More symbolic signs, less word only.

[NJ]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

[Brandon]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

Some of them, IMHO, are not as intuitive.  The tunnel ones I've seen are usually a mess.  We do have a lot more symbol shapes that Europe lacks, such as the No Passing Zone pennant and the school zone sign (shared with Canada).

[NJ]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

Some of them, IMHO, are not as intuitive.  The tunnel ones I've seen are usually a mess.  We do have a lot more symbol shapes that Europe lacks, such as the No Passing Zone pennant and the school zone sign (shared with Canada).

Canada including many other countries uses this symbol for "No passing" ->

School signs in Europe (other countries use their native local language though) ->

[Pink Jazz]

I know in the case of logo signs, the use of symbols for each service type would make the signs larger, especially if multiple service types are represented on a single sign.

Plus, I wonder what would a symbol for Attractions look like.  The MUTCD doesn't have an official Attractions symbol for general service signs, so I wonder what could be used if logo signs were to switch to symbols.

[english si]

Some of them, IMHO, are not as intuitive.

I totally agree that some Vienna Convention signs are unintuitive. The parking restriction ones, for example, the lack of red stripes on prohibitions, the use of mandatory blue circles for 'bicycles only', etc that reads as 'bicycles must use' etc, or 'pass obstacle on either side' that reads as 'go both ways' (they ought to be blue rectangles). But all that is fixable - use the current Vienna-inspired US sign for no-Parking, put (as the US does) red lines through prohibitions, use blue circles more like how the UK does (with the occasional slip up), rather than certain other European countries (which have lots of 'you must' when they don't mean that).

The tunnel ones I've seen are usually a mess.

Really? What is wrong with them?

And if you are saying 'unintuitive' for these, then I don't see how a picture of a tunnel portal is less intuitive than the word 'tunnel'. All the non-US countries who used the MUTCD as inspiration, rather than the Vienna convention, for their own sign manuals use a Vienna-inspired tunnel symbol instead of the word.

We do have a lot more symbol shapes that Europe lacks, such as the No Passing Zone pennant

How is that a symbol?

and the school zone sign (shared with Canada).

The school zone symbol is the Vienna Convention 'children' one.

Oh, I see, you mean sign shapes. I can, just about understand a sign shape for schools (though why aren't other places busy with vulnerable pedestrians as important?), but does 'No Passing' really require a special sign shape? I'd argue (and Europe is just as flawed here) that No Entry is much more worthy of it's own distinctive shape, alongside STOP and Yield. With the rail-road crossing X, that's 3 more shapes - hardly 'a lot more' and there's no real reason for those three things to have a unique sign shape other than "there's no reason why not".

[NJ]

"NO TURN ON RED"
"BRIDGE"
"LEFT/RIGHT LANE MUST TURN LEFT/RIGHT"
"DIP"
"HUMP/BUMP"
"BRIDGE FREEZES BEFORE ROAD SURFACE/ICY"
"FALLING ROCKS"
"ROAD NORROWS"
"RIGHT/LEFT LANE ENDS"
"TUNNEL"
^ Could be replaced with internationally recognized symbolic signs as used in other countries.

We also should get rid of word only "No parking" or "parking signs" with P around a circle, much nicer and better!

I'm fan of Canada's road signs.

[roadfro]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

The MUTCD has actually been moving more toward symbolization. The 2009 version introduced several new symbols, in part based on symbols used around the country and in Canada (and possibly Mexico). Also, in some cases word sign variants were removed (stop/yield ahead)...at one time these were the norm.

The reason why the MUTCD isn't rapidly expanding symbols is that the requirements with symbols require study before being included. Any new symbols are supposed to be approved by FHWA for experimentation prior to being implemented, then study is required after implementation. Compare with word signs, where MUTCD provisions allow jurisdictions to create appropriate word message signs whenever no standard sign exists for the purpose.

[NJ]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

The reason why the MUTCD isn't rapidly expanding symbols is that the requirements with symbols require study before being included. Any new symbols are supposed to be approved by FHWA for experimentation prior to being implemented, then study is required after implementation. Compare with word signs, where MUTCD provisions allow jurisdictions to create appropriate word message signs whenever no standard sign exists for the purpose.

If Canada and other countries already uses internationally recognized symbol, there shouldn't be any reason why America shouldn't with or without the study. Tunnel, Bridge, Bump, Hump, Dip are examples that should be symbolic for sure.

[DaBigE]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

The reason why the MUTCD isn't rapidly expanding symbols is that the requirements with symbols require study before being included. Any new symbols are supposed to be approved by FHWA for experimentation prior to being implemented, then study is required after implementation. Compare with word signs, where MUTCD provisions allow jurisdictions to create appropriate word message signs whenever no standard sign exists for the purpose.

If Canada and other countries already uses internationally recognized symbol, there shouldn't be any reason why America shouldn't with or without the study. Tunnel, Bridge, Bump, Hump, Dip are examples that should be symbolic for sure.

