Wire-hung traffic lights
Edisk1353
hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
--
Sam I of NNJ
Computergeek, roadgeek, [undefined]geek
Adrian Leskiw
my house (in Wyandotte) 2 summers ago knocking it down and therefore
bringing down the wire-hung traffic signals hung from it. It took crews all
day to replace the poll and string up new lights. As for the employee, I
think he was talking on his cell phone at the time, but I've also heard he
was drunk, so who knows. Hung lights can also come down easier during severe
storms, and lights mounted on mast arms just look better, IMHO.
Adrian Leskiw
Ann Arbor/Wyandotte, MI
"Edisk1353" <NOSPA...@atomicmail.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:rrLX7.2464$TM3....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Jeff Kitsko
otherwise blow wire hung signals around.
--
Jeff Kitsko
Pennsylvania Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/
Pittsburgh Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/pghhwys/
Philadelphia Highways: http://www.pahighways.com/phlhwys/
"Edisk1353" <NOSPA...@atomicmail.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:rrLX7.2464$TM3....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Ralph Herman
"Jeff Kitsko" <jjki...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:tnNX7.17731$NE5.108572@rwcrnsc53...
> Mast hung signals are better in areas where there are high winds that
could
> otherwise blow wire hung signals around.
Tethered wire span signals do not flop around as much as non-tethered. Fla
and Indiana are two examples that come to mind. NYSDOT has some tethered
wire spans, but not as extensive as Fla and IN.
IMO, wire span signals do offer some advantages. The immovable signal masts
can be placed far away from the curbs or recovery zones... as NYSDOT
generally does on high speed routes. Left turn signals can also be placed
directly over the lanes on wide roadways, a clear advantage on highways with
multiple turn lanes.
IMO, the major disadvantage is that some states, such as NY, love single
span wires, instead of the box spans. Box wire spans are much easier to
view at stop lines.
And as far as signals being blown around... I suggest you watch one of the
massive Caltrans or ADOT mast arms bounce around on a windy day. Granted,
they don't flop around like most wire spans, but they are not immune to the
problem... and the generally unprotected masts are very close to the curbs
or shoulders.
Ralph
Gene Janczynskyi
could
> otherwise blow wire hung signals around.
>
miles from the coastline, due to hurricanes that frequent the area every
year. A policy that was inacted in the mid 1990s due to Hurricane Andrew
back on August 1992.
--
Gene Janczynskyi
in Cape Coral, FL
Scott O. Kuznicki
Take a look at the single-span installation below (ASCII art!!), commonly
found in MI. The wire goes from SW to NE (bottom-left to top-right). As
you can see, traffic on the cross-street gets screwed on visibility, since
the signal head is too close to the stop line to be visible, unless you're
granny under the steering wheel.
* *
o
o
* *
MI is now beginning to use foundation-mounted steel poles for their span
mounts, replacing the wood they normally used. But, they haven't (AFAIK)
adopted the IN box-span style. Indiana also uses top and bottom wires (two
rows) to mount their signals, providing better stability in wind and, IMO, a
nicer appearance.
I do like the hangning signals, though, because they are unique. They've
also (at least in MI) allowed the introduction of overhead lighted signs (No
Left Turn, their "Left" above the left turn signals, and "Only").
IL has an 80 ft (25m) foot minimum spacing from the stop bar, allows up to
120 (37), and requires near-side heads between 120 (37) and 150 (45). We
use all mast-arm signals for permanent installations. On temporary signals,
we use box-span (single wires across each approach) with one near right and
two to three far signals, depending on if there are left-turn signals and/or
right turn overlaps. Normally, the heads are vertical but we have sometimes
had to mount horizontally, such as past bridges or in areas where we
couldn't get sufficient vertical clearance for the poles.
