HAWK Thread

[Rothman]

Three of these popped up in Gainesville, Florida. "Midblock Pedestrian Signals" (MPS's) are an experimental variant of the HAWK/PHB signal being tested across FL. District 2 has 4 of them in total. Two have been installed on SR-26 / W University Ave with raised crosswalks.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/a8fuxuUyADStjgHB7?g_st=ic

The sign has been replaced with an 11th edition variant stating "STOP ON RED / YIELD ON FLASHING RED AFTER STOP"





These basically are what many of us have called for in terms of HAWK beacons. The phasing is G/Y/SR/FR, with Steady Red displayed for the walk indication (+buffer) and Flashing Red displayed for the ped clearance interval.

Video from another installation: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QY2cYBbMadg

Unfortunately, compliance is still sub-par just like HAWK/PHB signals...

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

[jakeroot]

Three of these popped up in Gainesville, Florida. "Midblock Pedestrian Signals" (MPS's) are an experimental variant of the HAWK/PHB signal being tested across FL. District 2 has 4 of them in total. Two have been installed on SR-26 / W University Ave with raised crosswalks.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/a8fuxuUyADStjgHB7?g_st=ic

The sign has been replaced with an 11th edition variant stating "STOP ON RED / YIELD ON FLASHING RED AFTER STOP"





These basically are what many of us have called for in terms of HAWK beacons. The phasing is G/Y/SR/FR, with Steady Red displayed for the walk indication (+buffer) and Flashing Red displayed for the ped clearance interval.

Video from another installation: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QY2cYBbMadg

Unfortunately, compliance is still sub-par just like HAWK/PHB signals...

Thank you for sharing.

I was not aware that Florida was testing a variant of the HAWK. But that's great to see.

Overall, I think these are massively superior to HAWKs. They use familiar phasing already known to drivers, and they don't rest in dark like HAWKs.

On the other hand...are they really a variant of the HAWK? I don't think so. They are not beacons, as they rest in green. If anything, they are simply a variant of the "half signal" used in places like Seattle, with an added flashing red phase.

I am surprised that compliance is sub-par. There really is nothing that drivers shouldn't already know. In fact, these don't need any regulatory signs at all: go on green, go/stop on yellow, stop on red, proceed on flashing red after stop; these are well established road rules. HAWKs need a ton of explanatory signage because of the strange phasing (flashing yellow and alternating flashing red).

In many ways, these are newer versions of the standard Los Angeles-style signalized crossing that was installed for decades. Hopefully they are still being installed, but LA recently "discovered" the HAWK and made it sound like some cool new invention, completely forgetting they invented a better version of it years before...smh.

[jakeroot]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

[Rothman]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

People are used to the flashing red at intersections.  Not so much at mid-crossings. 

[SignBridge]

That Florida MPS seems like a far more intelligent design than the HAWK signal because it functions the same as a regular traffic signal. So drivers don't have to learn new interpretations of signals like with the HAWK. 

[ElishaGOtis]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

Compliance issues were the primary reasons the sign was changed from what can be seen in the GSV to what is shown in the image. Additionally, these have a VERY long pedestrian clearance interval (37 seconds for both on University Ave), which IMHO didn't help with either motorist and pedestrian compliance.

[mrsman]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

Compliance issues were the primary reasons the sign was changed from what can be seen in the GSV to what is shown in the image. Additionally, these have a VERY long pedestrian clearance interval (37 seconds for both on University Ave), which IMHO didn't help with either motorist and pedestrian compliance.

Interesting.  So the lack of compliance at these Florida installations was that drivers were simply treating the flashing red as a green light?  Proceeding on flashing red, as opposed to yielding to pedestrians on flashing red, as opposed to treating the flashing red as a stop sign (full stop, yield to peds, then proceed).

I question whether the lack of full compliance is really that dangerous overall.  I gather that drivers are still stopping at the solid red, just not at the flashing red.  Are drivers proceeding while peds are still in the ROW, or are they simply treating the flashing red like a California stop when pedestrians have already crossed out of the way?

When I lived in L.A., the ped crossings at the time did not have a solid red phase at all (only green/yellow/flashing red).  It seemed like the most common practice was to stop for the flashing red while there were pedestrians and then proceed when the peds were out of the way.  But it was relatively rare that each line of cars in succession would come to a stop again as they approached the stop line.  Drivers felt that if it is clear for the car in front of me, it's clear for me as well, so I can just drive forward even if the red is still flashing.  While technically wrong, it did not seem like a big safety hazard.

Of course, the FL case is very interesting since these are new to that area.  The old L.A. signals have been in place there for at least 40 years.  I lived pretty close to Fairfax Ave. and can't remember a time when they weren't present.  I do hope they get this right, since this FL signal is far better than a HAWK, and I believe most people participating on this thread agree.