You forget that everyone is not a world traveler. Just because other countries use it doesn't necessarily mean all drivers will understand it here. Hell, I work with road signs on a regular basis, and there's many international ones that I have to look up the meaning of myself.

[NJ]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

The reason why the MUTCD isn't rapidly expanding symbols is that the requirements with symbols require study before being included. Any new symbols are supposed to be approved by FHWA for experimentation prior to being implemented, then study is required after implementation. Compare with word signs, where MUTCD provisions allow jurisdictions to create appropriate word message signs whenever no standard sign exists for the purpose.

If Canada and other countries already uses internationally recognized symbol, there shouldn't be any reason why America shouldn't with or without the study. Tunnel, Bridge, Bump, Hump, Dip are examples that should be symbolic for sure.

You forget that everyone is not a world traveler. Just because other countries use it doesn't necessarily mean all drivers will understand it here. Hell, I work with road signs on a regular basis, and there's many international ones that I have to look up the meaning of myself.

I'm pretty sure most people would understand these symbols (Keep in mind that not everybody understands English either in America), therefore symbolic signs when possible makes more sense regardless of native language;

[jakeroot]

The MUTCD has actually been moving more toward symbolization. The 2009 version introduced several new symbols, in part based

I wish someone could explain to me why "narrow bridge" was removed. I still see it all the time, but I know it ain't in the manual:

[DaBigE]

The MUTCD has actually been moving more toward symbolization. The 2009 version introduced several new symbols, in part based

I wish someone could explain to me why "narrow bridge" was removed. I still see it all the time, but I know it ain't in the manual:

Probably too subtle for most drivers to understand. Those familiar with maps can figure it out (since the brackets are typically used to denote a bridge or overpass), but not the average schmoe. It only gets worse as GPS and Google Maps continue to replace paper maps. Kind of like why Do Not Enter and Yield signs still have words on them.

I have seen a couple locations use that symbol sign as a generic road narrows alternative.

[myosh_tino]

Hmm....

... Train Tunnel ahead?

... No Parallel Parking?

... Windy in Florida (or California) or Palms Farting ahead?

... Potholes ahead?

... Road Deteriorates ahead?

... Falling Rock (this is used in California - Calif Sign Code W50-1)

... Draw Bridge (although putting "DRAW BRIDGE" on the sign is simpler)

... Low Tunnel ahead?

I'm pretty sure most people would understand these symbols (Keep in mind that not everybody understands English either in America), therefore symbolic signs when possible makes more sense regardless of native language;

True but the vast majority (>99%) do and I think some knowledge of English is needed to function in our society and to obtain a drivers license.  IMO, using a symbol to replace a single English word (TUNNEL, WINDY, DIP, BUMP, etc)  is not worth the trouble of going through the process illustrated by Roadfro to bring in symbols that many Americans may not understand.

[DaBigE]

Why hasn't MUTCD adopted more internationally recognized symbolic signs as Canada, Europe and most other countries in the world? We have too many word only signs that could easily be replaced with symbolic ones'. Sure, we use more and more symbolic signs but still not enough.

The reason why the MUTCD isn't rapidly expanding symbols is that the requirements with symbols require study before being included. Any new symbols are supposed to be approved by FHWA for experimentation prior to being implemented, then study is required after implementation. Compare with word signs, where MUTCD provisions allow jurisdictions to create appropriate word message signs whenever no standard sign exists for the purpose.

If Canada and other countries already uses internationally recognized symbol, there shouldn't be any reason why America shouldn't with or without the study. Tunnel, Bridge, Bump, Hump, Dip are examples that should be symbolic for sure.

You forget that everyone is not a world traveler. Just because other countries use it doesn't necessarily mean all drivers will understand it here. Hell, I work with road signs on a regular basis, and there's many international ones that I have to look up the meaning of myself.

I'm pretty sure most people would understand these symbols (Keep in mind that not everybody understands English either in America), therefore symbolic signs when possible makes more sense regardless of native language;
...

It's been a while since I've seen results from a sign comprehension test, but from what I recall from some older ones, you would be surprised at the results. The motoring public is not as smart as you think they are. While not directly related to this thread topic...the number which don't know the difference between Stop and Yield is mind boggling.

[myosh_tino]

While not directly related to this thread topic...the number which don't know the difference between Stop and Yield is mind boggling.

Not really.  I see a ton of people treating stop signs as if they were yield signs. 

[Big John]

^^ As I have said before:  Never underestimate the stupidity of the average driver.

