Ninjasigning

[roadman]

Yeah ... but ... what if you could afford it?  Give me reasons why I shouldn't start fabricating fully spec shields for secret routes and mounting them to posts.

Two words - potential liability (for both you and the DOT).

[roadman]

I know of more signs that I would rather take down (seemingly needless No Turn On Red signs) than I would put up.

Diverging slightly off topic here:  In my opinion, the whole concept of RTOR needs to be changed.  Signs (Right Turn on Red After Stop) should be placed only where it is safe and legal to take a right turn on a red ball, as opposed to the current practice of placing "No Turn On Red" signs at locations where RTOR is unsafe or illegal.  This would also be consistent with the current requirements for red arrows, where (per the MUTCD and in most states) you cannot do RTOR at a red arrow UNLESS there is a sign.

Now, does anyone here really believe that the majority of drivers truly understand and follow the difference - RTOR for red ball unless there's a sign telling you no, but RTOR for red arrow only if there's a sign telling you OK.

In the mid-1970s, Massachusetts decided to adopt RTOR by implementing the "no RTOR unless there's a sign" approach for all intersections (red ball and red arrow).  It was in place for about a year, until FHWA told them to change to the national standard.  The biggest result of this change to conform to the national standard was an overnight visit from the "No Turn on Red" fairy, as virtually every intersection in the state sprouted new signs.

And even though Massachusetts practice was changed to conform to the Federal standard, to this day Mass. State Law (as opposed to the driver's manual) still permits RTOR on a red arrow (the law simply reads "red indication"), regardless of whether or not there is a sign permitting the movement posted.

Disclaimer - this inconsistency has been one of my top five gripes with the UVC and the MUTCD for the past 35 years

[Alps]

The reason I'm leaving this thread here is that it publicizes the liability of _Simon so that if anything does happen, we have plenty of evidence to furnish the lawsuit.

Seriously, hacks have been done before. A certain forum member put up to-spec (except for the substrate) MA 2/US 3 along Memorial Drive WB, on an existing signpost. It stayed for a few years. Don't ever touch the state's signs or put up incorrect signs, unless you like fines and court appearances. If you want to put up correct signs without defacing state property, go for it. (If you wanted to cover an incorrect sign with a correct one, I would support doing that as well, but do not damage the original sign because it's state property.)

[_Simon]

Perhaps we should develop an application that all the DOT agencies could use that would interface with a database of incorrect/missing/needed signs.  Each agency logs in to see what signs in their jurisdiction are screwed up, and then they use the system to notify us once they fix them?  Like Google MapMaker for signs.  I'm trying to think of creative ways to fix all of the bad signs within my own lifetime without having to send independent emails for each issue I'm "asking" them to look into.  There also should be some legislative bill we can pass to require the DOT to fix a sign within x time of being notified that it's wrong/missing/needed. 

[NE2]

Diverging slightly off topic here:  In my opinion, the whole concept of RTOR needs to be changed.  Signs (Right Turn on Red After Stop) should be placed only where it is safe and legal to take a right turn on a red ball, as opposed to the current practice of placing "No Turn On Red" signs at locations where RTOR is unsafe or illegal.  This would also be consistent with the current requirements for red arrows, where (per the MUTCD and in most states) you cannot do RTOR at a red arrow UNLESS there is a sign.

Why change it this way, rather than what some states already do: a red arrow means that movement has a red light, and all the rules for a red light apply.

[formulanone]

It's a...uh, start.

[Scott5114]

Perhaps we should develop an application that all the DOT agencies could use that would interface with a database of incorrect/missing/needed signs.  Each agency logs in to see what signs in their jurisdiction are screwed up, and then they use the system to notify us once they fix them?

This is actually a better way of going about things. I have a page on my website that is a giant table of Oklahoma DOT errors. Some have been fixed, some haven't. It would be fun, easy, and legal. If people would be interested in contributing to such a database, it doesn't seem like it would be too hard to code.

[jeffandnicole]

I know of more signs that I would rather take down (seemingly needless No Turn On Red signs) than I would put up.

Those are banned in certain instances for specific reasons. Sight distance, turning radius, etc.

Oh, yeah, I understand that...I was just using it as an example.  And I can name a few examples where I'm surprised one wasn't put up.

[agentsteel53]

there used to be a ninja MASS US 3 shield in the same area, but I can't find Alps' photo of it.

[Alps]

there used to be a ninja MASS US 3 shield in the same area, but I can't find Alps' photo of it.

The MASS US 3 shields weren't ninjas, those were MDC-issued fakes.

[agentsteel53]

The MASS US 3 shields weren't ninjas, those were MDC-issued fakes.

the very first one heading westbound after the Harvard Bridge.  same gantry as MA-2/(erroneous) MA-3.  I believe you had it on your website at some point.