[US 89]

I like this Florida design. As far as a driver is concerned, it functions almost exactly like a traditional UK/Ireland pelican crossing, except replacing the flashing yellow with flashing red. Much more intuitive than a HAWK.

[ElishaGOtis]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

Compliance issues were the primary reasons the sign was changed from what can be seen in the GSV to what is shown in the image. Additionally, these have a VERY long pedestrian clearance interval (37 seconds for both on University Ave), which IMHO didn't help with either motorist and pedestrian compliance.

Interesting.  So the lack of compliance at these Florida installations was that drivers were simply treating the flashing red as a green light?  Proceeding on flashing red, as opposed to yielding to pedestrians on flashing red, as opposed to treating the flashing red as a stop sign (full stop, yield to peds, then proceed).

I question whether the lack of full compliance is really that dangerous overall.  I gather that drivers are still stopping at the solid red, just not at the flashing red.  Are drivers proceeding while peds are still in the ROW, or are they simply treating the flashing red like a California stop when pedestrians have already crossed out of the way?

When I lived in L.A., the ped crossings at the time did not have a solid red phase at all (only green/yellow/flashing red).  It seemed like the most common practice was to stop for the flashing red while there were pedestrians and then proceed when the peds were out of the way.  But it was relatively rare that each line of cars in succession would come to a stop again as they approached the stop line.  Drivers felt that if it is clear for the car in front of me, it's clear for me as well, so I can just drive forward even if the red is still flashing.  While technically wrong, it did not seem like a big safety hazard.

Of course, the FL case is very interesting since these are new to that area.  The old L.A. signals have been in place there for at least 40 years.  I lived pretty close to Fairfax Ave. and can't remember a time when they weren't present.  I do hope they get this right, since this FL signal is far better than a HAWK, and I believe most people participating on this thread agree.

The largest issue was a combination of violations. Pedestrians were entering the crosswalk when the hand was flashing, while cars were not stopping for the flashing red despite pedestrians still being in the crosswalk. Not to mention bicycles and e-scooters doing this same thing but at a far higher speed...

The two on SR-26 have the benefit of being raised crosswalks, but not the one on SR-331 where operating speeds often exceed 50MPH. But essentially yes, flashing red was being treated as green.

[SignBridge]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

[ElishaGOtis]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

Ironically some HAWK beacons do this now by not displaying a flashing red phase, only double steady red through the clearance interval.

[thspfc]

"TUAH Thread" when?

[SignBridge]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

Ironically some HAWK beacons do this now by not displaying a flashing red phase, only double steady red through the clearance interval.

Well it sounds like some local traffic engineers are discovering that the HAWK signal operating configuration as envisioned by its creators at FHWA does not work especially well in the real world. So they are gradually transitioning back to traditional traffic signal operation that drivers understand.

Not really surprising that this new configuration is causing confusion among drivers.

[Rothman]

"TUAH Thread" when?

A thread devoted to a cryptocurrency scammer...

[SignBridge]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

Ironically some HAWK beacons do this now by not displaying a flashing red phase, only double steady red through the clearance interval.

Well it sounds like some local traffic engineers are discovering that the HAWK signal operating configuration as envisioned by its creators at FHWA does not work especially well in the real world. So they are gradually transitioning back to traditional traffic signal operation that drivers understand.

Not really surprising that this new configuration is causing confusion among drivers.

Upon checking the 2023 MUTCD, I just made a disheartening discovery. Sec. 4J.03.02 which dictates the operating sequence of HAWK's, requires (shall) that the clearance interval be the alternating flashing red lights. Therefore maintaining steady red's thru the clearance interval is not compliant. Not that the FHWA is going to enforce that standard on local traffic depts. But it should be a consideration for local agencies if they opt to deviate from the standard.

[TheCatalyst31]

"TUAH Thread" when?

I think the MUTCD discourages spitting on traffic control devices.

[jeffandnicole]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

Ironically some HAWK beacons do this now by not displaying a flashing red phase, only double steady red through the clearance interval.

Well it sounds like some local traffic engineers are discovering that the HAWK signal operating configuration as envisioned by its creators at FHWA does not work especially well in the real world. So they are gradually transitioning back to traditional traffic signal operation that drivers understand.

Not really surprising that this new configuration is causing confusion among drivers.

The signage used - often the simple but unclear "Stop on Red" - doesn't convey what one should do during the flashing red.  Engineers and transportation departments spend tens of thousands on the lights and structures, and a $150 sign that doesn't fully inform motorists they may proceed on flashing red destroys the indented beneficial use of the light.

At least in NJ, any recent installation of a pedestrian crossing I've seen have used ground-mounted signage with yellow beacon, not HAWK signals.  I have seen a few installations of the HAWK used for fire departments though to assist with equipment exiting the station.