Scott Kuznicki
Dedicated Highway Enthusiast and Civil (Traffic) Engineer
To reply, please remove the word "NOSPAM" from the
e-mail address and replace with "com"
Cody Goodman
"Gene Janczynskyi" <flroa...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:a0oggn$jct$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
> Which is why the FDOT does not hang install new traffic lights within 10
> miles from the coastline, due to hurricanes that frequent the area every
> year. A policy that was inacted in the mid 1990s due to Hurricane Andrew
> back on August 1992.
Some of these traffic lights are horizontally oriented to reduce wind
resistance.
PRDem3
They look so "third world." I'm used to Illinois, with it's virtual
non-existance of wire-hung lights. They look bad, and where do the "walk/don't
walk" signals go? In Illinois, they're just placed on the lower sections of
the traffic light post.
I remember going to Hiltion Head Island, SC one year. One thing I noticed was
the Island's charm and fair amount of wealth. But one thing that struck me as
odd was the wire-hung traffic lights. It looks like the town said, "ahhh, the
hell with it" when building the intersection.
Ralph Herman
"PRDem3" <prd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011230231438...@mb-cm.aol.com...
> > Why not?
>
> They look so "third world." I'm used to Illinois, with it's virtual
> non-existance of wire-hung lights.
Right, it is what you are used to. Nothing "third world" about it.
They look bad, and where do the "walk/don't
> walk" signals go? In Illinois, they're just placed on the lower sections
of
> the traffic light post.
In NYS, many oed signal heads are placed on breakaway signal posts. Near
the curbs, adjacent to the crosswalk. The non-movable span wire masts are
placed much futher back from the curb or shoulder, outside the recovery
zone.
> I remember going to Hiltion Head Island, SC one year. One thing I noticed
was
> the Island's charm and fair amount of wealth. But one thing that struck
me as
> odd was the wire-hung traffic lights. It looks like the town said, "ahhh,
the
> hell with it" when building the intersection.
Some jurisdictions are more concerned about unprotected immovable signal
masts in recovery zones. While I agree that mast arms are more visually
pleasing in most "downtown" situations, span wires offer many advantages on
wide, high speed highways.
Ralph
R.V. Droz
Edisk1353 wrote:
> I have noticed that many people on MTR don't like traffic lights that are
> hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
Mast arms are very durable, but if one does come down, the intersection is blocked.
Span wires are less durable, but usually easier to clear.
Mast arms have a clean appearance.
Span wires are very adjustable.
Mast arms have limitations on amount of lanes spannable before they become unstable.
Span wires can be installed over any size intersection.
Mast arms can be painted.
_________________________________________________________
Happy Motoring! _________
Robert V. Droz ( us...@earthlink.net ) |______|_\__
U.S. Highways : From US 1 to (US 830) |______|_|__\
http://www.us-highways.com/ () ()
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Edisk1353 wrote:
>
> > I have noticed that many people on MTR don't like traffic lights that are
> > hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> > other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
>
> Mast arms are very durable, but if one does come down, the intersection is blocked.
> Span wires are less durable, but usually easier to clear.
> Mast arms have a clean appearance.
> Span wires are very adjustable.
> Mast arms have limitations on amount of lanes spannable before they become unstable.
> Span wires can be installed over any size intersection.
> Mast arms can be painted.
Span wires are a huge improvement over their predecessor, pedestal
mounted signals, which are not over the roadway, but are on a pedestal
beside the roadway.
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
Chris Marshall
"Ralph Herman" <rlah...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:eiPX7.1489$%C1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> And as far as signals being blown around... I suggest you watch one of the
> massive Caltrans or ADOT mast arms bounce around on a windy day. Granted,
> they don't flop around like most wire spans, but they are not immune to
the
> problem... and the generally unprotected masts are very close to the curbs
> or shoulders.
Solved in Britain by requiring guard rail protection, and very heavy
protection at that. I've only ever seen a wire strung light once here, and
that was between two buildings in a city centre where there wasn't room for
a mast arm. It was removed after about a year, when the public complained it
looked ugly, and they *found* room for a mast arm.
As for blowing around in the wind, we tend to make them very sturdy.