[roadman]

Diverging slightly off topic here:  In my opinion, the whole concept of RTOR needs to be changed.  Signs (Right Turn on Red After Stop) should be placed only where it is safe and legal to take a right turn on a red ball, as opposed to the current practice of placing "No Turn On Red" signs at locations where RTOR is unsafe or illegal.  This would also be consistent with the current requirements for red arrows, where (per the MUTCD and in most states) you cannot do RTOR at a red arrow UNLESS there is a sign.

Why change it this way, rather than what some states already do: a red arrow means that movement has a red light, and all the rules for a red light apply.

Yes, allowing right turn on red arrow unless there's a sign present would also work.

[hbelkins]

do not molest the original sign because it's state property.)

FIFY.

Also, road meet attendees should not trespass on state property and take the official meet photo there.

[NE2]

Federal property is OK though. Because states' rights.

[Alps]

do not molest the original sign because it's state property.)

FIFY.

Also, road meet attendees should not trespass on state property and take the official meet photo there.

But only if poo.

[_Simon]

Just an update:  I sent an email Wednesday about a missing blade sign, a missing BEGIN and END shield for a(n extremely short) county highway, and a missing county shield on an mast arm sign to the county and municipality and I got a reply today telling me that the blade sign will be installed Monday; the county shields are on order and will be done in about 4 weeks; and that they've forwarded my email to NJDOT regarding the mast arm sign.  WTG Somerset county -- best experience I've had getting stuff corrected.  I would have thought for sure they'd have rejected my request for BEGIN and END shields because it's on a section of road that's less than a mile long (though it is signed from the cross roads). 

[kphoger]

Just an update:  I sent an email Wednesday about a missing blade sign, a missing BEGIN and END shield for a(n extremely short) county highway, and a missing county shield on an mast arm sign to the county and municipality and I got a reply today telling me that the blade sign will be installed Monday; the county shields are on order and will be done in about 4 weeks; and that they've forwarded my email to NJDOT regarding the mast arm sign.  WTG Somerset county -- best experience I've had getting stuff corrected.  I would have thought for sure they'd have rejected my request for BEGIN and END shields because it's on a section of road that's less than a mile long (though it is signed from the cross roads). 

I was surprised you even bothered to mention a BEGIN and END, but I guess it never hurts to ask, does it?

[Avalanchez71]

Just an update:  I sent an email Wednesday about a missing blade sign, a missing BEGIN and END shield for a(n extremely short) county highway, and a missing county shield on an mast arm sign to the county and municipality and I got a reply today telling me that the blade sign will be installed Monday; the county shields are on order and will be done in about 4 weeks; and that they've forwarded my email to NJDOT regarding the mast arm sign.  WTG Somerset county -- best experience I've had getting stuff corrected.  I would have thought for sure they'd have rejected my request for BEGIN and END shields because it's on a section of road that's less than a mile long (though it is signed from the cross roads). 

I was surprised you even bothered to mention a BEGIN and END, but I guess it never hurts to ask, does it?

I had TDOT install a BEGIN and END 412 sign on US 412 at I-65.  They were nice about it and it was installed in no time.  I forgot to ask about a US 43 END sign.  If I think about it I may ask about it.

Why would someone want to risk the liability and possible criminal charges?  What kind of money would one have to invest anyway?

[Scott5114]

There's a construction detour near my house that is for EAST US-77/NORTH SH-39. The banners are switched. I idly considered switching them to be correct, but I'm lazy and it's just one sign out of many, so it's not a major error, so the chances are very small that I would actually do it.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Just saw this thread:  I am sure everyone is familiar with the "deer crossing", "cattle crossing" official signs and such.  There is an agricultural supply company that makes, the proper size, with the yellow reflector sheet, similar signage with any animal you specify.  If I can find them, we have on site, "pig crossing", "goat crossing" and maybe even "sheep crossing" and "goose crossing", but we never put them up.

[theline]

Not quite "GOOSE CROSSING," but not an uncommon sign in these parts: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.708604,-86.204899,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shuIDnMIFHLTSwwwlW8oQlA!2e0?hl=en

[cu2010]

Something in a similar vein...a local businessman, with a long history of volunteerism, took it upon himself to patch up the paint job on a village welcome sign.

The result? The signs look great...and said businessman has received a nice cease-and-desist order from the village, saying that he "went too far".

[bugo]

Oh come on, you guys need to pull those giant sticks out of your asses

+1

[bugo]

I'd like to replace all the OK 66 meat cleavers with US 66 shields.

[bugo]

They need to put an END sign at the eastern end of I-244 and at the southern end of OK 167.