Transport focus wants bad road signs

[whole diary]

[infoman]

Being featured on BBC1 breakfast News

Transport focus want us to report tree foliage obscuring information signs.

Just a thought,please don't try and take the pics while in the car on your own.

Take a second person with you and get your passenger to take the pics.

https://www.transportfocus.org.uk/news-events-media/news/sort-my-sign-transport-watchdog-calls-for-better-road-user-information/

[grahame]

Just a thought,please don't try and take the pics while in the car on your own.

Take a second person with you and get your passenger to take the pics.

Thanks for that link.

Better still - take the pictures from a bus!

[Worcester_Passenger]

I have a similar gripe but about information signs at railway stations that have been installed without a thought as to whether they can be seen. Fine example here from Bristol Parkway.

[SandTEngineer]

What about keeping them clean so at least you can read them at some point?  I have a particular gripe about traffic bollards that are so black with dirt that they are impossible to see in bad weather, and rather than being a safety feature they become a hazard in their own right

[IndustryInsider]

I have a similar gripe but about information signs at railway stations that have been installed without a thought as to whether they can be seen. Fine example here from Bristol Parkway.

Not to say in your example it couldn't have been placed in a better location, but there are rules that are followed that can sometimes lead to locations which are far from optimal.  They include things like height off of the ground, whether a location hinders a drivers view of any signals (that is the reason Didcot's Platform 3 ones are tucked out of the way a bit), and the ease of installing an electrical supply to power it.

[ray951]

I have a similar gripe but about information signs at railway stations that have been installed without a thought as to whether they can be seen. Fine example here from Bristol Parkway.

Not to say in your example it couldn't have been placed in a better location, but there are rules that are followed that can sometimes lead to locations which are far from optimal.  They include things like height off of the ground, whether a location hinders a drivers view of any signals (that is the reason Didcot's Platform 3 ones are tucked out of the way a bit), and the ease of installing an electrical supply to power it.

That answers a lot of questions as I have often wondered why the signage on Platform 3 was so useless unless you are stood right by them. Thanks.

[grahame]

I have a similar gripe but about information signs at railway stations that have been installed without a thought as to whether they can be seen. Fine example here from Bristol Parkway.

Lovely!  (Not!)

One of my pet grouches is the lack of departure boards easily visible to passengers as they get off trains when making connections at hub stations.  A bit off the "bad ROAD" signs topic ... but stepping off a train onto a crowded platform at New Street or Temple Meads, wouldn't it be lovely to know where to head straight away?    Mobiles and devices much more common these days ... I've taken to using my self defence pages at http://www.mrug.org.uk/bhm.html and http://www.mrug.org.uk/bri.html respectively.

[Red Squirrel]

Forgive me if I am going off topic slightly, but puffin crossings are all badly-signed by design. How anyone could possibly imagine that putting the signal on the post where you wait is a good idea defies reason: on crossroads, this often makes it unclear which crossing the lights refer to. On top of that, the pedestrian lights appear to be deliberately angled so that you can't see them until you are stood right at the crossing, which just makes life that little bit harder.

[Witham Bobby]

My pet hobby-horse (in a big hobby horse stable) is that the various highway authorities (Yes, Worcestershire County Council.  I'm looking at you) don't take down signs that have served their purpose.  Within half a mile of my front door, a section of road was resurfaced about 8 years ago.  The "new road surface" warning signs are still there.  And in a 25 mile drive, I can pass two "new traffic signals" signs at different junctions, that have been there for 10+ years.  Reporting these to the council is a waste of breath.

There are too many signs that, it could be argued, are legitimate.  Leaving the illegitimate ones in place just adds to the clutter.  The more signs there are, the greater the risk of confusion and of missing something important through fatigue.

[eXPassenger]

Forgive me if I am going off topic slightly, but puffin crossings are all badly-signed by design. How anyone could possibly imagine that putting the signal on the post where you wait is a good idea defies reason: on crossroads, this often makes it unclear which crossing the lights refer to. On top of that, the pedestrian lights appear to be deliberately angled so that you can't see them until you are stood right at the crossing, which just makes life that little bit harder.

I completely agree.  I have never got used to the fact that there is no light opposite where you are standing. 

[Robin Summerhill]

Forgive me if I am going off topic slightly, but puffin crossings are all badly-signed by design. How anyone could possibly imagine that putting the signal on the post where you wait is a good idea defies reason: on crossroads, this often makes it unclear which crossing the lights refer to. On top of that, the pedestrian lights appear to be deliberately angled so that you can't see them until you are stood right at the crossing, which just makes life that little bit harder.

I completely agree.  I have never got used to the fact that there is no light opposite where you are standing. 

Another one in agreement here. This is simply moronic. If whoever dreamed this one up thinks that putting red and green lights to the side rather than in front of you is a good idea, then why aren't all traffic lights placed to the side? After all, it's only the person at the front of the queue that needs to see when it changes, isn't it 

[CyclingSid]

Cyclists Dismount signs, ever seen a Cyclists Remount sign?

[Red Squirrel]

Cyclists Dismount signs, ever seen a Cyclists Remount sign?

...or a 'Motorists please push your vehicle' sign?

[JayMac]

What about keeping them clean so at least you can read them at some point?  I have a particular gripe about traffic bollards that are so black with dirt that they are impossible to see in bad weather, and rather than being a safety feature they become a hazard in their own right

And sharp deviation chevrons. On the A30 between Milborne Port and Sherborne there is a nasty double bend on a hill and in a rock cutting where the chevrons are so dirty they no longer reflect. I informed the County Highways dept. in early January. They've still not been cleaned.

And while we're discussing safety features, have councils and Highways England run out of road marking paint and cats eyes? In many places these are in a terrible condition.

[JayMac]

Forgive me if I am going off topic slightly, but puffin crossings are all badly-signed by design. How anyone could possibly imagine that putting the signal on the post where you wait is a good idea defies reason: on crossroads, this often makes it unclear which crossing the lights refer to. On top of that, the pedestrian lights appear to be deliberately angled so that you can't see them until you are stood right at the crossing, which just makes life that little bit harder.

The theory behind having the pedestrian signals on a post on the right hand side of the crossing is that you are looking toward approaching traffic while watching for the green man. That's supposed to be safer than looking across the road. Having the red/green man closer to pedestrians also aids the visually impaired. It's easier for them to see the lights than if they are on the other side of the road.