[mrsman]

Better than a HAWK.  But, the flashing red phase will never work as intended.

I disagree, flashing red is well-established. Stop and then go when clear, that's been the law for decades.

I understand ElishaGOtis says that compliance isn't great, but I think that may be anecdotal. I think actual long-term compliance data would paint a more promising picture.

After all, why would FDOT start using this if not because the HAWK sucks? They basically removed the confusing parts of the HAWK while leaving all of the benefits.

Compliance issues were the primary reasons the sign was changed from what can be seen in the GSV to what is shown in the image. Additionally, these have a VERY long pedestrian clearance interval (37 seconds for both on University Ave), which IMHO didn't help with either motorist and pedestrian compliance.

Interesting.  So the lack of compliance at these Florida installations was that drivers were simply treating the flashing red as a green light?  Proceeding on flashing red, as opposed to yielding to pedestrians on flashing red, as opposed to treating the flashing red as a stop sign (full stop, yield to peds, then proceed).

I question whether the lack of full compliance is really that dangerous overall.  I gather that drivers are still stopping at the solid red, just not at the flashing red.  Are drivers proceeding while peds are still in the ROW, or are they simply treating the flashing red like a California stop when pedestrians have already crossed out of the way?

When I lived in L.A., the ped crossings at the time did not have a solid red phase at all (only green/yellow/flashing red).  It seemed like the most common practice was to stop for the flashing red while there were pedestrians and then proceed when the peds were out of the way.  But it was relatively rare that each line of cars in succession would come to a stop again as they approached the stop line.  Drivers felt that if it is clear for the car in front of me, it's clear for me as well, so I can just drive forward even if the red is still flashing.  While technically wrong, it did not seem like a big safety hazard.

Of course, the FL case is very interesting since these are new to that area.  The old L.A. signals have been in place there for at least 40 years.  I lived pretty close to Fairfax Ave. and can't remember a time when they weren't present.  I do hope they get this right, since this FL signal is far better than a HAWK, and I believe most people participating on this thread agree.

The largest issue was a combination of violations. Pedestrians were entering the crosswalk when the hand was flashing, while cars were not stopping for the flashing red despite pedestrians still being in the crosswalk. Not to mention bicycles and e-scooters doing this same thing but at a far higher speed...

The two on SR-26 have the benefit of being raised crosswalks, but not the one on SR-331 where operating speeds often exceed 50MPH. But essentially yes, flashing red was being treated as green.

A lot of that is probably the location along a college campus.  College areas tend to be among the worst regarding pedestrian compliance with signals.  A crossing in front of a high school / junior high school would also be similarly troubling (outside of those with crossing guards).

In Los Angeles, the majority of those are in Downtown LA where it's typically office workers who would be crossing.  Along Fairfax Ave., in the time of my childhood, was a major shopping street for the Jewish community and there were a lot of old people who walked around. (THe vibe is a little different today) The crosswalks were absolutely beneficial.

Upon checking the 2023 MUTCD, I just made a disheartening discovery. Sec. 4J.03.02 which dictates the operating sequence of HAWK's, requires (shall) that the clearance interval be the alternating flashing red lights. Therefore maintaining steady red's thru the clearance interval is not compliant. Not that the FHWA is going to enforce that standard on local traffic depts. But it should be a consideration for local agencies if they opt to deviate from the standard.

And this really makes sense given that the HAWKs generally do not meet the warrants for a traffic signal.

Whenever there is a legal ped crossing, but no traffic signal or stop sign, drivers should still stop for pedestrians and proceed once the pedestrians clear the crossing.  The HAWK was meant to help in this regard because it is often times hard to see a pedestrian that wants to cross when you are driving on a multi-lane arterial with a speed limit higher than 30 mph.  But ideally, the drivers would act in the same way as the unsignalized crossing: stop for the peds, let them cross, and then proceed when they are out of the way.  The red time in a HAWK signal is generally far less than if there were a regular signal in its place.

If you get rid of the flashing red phase, then you really do not have anything that is demonstrably different than a normal traffic signal.  The ability to proceed when there are no pedestrians present, or presumed to be present, is the major feature of a HAWK, because it ensures that traffic will only stop for the minimum time needed.

[cjw2001]

Well, LOL I guess the answer is we eliminate the flashing-red and just go back to steady green-yellow-red traffic lights at pedestrian activated locations. Did I just re-invent the wheel ?

Ironically some HAWK beacons do this now by not displaying a flashing red phase, only double steady red through the clearance interval.

Well it sounds like some local traffic engineers are discovering that the HAWK signal operating configuration as envisioned by its creators at FHWA does not work especially well in the real world. So they are gradually transitioning back to traditional traffic signal operation that drivers understand.

Not really surprising that this new configuration is causing confusion among drivers.

