|
Posted by Arthur J. Dock on April 20, 19100 at 19:38:54: Replacing red arrows with red balls does more than just create a larger target value for the driver.... It opens up a huge can of worms and creates a potential for confusion between the protected/permitted (five-section) heads and protected indications. Furthermore, it presents the driver with both a red ball and green ball indication simultaneously on approaches with separate left turn and through movements. Worse can result in a far-left indication which looks identical to a red through indication! This is a BAD IDEA! In order to avoid driver confusion, we will end up creating more confusion... ah, a grand proliferation of more signs such as "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" R10-10L and "LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN (symbolic green ball)" R10-5 will add to the visual clutter gaining us nothing. If a driver does not have the acuity to distinguish a left turn red arrow, what makes us think they will have the acuity to distinguish the wording on the sign (or for that matter are we SURE that all drivers read English)?!? By its very nature, a protected left turn phase should experience less accidents because it is MORE RESTRICTIVE than permitted and protected/permitted. This is a given. This is a BAD IDEA! Replacing a self-evident indication such as a red arrow (i.e. it's red and pointing in a direction... hmmm, what does it mean) with a non self-evident combination of a signal and a sign is not a good end result. This is a BAD IDEA! Use backplates to make the signals more visible - make that the first step. BTW, why is there are no 200 mm red arrows?!? Educate the public and save the red arrows! A full-length article will be put on this site, IMSA's site, and should be in the next issue of the IMSA Journal... ...we'd better hurry - comments must be in by June 30, 2000.
|