXZ3VQZMqaQMH6JHgw&cbp=12,119.17,,0,5).
It's a nice addition, considering how many out of state truckers may not be aware of the necessity to stay left to follow I-95 there - especially since the configuration of lane pickups and drops over the following couple miles is such that a car in the left lane at exit 6B will have to shift left twice to end up in the right lane at exit 8B!
I think most drivers know what state New Haven is in, though. :pan:
Quote from: Duke87 on November 25, 2009, 01:39:50 AM
I think most drivers know what state New Haven is in, though. :pan:
one can never have too little faith in the dolts that are churned out by the American public school mill.
I saw a taper on an I-75 entrance ramp to eastbound I-69 on my way here for Thanksgiving. I'm thinking it'll probably be gone whenever the interchange gets rebuilt.