--
Chris Marshall
http://www.error-404.co.uk/roads
(Email spam-proofed)
Dan Garnell
> my house (in Wyandotte) 2 summers ago knocking it down and therefore
> bringing down the wire-hung traffic signals hung from it. It took crews all
> day to replace the poll and string up new lights. As for the employee, I
> think he was talking on his cell phone at the time, but I've also heard he
> was drunk, so who knows. Hung lights can also come down easier during severe
> storms, and lights mounted on mast arms just look better, IMHO.
>
I definitely agree. The simple reason why MDOT, the Wayne Co. Rd.
Commission, and all the other road agencies around here -- and in many
other places like New York & Ohio -- prefer wire-hung signals versus
mast-arm signals is $$$; it's a much cheaper way to go. One example
of this: Ferndale. When MDOT replaced all the signals along M-1
(Woodward Ave.) in 2000 & early 2001 through southern Oakland Co.,
they started stringing new signal wires at the signalized
intersections. But, Ferndale came in & wanted mast arm signals
installed at M-1 @ 9 Mile & M-1 @ Cambourne (the next signal north of
9 Mile) to fit in with the new mast-arms installed along 9 Mile in
1999. MDOT would only do it Ferndale foot the difference in price
between the wire installation & the mast-arm installation. There has
apparantly been some sort of stalemate, because the last time I was
out that way, the OLD (small-diametered) signals were still hanging
over those two intersections. This is a good example of the reason
why the DOT prefers the wires.
But, I definitely wished more places would consider using mast arms;
they are more appeasing to the eye, IMO.
-Dan Garnell
Richard M. Simpson III
I don't think that way about it, tho. In Indiana, they are really well
done. They have been described in full detail in this thread, so I won't
get into that.
The first time I ever visited Michigan, I noticed how much the signal
installation looked like those in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. (Or at least the
way they looked in 1994 - the last time I spent any time there.)
Richard
Brian Purcell
> hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
San Antonio has a mix of both span wires and mast arm signals. In the
past, with a few exceptions (the downtown and Medical Center areas
being the main ones) the City installed only span wire signals to save
money. Now, they've switched mostly to mast arm installations. TxDOT
mixes the two depending on the circumstances (intersection geometry,
speed, etc.)
In my opinion, span wire signals are just ugly, especially when strung
from wooden utility poles. The ones with steel poles are better, but
still not as asthetically pleasing as mast arms, IMHO.
For pics of the large assortment of signals here, see my site at
http://home.att.net/~texhwyman2/sigpics.htm.
--Brian Purcell
San Antonio, Texas, USA
mailto:br...@texhwyman.com
http://www.texhwyman.com
david prins
pulls up to far and thus cannot see the signals very well. If visibility of
the signal is bad at the inteneded stop line, a pedestal mounted signal is
then often added on the far right side of the intersection (though I have
seen one on the left and that was due to a left turn arrow). Mounted above
the pedestrian signals if they are present.
Additionally, wire hung signals sway in the wind making it difficult to see
the signal if it sways toward or away too much.
Illinois uses mast arms for almost everything. Temporary signals are hung
on the far side of the intersection on wires perpendicular to the road.
This is known as a "box wire" installation. Permanent installations are
mast arms.
In spots, downtown Aurora, IL uses 3 sided signals mounted on four posts at
intersections (no face on the near left).
On at least two roads intersectiong I-88 in Aurora, IL are several box wire
installations that have been that way for at least 3 years. Including one
at the visitors entrance to the Fermi Labs off of Farnsworth.
ValHal 444
no offense in that).
Granted, there are safety benifits to wire-strewn signals. However, in any
situation I can concieve of, the benifits do not justify the cosmetic and
asthetic atrocity they cause, e.g. - the difference between a 1/2 mile diametre
asteroid hitting your car, as opposed to a 2 mile diametre one. I had a
relative that had a accident into a free wooden telephone pole, and that was
almost fatal.
The only plausible excuse, to me, is economical. I can understand the various
state DOTS using them, but, in any other situation, or where any municipality
lies, it is inexcusable.
