Press stories on controversial road signs

[The Thinker]

Recently in the press there has been articles on a particular road sign.

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol ... steer.html

The sign is here.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=b905&h ... 9,,0,17.78

I think that there is a case for changing the sign as the bend the sign is for is less sever than the bend you can see, and most people should be happy to get warnings about things they cant see yet. Perhaps a sign indicating a series of bends would have been more appropriate.
However I still dont believe that people will drive off a road because a sign says so, or think that is confusing lets go faster.

I use this stretch of road on observed drives and ask associates about it, most are a bit confused but all have driven appropriately.

[PeterE]

In practice an apparently wrong sign like this isn't dangerous as such, but it is important to maintain confidence in the signing system that highway authorities do their job diligently and avoid creating ambiguity.

[GJD]

Recently in the press there has been articles on a particular road sign.

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol ... steer.html

Someone raised something similar in a thread a few months ago. As I said in that thread, I don't think it's particularly uncommon, but I guess the first time you come across the concept it might take a moment to figure it out.

The sign is here.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=b905&h ... 9,,0,17.78

If you had the opportunity to stop at that point and ask any of your associates what they thought that sign was for, I can't imagine it would take them very long to come up with the answer.

the bend the sign is for is less sever than the bend you can see,

Is it? It looks from the overhead view that the second bend is sharper or at least longer. The StreetView photo of the second bend looks worse too, but that could be because it's on the inside of the bend, not the outside.

and most people should be happy to get warnings about things they cant see yet.

Well indeed.

However I still dont believe that people will drive off a road because a sign says so

No, that's just nonsense.

[ROG]

Sign needs moving to after the left curve

[GJD]

Sign needs moving to after the left curve

By that reasoning, wouldn't it be better to just remove the sign? From here it's apparent there's a right curve ahead - probably even more so from the correct side of the road - so no need for a sign at all.

Perhaps a double bend sign, left then right, from somewhere further back would lead to less public outcry. Although TBH, I think Falkirk Council must be doing an fantastic job for their residents if this is the only thing left to complain about.

Question for the OP - do you know if there are similar complaints for the equivalent sign heading in the opposite direction - a warning for a left bend when all you can see is the road curving right?

[Gareth]

I think that there is a case for changing the sign as the bend the sign is for is less sever than the bend you can see

Have you looked for broken wall on the left side? Coming off the right-hander is where people have had trouble, which suggests that they have been mislead into taking the right bend too quickly.

Regarding the location of the sign - on the rise to the right bend there is vegetation on the left which would result in the sign quickly being overgrown and missed - regular maintenance would be required. If the sign was placed in the dip, after the entrance on the left and before the vegetation, it might be missed as people looked down at the road. I think the location is not unreasonable. If the sign confuses some drivers it will probably encourage them to slow down slightly, which may help them pass without incident.

[The Thinker]

Sign needs moving to after the left curve

Question for the OP - do you know if there are similar complaints for the equivalent sign heading in the opposite direction - a warning for a left bend when all you can see is the road curving right?

I just raised this as it made the papers. I have heard nothing about any other signs (including in the opposite direction), but the I suppose the same issue arises.

The article was originally in a local paper. Like most local papers they are looking for pages to fill and so will print many concerns from people. The national papers have a group of reporters scouring the local papers for news and I think this got picked up as it was a reasonably slow news day.

[Big Err]

It's not unusual for the guys who put the signs up to pick up a bend sign from the store regardless of direction and stick it up on a pole. Sadly some of these individuals don't seem to care or notice what they have done until their supervisor or the designer checks the job, or in this case the newspaper make a scoop out of it. Maybe they've been hacking the roads authority phone lines...........

[apple tango]

Does not look controversial to me.

What is the point in signing a hazard that is obvious? There is no need for a warning sign for a left bend when it is patently obvious there is a left bend, or has the standard of driving really got that bad?

The whole point of warning signs is to point out hidden or unusual hazards, to give advance warning of something that we may not yet be able to see, and allow us to adjust our driving plan accordingly so there are no surprises. Warning of a right hand bend hidden behind a left hand bend makes perfect sense to me.

[nigelc]

Does not look controversial to me.

What is the point in signing a hazard that is obvious? There is no need for a warning sign for a left bend when it is patently obvious there is a left bend, or has the standard of driving really got that bad?

The whole point of warning signs is to point out hidden or unusual hazards, to give advance warning of something that we may not yet be able to see, and allow us to adjust our driving plan accordingly so there are no surprises. Warning of a right hand bend hidden behind a left hand bend makes perfect sense to me.

I'll go along with that.

It would take the kind of idiot that follows a satnav down a footpath and into a quarry to turn right just because the sign said so at the left hand bend.

[fungus]

Does not look controversial to me.

What is the point in signing a hazard that is obvious? There is no need for a warning sign for a left bend when it is patently obvious there is a left bend, or has the standard of driving really got that bad?

The whole point of warning signs is to point out hidden or unusual hazards, to give advance warning of something that we may not yet be able to see, and allow us to adjust our driving plan accordingly so there are no surprises. Warning of a right hand bend hidden behind a left hand bend makes perfect sense to me.

I'll go along with that.

It would take the kind of idiot that follows a satnav down a footpath and into a quarry to turn right just because the sign said so at the left hand bend.

I'd agree here.

The bends in question look pretty obvious to me. It reminds me of an article in one of my instructor magazines two or three years ago where the author was being driven through the Netherlands by a highways engineer. As they approached a farm the author of the article commented that the road lacked a road sign warning of a farm. The reply was that you could see farm buildings, and you could smell the animals. Do you need a sign?

[brianhaddon]

Does not look controversial to me.

What is the point in signing a hazard that is obvious? There is no need for a warning sign for a left bend when it is patently obvious there is a left bend, or has the standard of driving really got that bad?

The whole point of warning signs is to point out hidden or unusual hazards, to give advance warning of something that we may not yet be able to see, and allow us to adjust our driving plan accordingly so there are no surprises. Warning of a right hand bend hidden behind a left hand bend makes perfect sense to me.

I'll go along with that.

It would take the kind of idiot that follows a satnav down a footpath and into a quarry to turn right just because the sign said so at the left hand bend.

I'd agree here.

The bends in question look pretty obvious to me. It reminds me of an article in one of my instructor magazines two or three years ago where the author was being driven through the Netherlands by a highways engineer. As they approached a farm the author of the article commented that the road lacked a road sign warning of a farm. The reply was that you could see farm buildings, and you could smell the animals. Do you need a sign?

Precisely. I wonder how many of the signs that litter the roads are really necessary. The one that always makes me wonder is the sign that reads 'New road layout ahead'. So motorists can see a (relatively) small sign and have time to read it but don't notice a great big roundabout (for instance) in their way.
Regards
Brian Haddon

[fungus]

[/quote]
Precisely. I wonder how many of the signs that litter the roads are really necessary. The one that always makes me wonder is the sign that reads 'New road layout ahead'. So motorists can see a (relatively) small sign and have time to read it but don't notice a great big roundabout (for instance) in their way.
Regards
Brian Haddon[/quote]

New road layout ahead means nothing to a stranger.

[nigelc]

Precisely. I wonder how many of the signs that litter the roads are really necessary. The one that always makes me wonder is the sign that reads 'New road layout ahead'. So motorists can see a (relatively) small sign and have time to read it but don't notice a great big roundabout (for instance) in their way.
Regards
Brian Haddon

New road layout ahead means nothing to a stranger. [/quote]

I've often wondered what the old layout looked like