Traffic signal

[CoreySamson]

There's a new flashing red right arrow traffic signal for right-turning traffic in Atoka, OK on US 69/75 at Court St here:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/MnNphzvzFivjHECc6 (GSV came in a bit too early for it to be installed; notice the spot for wiring on the right side of the horizontal pole)

The signal looks like a normal Oklahoma signal, but has two red faces, arranged horizontally. There was also a regulatory sign on the pole beside the sign, but I couldn't read it.

UPDATE: I just checked this spot on GSV again and it has now updated to show the new signal:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y8aSbsWSz6zSqjbq5

Really bizarre situation, but the signals on the far sides of the intersection are pretty cool.

[Revive 755]

UPDATE: I just checked this spot on GSV again and it has now updated to show the new signal:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y8aSbsWSz6zSqjbq5

Really bizarre situation, but the signals on the far sides of the intersection are pretty cool.

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow?

That setup also seems likely to encourage rolling stops for northbound - going off Streetview it looks like the flashing red arrow is on when the adjacent pedestrian signal is showing a stead handy.

[kphoger]

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow[?

The latter.  "Right turn yield on flashing red arrow".

Yes, I know there's a similar sign coming from the other direction, but an FYA should be treated basically like a solid green ball—and in that case, the right turn on red should yield.

[jakeroot]

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow[?

The latter.  "Right turn yield on flashing red arrow".

Yes, I know there's a similar sign coming from the other direction, but an FYA should be treated basically like a solid green ball—and in that case, the right turn on red should yield.

I'm sure you know why stop signs are octagonal-shaped, right? So they can be recognized regardless of whether you can see the face of the sign or not?

This is the exact same situation, without those contextual clues. There is no reasonable way traffic turning left could possibly know traffic turning right has to yield to them. And I highly doubt traffic turning right would assume they would have to yield to oncoming left turns. I personally wouldn't.

The sign is clearly designed for the pedestrian crossing, and should be worded as such: "right turn on red yield to pedestrians after stop". Ideally a green arrow or green ball would be displayed when the red arrow wasn't shown/ped signal not activated.

There is a variant of the standard three-ball display that includes either a solid or flashing red arrow for use at pedestrian crossings. It is extremely rare, but it's what they should have used at this location. The only example I know if is in Spokane, WA. This would have provided a red arrow during (and only during) the WALK phase, before reverting back to normal operations.

[roadfro]

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow[?

The latter.  "Right turn yield on flashing red arrow".

Yes, I know there's a similar sign coming from the other direction, but an FYA should be treated basically like a solid green ball—and in that case, the right turn on red should yield.

I'm sure you know why stop signs are octagonal-shaped, right? So they can be recognized regardless of whether you can see the face of the sign or not?

This is the exact same situation, without those contextual clues. There is no reasonable way traffic turning left could possibly know traffic turning right has to yield to them. And I highly doubt traffic turning right would assume they would have to yield to oncoming left turns. I personally wouldn't.

The sign is clearly designed for the pedestrian crossing, and should be worded as such: "right turn on red yield to pedestrians after stop". Ideally a green arrow or green ball would be displayed when the red arrow wasn't shown/ped signal not activated.

There is a variant of the standard three-ball display that includes either a solid or flashing red arrow for use at pedestrian crossings. It is extremely rare, but it's what they should have used at this location. The only example I know if is in Spokane, WA. This would have provided a red arrow during (and only during) the WALK phase, before reverting back to normal operations.

I'm wondering why a special signal to protect the crossing from right turns at this location to begin with. Doesn't seem out of the ordinary in any way. 

[jakeroot]

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow[?

The latter.  "Right turn yield on flashing red arrow".

Yes, I know there's a similar sign coming from the other direction, but an FYA should be treated basically like a solid green ball—and in that case, the right turn on red should yield.

I'm sure you know why stop signs are octagonal-shaped, right? So they can be recognized regardless of whether you can see the face of the sign or not?

This is the exact same situation, without those contextual clues. There is no reasonable way traffic turning left could possibly know traffic turning right has to yield to them. And I highly doubt traffic turning right would assume they would have to yield to oncoming left turns. I personally wouldn't.

The sign is clearly designed for the pedestrian crossing, and should be worded as such: "right turn on red yield to pedestrians after stop". Ideally a green arrow or green ball would be displayed when the red arrow wasn't shown/ped signal not activated.

There is a variant of the standard three-ball display that includes either a solid or flashing red arrow for use at pedestrian crossings. It is extremely rare, but it's what they should have used at this location. The only example I know if is in Spokane, WA. This would have provided a red arrow during (and only during) the WALK phase, before reverting back to normal operations.

I'm wondering why a special signal to protect the crossing from right turns at this location to begin with. Doesn't seem out of the ordinary in any way.

I assume you mean left turns? You've got a point, I don't know what is special about this particular turn that would warrant this type of signal. They definitely used the correct signal for the job, as it's a shared-lane signal as opposed to left turn signal, which would be wrong without a dedicated left turn lane. But why it was warranted, that's anyone's guess. There's a lot of medical facilities nearby, but I don't see why that would be a specific concern. Maybe they just wanted to try out the signal as a test.

[Dirt Roads]

So who yields - the southbound left with the flashing yellow arrow or the northbound right turn with the flashing red arrow[?

The latter.  "Right turn yield on flashing red arrow".

Yes, I know there's a similar sign coming from the other direction, but an FYA should be treated basically like a solid green ball—and in that case, the right turn on red should yield.

I'm sure you know why stop signs are octagonal-shaped, right? So they can be recognized regardless of whether you can see the face of the sign or not?

This is the exact same situation, without those contextual clues. There is no reasonable way traffic turning left could possibly know traffic turning right has to yield to them. And I highly doubt traffic turning right would assume they would have to yield to oncoming left turns. I personally wouldn't.

The sign is clearly designed for the pedestrian crossing, and should be worded as such: "right turn on red yield to pedestrians after stop". Ideally a green arrow or green ball would be displayed when the red arrow wasn't shown/ped signal not activated.

There is a variant of the standard three-ball display that includes either a solid or flashing red arrow for use at pedestrian crossings. It is extremely rare, but it's what they should have used at this location. The only example I know if is in Spokane, WA. This would have provided a red arrow during (and only during) the WALK phase, before reverting back to normal operations.

I'm wondering why a special signal to protect the crossing from right turns at this location to begin with. Doesn't seem out of the ordinary in any way.

Perhaps there were issues (either here or somewhere else in the area) with right turns RTOR competing with left turns on FYLTA at the same time as pedestrians were in the crosswalk (in this case thinking that they are "protected" with a ped signal).  As I have ranted several times in other threads, there is a significant issue (in some places) with folks making left turns believing that they have the right-of-way over opposing traffic making right turns (and the problem is not necessarily associated with traffic signals). 

Around here, this seems to be an issue more with eastbound traffic (towards Raleigh-Durham) than with westbound traffic (towards Burlington-Greensboro).  The only thing that I can figure is that eastbound traffic tends to be in a bigger hurry to get to work.