In the Denver Metro, where I live, the city of Denver has had a standardized
cosmetic paradigm for their poles, masts, etc. for at least the last 8-10
years. The number of wire-strewns have dwindled slowly and surely. Now, I
believe 90% of the ones still in existance are in the inner city area. I can
honestly say that this, and this alone, has made Denver a much more pleasant
looking place to live.
Also, in Orange County, CA, which I am frequently, I have not seen a
wire-strewn for at least 4 years. I believe OCs masts do notable justice, along
with the beautiful lit street signs they use, in making the county look good.
However, there are some unique intersections where masts can be ridiculous, to
me. I have seen masts that defy physics around Phoenix, and I wondered how they
stayed rigid. ADOT can get a little out of whack, although even with this, if
the funding and technology is there, it still makes sense to me. The
intersection of Arapahoe and Parker here is a example. Masts here would seem to
just be too much (of course intersections of this magnitude really need to be
interchanges - a project on the backburner for CDOT, much like everything else,
including justification of their existance)
Also, though, and I have mentioned this before, theyre are the opposite ends of
the spectrum. Hampden and University are the quint-essential example. Lets just
say that whoever was responsible for wasting tax payers money on replacing, in
a small, poor intersection, a wire strewn with another wire-strewn,
accomplishing nothing except making the damn street signs look worse (anyone
know where this is, you know what Im talking about), should be drug out to San
Antonio to live. Obviously, they have some kind of strange fetish for wires. If
they could keep it out of contact with the rest of us "normal" people, much
would be appreciated.
Better get the old horseys out, cuz after CDOTS finished with us, theyre aint
gonna be no more roads to drive on in Denver!
C.R. Hinners
>Span wires are a huge improvement over their predecessor, pedestal
>mounted signals, which are not over the roadway, but are on a pedestal
>beside the roadway.
...then there's DC, where pedestal-mounted signals still, and always
will (thanks to the Aesthics Commission) rule. I think DC does have a
few full mast arm installations (NY Ave. at N. Capitol St. comes to
mind), and they do use a short arm (6 ft, I think) at some locations.
It's funny to see a major, six lane thoroughfare, with two pedestal
signals on each approach. A city, with all its visual clutter, has to
be the worst possible place to use pedestals!
Paul S. Wolf
> ...then there's DC, where pedestal-mounted signals still, and always
> will (thanks to the Aesthics Commission) rule. I think DC does have a
> few full mast arm installations (NY Ave. at N. Capitol St. comes to
> mind), and they do use a short arm (6 ft, I think) at some locations.
> It's funny to see a major, six lane thoroughfare, with two pedestal
> signals on each approach. A city, with all its visual clutter, has to
> be the worst possible place to use pedestals!
The major reason for the pedestal signals predates mast arms. DC law
does not allow overhead wiring of any kind in major portions of the
District (everything south of Florida Avenue).
Also, don't forget the fact that they use "BATTLESHIP GRAY" for the
signals and poles, also as a requirement of the Fine Arts Commission.
(BTW, I was Chief Traffic Signal Engineer for the DCDOT in the mid
70's.)
--
Paul S. Wolf, P.E. mailto:paul....@alum.wpi.edu
Traff-Pro Consultants, Inc.
Member, Institute of Transportation Engineers
John David Galt
> I have noticed that many people on MTR don't like traffic lights that are
> hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
Several reasons, in my experience.
First, wire-hung signals don't stay put if there's any real wind at all
(say, more than 5 mph). Flopping around does make them somewhat more
noticeable, but in an annoying way; but it also has been known to make
the lights hit vehicles or even tear loose. I suppose you could avoid
this problem by putting a second set of wires underneath, but I've never
seen it done, and you'd probably have to mount the whole mess higher up
to compensate. And it would obscure the view from some angles.