The signage used - often the simple but unclear "Stop on Red" - doesn't convey what one should do during the flashing red.  Engineers and transportation departments spend tens of thousands on the lights and structures, and a $150 sign that doesn't fully inform motorists they may proceed on flashing red destroys the indented beneficial use of the light.

At least in NJ, any recent installation of a pedestrian crossing I've seen have used ground-mounted signage with yellow beacon, not HAWK signals.  I have seen a few installations of the HAWK used for fire departments though to assist with equipment exiting the station.

Here they sign them appropriately with the needed instructions.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/vaMGbxCABikotTXGA

[roadfro]

I have seen a few installations of the HAWK used for fire departments though to assist with equipment exiting the station.

These are not technically Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (HAWKs), but Emergency Vehicle Hybrid Beacons. These look like and have similar operation to a HAWK. However, the default operation prescribed in the MUTCD for emergency vehicle hybrid beacons omits the steady red vehicular indication used in a HAWK (but does permit its use in an option).

[jakeroot]

Upon checking the 2023 MUTCD, I just made a disheartening discovery. Sec. 4J.03.02 which dictates the operating sequence of HAWK's, requires (shall) that the clearance interval be the alternating flashing red lights. Therefore maintaining steady red's thru the clearance interval is not compliant. Not that the FHWA is going to enforce that standard on local traffic depts. But it should be a consideration for local agencies if they opt to deviate from the standard.

I don't necessarily see this as requiring that clearance phase, but rather what the clearance phase must look like if it is included. 4F.03, section 2, does indicate that a clearance interval as part of the "shall" statement of required phases, but it doesn't preclude that phase being set to something like 0.01 seconds, or even just 0 seconds.

[SignBridge]

Upon checking the 2023 MUTCD, I just made a disheartening discovery. Sec. 4J.03.02 which dictates the operating sequence of HAWK's, requires (shall) that the clearance interval be the alternating flashing red lights. Therefore maintaining steady red's thru the clearance interval is not compliant. Not that the FHWA is going to enforce that standard on local traffic depts. But it should be a consideration for local agencies if they opt to deviate from the standard.

I don't necessarily see this as requiring that clearance phase, but rather what the clearance phase must look like if it is included. 4F.03, section 2, does indicate that a clearance interval as part of the "shall" statement of required phases, but it doesn't preclude that phase being set to something like 0.01 seconds, or even just 0 seconds.

I think what you are suggesting would defeat the intent of the standard. Also, I don't like that requirement; I'm just interpreting what it says.

[mrsman]

The flashing red clearance phase is a key element of HAWK and other alternative ped crossings.  The whole idea is that in a lot of cases, peds may cross early (before traffic gets a red, if they see an opening) or cross quickly (faster pedestrians who are able to walk faster than the 3 MPH or so that the signal was set) so there is no need for traffic to just simply wait there for nobody.  And this also dovetails with the notion that full traffic signals should only be placed where warranted (meeting the specific criteria of traffic signal warrants) whereas pedestrian crossings can occur at nearly every unsignalized intersection and certain other mid-block locations (warrants for crosswalks are much less strict than the warrants for signals).  The HAWK (or its better alternatives) is meant to make it easier for drivers to drive appropriately.  At an unsignalized legal crossings, drivers are supposed to yield to pedestrians and only proceed when pedestrians have cleared .  The HAWKs are meant to alert drivers to the presence of pedestrians, where they may not be so easily visible.

[Caps81943]

These basically are what many of us have called for in terms of HAWK beacons. The phasing is G/Y/SR/FR, with Steady Red displayed for the walk indication (+buffer) and Flashing Red displayed for the ped clearance interval.

Video from another installation: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QY2cYBbMadg

Unfortunately, compliance is still sub-par just like HAWK/PHB signals...

Overall, I do really like these signals, but I gotta love how the FDOT example video of a "Midblock" signal is literally not at a midblock location. I think that's okay, but maybe if it is at an intersection, replace the green with a flashing yellow (to indicate that cross traffic is possible).

[ElishaGOtis]

These basically are what many of us have called for in terms of HAWK beacons. The phasing is G/Y/SR/FR, with Steady Red displayed for the walk indication (+buffer) and Flashing Red displayed for the ped clearance interval.

Video from another installation: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QY2cYBbMadg

Unfortunately, compliance is still sub-par just like HAWK/PHB signals...

Overall, I do really like these signals, but I gotta love how the FDOT example video of a "Midblock" signal is literally not at a midblock location. I think that's okay, but maybe if it is at an intersection, replace the green with a flashing yellow (to indicate that cross traffic is possible).

An ICWS ("TRAFFIC ENTERING WHEN FLASHING") would probably be better than a continuous flashing beacon imho, based on some research I've seen. D2 is installing a bunch of them.