[jakeroot]

The countries below in red will understand our road signs. Those in grey probably won't. Remember that the tourism industry, like pretty much every other country in the world, is a massive part of our GDP. Now yes, more people speak English than ever before in history, but there's no telling how well they can speak English (in other words, can they decipher an incoming sign quickly?). I speak Spanish moderately well, but it still takes me a minute to comprehend what it is that I'm reading.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Colombia_SP-42.svg/64px-Colombia_SP-42.svg.png ... Falling Rock (this is used in California - Calif Sign Code W50-1)

By your logic, that's an exploding mountain. In the context of driving, people can comprehend these signs moderately well. Worst case scenario, they learn these new symbols in drivers ed, and the symbols are introduced with an accompanying plaque. If I remember correctly, the "stop ahead" symbol sign was introduced with a text "stop ahead" below the sign itself, to help "slow" drivers figure out what that sign meant.

^^ As I have said before:  Never underestimate the stupidity of the average driver.

Never over-estimate the number of people who can read English at-speed. Err, that was out of context. My bad.

I wish someone could explain to me why "narrow bridge" was removed. I still see it all the time, but I know it ain't in the manual:

Probably too subtle for most drivers to understand. Those familiar with maps can figure it out (since the brackets are typically used to denote a bridge or overpass), but not the average schmoe. It only gets worse as GPS and Google Maps continue to replace paper maps. Kind of like why Do Not Enter and Yield signs still have words on them.

I have seen a couple locations use that symbol sign as a generic road narrows alternative.

They could have just added a supplementary plaque? No reason to do away with the entire symbol. The chance of us learning the symbol was good. People would have eventually learned to associate the symbol with the narrow-ness of the road.

I don't necessarily think the symbol should have been relegated to bridges though, so I'm pleased to see the symbol being used for other purposes. It's a good "road narrows" alternative, even if it was meant for bridges.

[NJ]

Supplementary plaques can be used, and many of those are common sense that a person with a normal brain and vision could figure out what they stand for. Let's not pretend to be retarded now.

Hmm....

... Train Tunnel ahead?

... No Parallel Parking?

... Windy in Florida (or California) or Palms Farting ahead?

... Potholes ahead?

... Road Deteriorates ahead?

... Falling Rock (this is used in California - Calif Sign Code W50-1)

... Draw Bridge (although putting "DRAW BRIDGE" on the sign is simpler)

... Low Tunnel ahead?

I'm pretty sure most people would understand these symbols (Keep in mind that not everybody understands English either in America), therefore symbolic signs when possible makes more sense regardless of native language;

True but the vast majority (>99%) do and I think some knowledge of English is needed to function in our society and to obtain a drivers license.  IMO, using a symbol to replace a single English word (TUNNEL, WINDY, DIP, BUMP, etc)  is not worth the trouble of going through the process illustrated by Roadfro to bring in symbols that many Americans may not understand.

[roadfro]

I'm pretty sure most people would understand these symbols (Keep in mind that not everybody understands English either in America), therefore symbolic signs when possible makes more sense regardless of native language;

Why is a tunnel warning even necessary?

This almost made it into the 2009 MUTCD (with optional educational plaque), but there was some concern that it wasn't readily understood. It is not immediately evident that the left car is passing the other. It might make sense in the context of a two-lane road, but there are other instances where "do not pass" is used.

Not sure that this would make sense in places that don't have palm trees...

This is not immediately evident that it means "dips".

I've seen this pavement ends symbol before. I'm not sure if it was ever in the MUTCD...if it was, it was removed.

A similar "Falling Rock" design was introduced in the 2009 MUTCD.

I would support this sign's inclusion in the manual. This is pretty clear.


This one could work.

[Pete from Boston]

The palm tree is way too specific to a few areas of the country.  What if I am unfamiliar with this variety of tree?

The Québec grimacing cloud blowing squiggly arrows all over the road is the only "wind" sign I will ever accept.

I agree that "dip" picture would only be clear with prior knowledge, much like would be the case with an English word to a non-speaker.  Less so with "bump," but still not all that clear.

I understood "narrow bridge" (I always just considered it "narrow road") before I could read.  I don't know what is unclear about this indicating a road that narrows.

[jakeroot]

I just threw this together in Illustrator...thoughts?

[myosh_tino]

I just threw this together in Illustrator...thoughts?

Heh, not bad although it looks like the car's front axle has fallen away.

[SignGeek101]

I think I've posted this before, but I'll post it again:


Standard Canadian No Right Turn on Red Sign by Sign Geek, on Flickr

[NJ]

I like Canadian 'No left turn on red' sign... Wish USA adopted the same

I think I've posted this before, but I'll post it again:


Standard Canadian No Right Turn on Red Sign by Sign Geek, on Flickr

[jakeroot]

Heh, not bad although it looks like the car's front axle has fallen away.

Perhaps a little extreme.

Here's something for wind. Shows a wind sock, common in other country's 'wind ahead' signs:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Brasil_A-44.svg/64px-Brasil_A-44.svg.png ... Not sure that this would make sense in places that don't have palm trees...

The point is to at least show a tall object bending over from a visibile strong wind. Tree or otherwise, the point gets across.