Second, they make an intersection look messy, and obscure the view of
any other overhead lights or signs that may be present, either there or
farther down the road you're on. In a city (where most signals are),
there tends to be plenty of visual clutter already. (And of course, if
there are overhead street signs, now common in cities, those are either
pole-mounted -- in which case the light may as well be, too -- or they
hang from the wires and share all of these problems themselves.)
Third, if there are trolleys or trolley buses running there, forget it.
Every time one of the lights flops over into a trolley wire (or near
enough to arc across), one or both electrical systems would short out.
Ralph Herman
"John David Galt" <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:3C33B753...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us...
> Edisk1353 wrote:
> > I have noticed that many people on MTR don't like traffic lights that
are
> > hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> > other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
>
> Several reasons, in my experience.
>
> First, wire-hung signals don't stay put if there's any real wind at all
> (say, more than 5 mph). Flopping around does make them somewhat more
> noticeable, but in an annoying way; but it also has been known to make
> the lights hit vehicles or even tear loose. I suppose you could avoid
> this problem by putting a second set of wires underneath, but I've never
> seen it done, and you'd probably have to mount the whole mess higher up
> to compensate. And it would obscure the view from some angles.
There are several ways to add the second wire... Below the signal head and a
"taught" wire above the signal head. The second above the signal head wire
is not support the signal or cable, but just as a tether. These signals do
not flop in light wind conditions. I've seen large Caltrans, ADOT and
Phoenix mast arms oscillate in moderate wind conditions, so mast arms are
not immue to wind conditions.
>
> Second, they make an intersection look messy, and obscure the view of
> any other overhead lights or signs that may be present, either there or
> farther down the road you're on. In a city (where most signals are),
> there tends to be plenty of visual clutter already. (And of course, if
> there are overhead street signs, now common in cities, those are either
> pole-mounted -- in which case the light may as well be, too -- or they
> hang from the wires and share all of these problems themselves.)
Beauty is in the eye of the holder. Massive mast arms have many of the same
faults you've listed. To cut down some of the distance and weight,
immovable
Masts for the arms are often placed in recovery zone. Plus, signals in many
instances cannot be placed near the center of the intersection. Masts for
wire hunfg signals can be placed further back from the roadway.
>
> Third, if there are trolleys or trolley buses running there, forget it.
> Every time one of the lights flops over into a trolley wire (or near
> enough to arc across), one or both electrical systems would short out.
>
Signal heads can easily be placed away from trolley wires.
Another point that should be mentioned...
Modern NYSDOT wire span signal installations are not significantly cheaper
than "traditional" mast arm installations. The routine underground wiring is
still need in NYSDOT installations on all intersection corners for roadway
detector access boxes, underground wiring conduits, pedestrian buttons, and
breakaway mounted poles for pedestrian signal faces and auxiliary post
mounted signal faces. Some of the NYSDOT rural steel masts (such as those
on NY 27 and NY 25 in Nassau County) are massive, and contain about the same
amount of steel that a traditional mast arm installation would be.
In the 1980's I asked NYSDOT why they favored wire spans, and they said the
costs compared to a mast arm installation were pretty close. But their
primary reason was that the immovable masts could be placed outside the
recovery zone.
Ralph
Damon Scott Hynes
> In spots, downtown Aurora, IL uses 3 sided signals mounted on four posts
at
> intersections (no face on the near left).
I was living in St. Louis in the mid-late 60's when broad areas of the north
suburbs were done that way. Jennings, West Florissant, Brown roads among
others. Followed within five years or so by mast arms.
--
Damon Hynes -- Waste of Bandwidth
http://home.att.net/~damonhynes/
The reviews are in:
"Dude, the pictures of your wife's rack won't load."
--from rec.autos.sport.nascar
Chris Marshall
"C.R. Hinners" <chin...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3c330920.345695824@news...
Britain uses them more often than anything else! A contrast to the US would
be the Sheepscar interchange near where I live - an at-grade intersection of
four or five roads up to six lanes each at various odd angles, and all done
with pedestals with a few masts thrown in. There's a set layout though:
- Left of the stop line there is a pedestal signal
- far side of the intersection, on the right there is a pedestal
- optional, but included quite often, a mast arm at the near right corner
too, with a light on the arm and a light at pedestal height on the mast.
Not sure why we use pedestals more than anything else - probably aesthetics
I imagine, since they look better than masts even.
John David Galt
>> will (thanks to the Aesthics Commission) rule. I think DC does have a
>> few full mast arm installations (NY Ave. at N. Capitol St. comes to
>> mind), and they do use a short arm (6 ft, I think) at some locations.
>> It's funny to see a major, six lane thoroughfare, with two pedestal
>> signals on each approach. A city, with all its visual clutter, has to
>> be the worst possible place to use pedestals!
> Britain uses them more often than anything else! A contrast to the US would
> be the Sheepscar interchange near where I live - an at-grade intersection of
> four or five roads up to six lanes each at various odd angles, and all done
> with pedestals with a few masts thrown in. There's a set layout though:
> - Left of the stop line there is a pedestal signal
> - far side of the intersection, on the right there is a pedestal
> - optional, but included quite often, a mast arm at the near right corner
> too, with a light on the arm and a light at pedestal height on the mast.
> Not sure why we use pedestals more than anything else - probably aesthetics
> I imagine, since they look better than masts even.
How about on the far left? Do they not want drivers to look where they're
going?
Daniel Dey
"John David Galt" <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:3C33B753...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us...
> > I have noticed that many people on MTR don't like traffic lights that
are
> > hung by wire. Why not? What are the benefits of masthead-hung lights or
> > other ways of hanging it instead of wire-hung ones?
>
> Several reasons, in my experience.
>
> First, wire-hung signals don't stay put if there's any real wind at all
> (say, more than 5 mph). Flopping around does make them somewhat more
> noticeable, but in an annoying way; but it also has been known to make
> the lights hit vehicles or even tear loose. I suppose you could avoid
> this problem by putting a second set of wires underneath, but I've never
> seen it done, and you'd probably have to mount the whole mess higher up
> to compensate. And it would obscure the view from some angles.
>
That's true, but even masthead-hung lights can bounce around a lot in the
wind, and Hurricane Andrew knocked a lot of them over in 1992.
> Second, they make an intersection look messy, and obscure the view of
> any other overhead lights or signs that may be present, either there or
> farther down the road you're on. In a city (where most signals are),
> there tends to be plenty of visual clutter already. (And of course, if
> there are overhead street signs, now common in cities, those are either
> pole-mounted -- in which case the light may as well be, too -- or they
> hang from the wires and share all of these problems themselves.)
>
I agree totally.
> Third, if there are trolleys or trolley buses running there, forget it.
> Every time one of the lights flops over into a trolley wire (or near
> enough to arc across), one or both electrical systems would short out.
>
Mass transit advocates should keep this in mind.
Daniel Timothy Dey.
Edmund Blackadder
>
> Also, in Orange County, CA, which I am frequently, I have not seen a
> wire-strewn for at least 4 years. I believe OCs masts do notable
> justice, along with the beautiful lit street signs they use, in
> making the county look good.
I've only seen two permanent examples of wire-hung lights in OC. Both
are in a residential area of Garden Grove, on Springdale JNO SR-22.
However, these serve as glorified stop signs instead of actual signals,
as they both only flash red. Other than these, I've only seen wire-hung
lights in OC during construction projects.
Sherman Potter
news:FCQX7.1704$%C1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Non sequitur. Same area exposed to wind.
SPUI
"Sherman Potter" <pot...@4077.mash.mil> wrote in message
news:a14ie...@enews2.newsguy.com...
> "Cody Goodman" <cod...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:FCQX7.1704$%C1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > resistance.
>
> Non sequitur. Same area exposed to wind.
If you look at where the wire is attached a vertical one is only connected
on top, and so the bottom can be blown. On a horizontal setup both ends are
connected.
US71
> IMO, wire span signals do offer some advantages. The immovable signal masts
> can be placed far away from the curbs or recovery zones... as NYSDOT
> generally does on high speed routes. Left turn signals can also be placed
> directly over the lanes on wide roadways, a clear advantage on highways with
> multiple turn lanes.
They can also be used as temporary signals such as the one at US71 and
AR540/282 in Mountainburg, AR a couple years back. I've also seen
temporary wire-spans at some highway construction projects (esp in
Kansas and Missouri)
AKirsc5653
attractive---at least they are the way New York State does them. Bear in mind,
my bias comes from my having grown up in Levittown, but I think NYSDOT signals
are soem of the most attractive signals out there. In fact they're the major
obsession within my roadgeekery. I don't know about other states, but NYSDOT
signals are noticeably different depending on the region--and no two are quite
alike.
Some mast arm signals are attractive--noticeably New York City--but many are
nothing special. The ones favored by Nassau County are, IMHO, ugly, ugly, UGLY!
And unfortuantely it appears that the NYSDOT has adapted that same mast arm for
some of the few state lights on Long Island (and a few in Westchester too.)
Lately, NYS has adapted, at least within Long Island, the Hudson Valley, and
the Captial District (Regions 10, 8, and 1 respectively) a two wire system
where both wires are above the signals. The upper one is where the signals hang
from, with tethers both short and long, while the lower one hugs the top of
each signal. Of these three regions I've seen the fewest such instalations on
Long Island, where often there is a second wire anyway for a different purpose,
hanging the signs accmpanying the signals. (I don't kbnow why that would
preclude the second signal wire, but there you go.)
:-) Andrew
Tulsarama
attractive, as does Columbus, Ohio.
Rick M.
Tulsa
Andrew Muck
I like wire-hung also. Due to the fact they're often hung diagonally,
they're staggered, as New York tends to have 2 signals facing each
roadway. This is good, if a light turns red quicker than what you
anticipate and stop late, allowing you to see the traffic light, where
if you stop late under a mast arm, you can't see it because its above
you and not in front of you, which the staggering on the wire spans
allow.
Sherman Potter
"SPUI" <sp...@mit.eREMOVEdTHISu> wrote in message
news:WcpZ7.271375$Ga5.49...@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com...
It doesn't do a thing to reduce wind resistance, though, only the effects of
wind resistance, and then only to crosswinds, not direct winds. The same
area is exposed to wind. Having both ends connected to the wire does
nothing to address vertical swing, only horizontal sway. You slightly
reduce the area exposed to crosswinds having the sun shields in line with
the breeze but the same effect is achieved by connecting both ends of the
signal to the wire.
Chris Marshall
> > Britain uses them more often than anything else! A contrast to the US
would
> > be the Sheepscar interchange near where I live - an at-grade
intersection of
> > four or five roads up to six lanes each at various odd angles, and all
done
> > with pedestals with a few masts thrown in. There's a set layout though:
> > - Left of the stop line there is a pedestal signal
> > - far side of the intersection, on the right there is a pedestal
> > - optional, but included quite often, a mast arm at the near right
corner
> > too, with a light on the arm and a light at pedestal height on the mast.
> > Not sure why we use pedestals more than anything else - probably
aesthetics
> > I imagine, since they look better than masts even.
>
> How about on the far left? Do they not want drivers to look where they're
> going?
Apparently not - have a look at this fairly standard intersection:
http://www.error-404.co.uk/roads/images/2/1.jpg
Kind of hard to see but at the far left side there are two lights facing
away (mirroring the arrangement in the foreground) but none for traffic in
this direction.
Can't quite work out why not really, but that's how it is!
AKirsc5653
that you often get a variety of fixtures in each set. It is common, for
instance, to see one-way, two-way, three-way, and four-way all along the same
wire. It's common for the one-way to be on the far ends and the three and
four-ways to be in the center, but there is a great deal of variety. In states
like Pennsyvania, one-way is just about all you ever get.
:-) Andrew
David D Miller
"John David Galt" <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:3C349878...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us...
For safety reasons, drivers on any given approach should always be able to
see at least two signal heads, usually a primary and a secondary (or
reinforcing) signal. In Britain the primary signal is located 1-2 m beyond
the stop line as seen in the direction of the traffic flow, and normally on
the nearside of the carriageway. A duplicate primary signal can be placed
immediately beyond the other end of the stop line, in the median or on a
central island. A secondary signal is usually on the far offside of the
intersection, and may show additional non-conflicting information, e.g., a
green right-turn arrow. [From O'Flaherty]
Secondary signals are almost never placed on the far nearside of an
intersection, possibly because they could be misinterpreted as another
primary signal.
For an example of a signal-controlled junction in the UK, where some flows
have four separate closely-spaced primary signals to contend with, have a
look at this map of the new Barnton junction in Edinburgh:
http://download.edinburgh.gov.uk/barntonjunc.pdf All the surface markings
at the junction are shown on the map: Signal-controlled stop lines have a
single solid line across the lane, and Yield is shown with a large triangle
in the lane and a double broken line across the end. The brown areas are
high adhesion surfaces; red is a cycle box with an advance stop line; and
green is a bus-only lane, which bypasses one set of eastbound signals with a
yield - effectively a straight on on red!
Some more piccies of typical UK traffic lights can be found with these
links:
http://www.detr.gov.uk/roads/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/signs/16_99/index.htm
http://www.detr.gov.uk/roads/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/signs/04_95/sc-7a.jpg
http://www.detr.gov.uk/roads/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/signs/04_95/sc-7b.jpg
David D Miller
Edinburgh
David D Miller
news:a1ikto$dq6$1...@suaar1aa.prod.compuserve.com...
> For an example of a signal-controlled junction in the UK, where some flows
> have four separate closely-spaced primary signals to contend with, have a
> look at this map of the new Barnton junction in Edinburgh:
> http://download.edinburgh.gov.uk/barntonjunc.pdf
For some recent photos of the junction with the new traffic signals:
http://miller_dd.tripod.com/A90_Barnton_Junction
I've also put up some new pictures of the Forth Road Bridge:
http://miller_dd.tripod.com/A90_Forth_Bridge
David D Miller
Edinburgh, Scotland
Brian Purcell
> Judging from the pictures, San Antonio looks like one ugly place (please take
> no offense in that).
:-) None taken. If nothing else, at least there's quite a variety!
[...]
> In the Denver Metro, where I live, the city of Denver has had a standardized
> cosmetic paradigm for their poles, masts, etc. for at least the last 8-10
> years. The number of wire-strewns have dwindled slowly and surely. Now, I
> believe 90% of the ones still in existance are in the inner city area. I can
> honestly say that this, and this alone, has made Denver a much more pleasant
> looking place to live.
I noticed that last time I was there. The Kansas City area appears to
have similar protocols.
--Brian Purcell
Brandon Gorte
>
> Illinois uses mast arms for almost everything. Temporary signals are hung
> on the far side of the intersection on wires perpendicular to the road.
> This is known as a "box wire" installation. Permanent installations are
> mast arms.
>
> In spots, downtown Aurora, IL uses 3 sided signals mounted on four posts at
> intersections (no face on the near left).
>
> On at least two roads intersectiong I-88 in Aurora, IL are several box wire
> installations that have been that way for at least 3 years. Including one
> at the visitors entrance to the Fermi Labs off of Farnsworth.
Illinois does however have a few permanent span wire signals.
1. Illinois 83 (Cal-Sag Rd) and 108th Ave. This is a Michigan-style
wire span.
2. Illinois 171 (Archer Ave) and McCarthy Rd (Lemont). Ditto.
Other wire spans seem to be put up by local agencies.
3. McDonough St and Joyce Rd (Joliet). Four signals are on a wire span
across the intersection (ASCII art).
o
^
<
>
v
o
< indicaes the face of the signal.
That one has been up as a wire span since 1974 or so.
Brandon Gorte
bmg...@hotmail.com
Joliet, IL