[Closed] Traffic Lights and the green man.

We had some really confusing traffic lights near me a few years back that always had a cycle when all the pedestrians could cross and a stage where the green light shone, for what was in affect a builders yard and nothing else. All night. So, when attending an RTC nearby I asked the police officer about the stupid lights (since the driver had totalled one of them) and he said that the lights were stupid, but it meant that traffic queued at the top of the hill, as, if the lights ran normally, the traffic would all queue at the big junction at the bottom, where A: there wasn't much room for cars to queue and B: Motorists would block the junction, snarling up more roads. Whereas at the top, there was nothing to do but queue.

made sense that way, so maybe yours is similar. Or just stupid. there are a lot of stupid traffic lights!

Am I missing something... if the roads are all bidirectional (not one way) then they all have to stop to enable the green man to come on - thats the way it has always been unless there have been complicated left/right filter lanes or large (usually staggered barrier) pedestrian islands...

Hmmm poly does make sense - how can you have one arm of a junction with a green man if ANY of the other arms are on green for cars, unless its a 1-way (entering the junction) arm that the green man is on?

I'm lost- at a conventional set of cross roads I would expect to see (say) the north-south flow of cars with a green light, and pedestrians not permitted to cross the moving traffic. The east-west cars will have a red light and pedestrians get the green man, with turning vehicles holding til the green man goes or the pedestrians have finished. However, I am seeing more and more intersections where there are reds across both flows, and then the pedestrians are permitted to cross.

Or has it always been like this, and I'm under some sor tof delusion about how lights work in this country (perfectly possible, you know- I'm a piss poor driver..)

vinnyeh - Member

I'm lost- at a conventional set of cross roads I would expect to see (say) the north-south flow of cars with a green light, and pedestrians not permitted to cross the moving traffic. The east-west cars will have a red light and pedestrians get the green man,[b] with turning vehicles holding til the green man goes or the pedestrians have finished[/b]. However, I am seeing more and more intersections where there are reds across both flows, and then the pedestrians are permitted to cross.

Holding turning vehicles via a filter? I'd say those lights are in the minority.

with turning vehicles holding til the green man goes or the pedestrians have finished

this wouldn't happen, the traffic would have turn as allowed by the traffic lights and the pedestrians would end up as another unfortunate road death statistic

 

Nope Vinneyeh, you've lost me too - you can't let pedestrians cross one way whilst allowing cars to potentially turn left/right into their path (how do you 'hold' car on a green light?

Stopping traffic flow to enable pedestrians to cross safely is pretty much the standard way up here. Sometime the pedestrians have to press the button on the lights for that to kick in so if no-one is there the cars can just do east/west, north/south until requested.

I can't figure out why some lights make pedestrians wait
There's a crossing near me that takes around 30 seconds to change the lights to red for the cars - why?
There's no other lights around that need to be timed

so what's the point? - I'm not bothered about waiting but it bothers me not understanding why they just don't change immediately

there is a set of lights which do what vinnyeh is suggesting on my walk to work, most prople turn left on green, and then faced with a red, fail to notice the line on the ground, and drive through the crossing, almost get knocked down once a week.

Or has it always been like this, and I'm under some sort of delusion about how lights work in this country

I think so.

edit

I must be missing something too. There are lights which do the pedestrian thing without anyone pressing a button? Must be a city thing, I've not seen any yet.

What we're really missing in this country is a button for cyclists to press when the lights are stuck on red and won't change until a car pootles over the induction loop.

samuri,

In the circumstances where fixed lights (ie not temporary lights like at roadworks) are controlled by a sensor (like an induction loop) that does not register a particular user group (like cyclists) then that user group can proceed through the red light (if there is not a suitable vehicle coming to activate the Green signal) as if it were are a Give Way junction.

It's worth writing a letter to the responsible Highways Dept informing them of the problem. They may fix it but, more importantly some may say, means they have to act to resolve the issue or become liable for compensation should a third party suffer loss because of the fault.

Does that make sense?

[img] [/img]

prefer redman

mk1fan - all UK lights are only "advanced" by a sensor, they all return to timed operation if no vehicles are seen - no "limb" of the junction remains red indefinitely even if one side sees no traffic flow and the other has constant traffic. Hence you're not allowed to pootle through on red, that is just impatience?

coffeeking,

What's the simplist way to put this? Oh, that's it, you're wrong. There are plenty of lights in the UK that are controlled solely by sensor. I have a set at the bottom of my road (controlled solely by induction loop).

Normally, as I approach there is a car / van / bus to activate the lights but there have been plenty of occasions where I have passed through as if it were a Give Way. And before anyone suggests it, yes I've tried leaning the bike at an angle over the loops. It doesn't work at these lights (and that's with an On One Inbred).

mk1 fan - you are still breaking the law tho I believe. I had exactly that with a set near my old place of work. Side road onto a main road crossroads ( five entries to the junction) and they didn't change until a car came along. The side road part of the cycle just got missed unless a car triggered them.

As for the pedestrian crossings - I have never seen a crossroads where the green man comes on while cars can turn left or right thru the lights.

Some have a green man twice a cycle some once.

No you're not breaking the Law as the Law allows you to proceed as if it were a give way - to both pedestrians and road users. Although I doubt that Police Officer would be aware this section of the RTA.

There's a crossing near me that takes around 30 seconds to change the lights to red for the cars - why?
There's no other lights around that need to be timed

It actually makes me angry. I'll be standing in the pouring rain, waiting for the lights to change, while all the nice, dry drivers pootle past. The lights outside my house can take over two minutes to change - this is to cross a busy main road. There is a junction near work that I've timed at 4 minutes wait for a pedestrian. (Yes I know, sad, but this is how frustrated I get.) And when the green man does appear I'm likely to be mown down by red-light dodgers.

They must be broken then mk1fan - because lights were timed only before they were sense+timed. We have one locally that is sensed and timed, occasionally the timer side keels over and it goes to sense only - they come out and repair it pretty sharpish.

Can you show use the law that specifies that you can pass through?

No you're not breaking the Law as the Law allows you to proceed as if it were a give way - to both pedestrians and road users. Although I doubt that Police Officer would be aware this section of the RTA.

How are you supposed to tell if you are on one these red lights?

There are standard 'times' that systems need to adhere too. As much of a ball ache as it is, you should report these things to the Highways Dept responsible for the section of Highway.

ETA This is a reply to the post above Idlejon

IdleJon,

Normally if you're standing there for ages and then a car arrives and the lights change within 10-seconds. Induction loops can be seen through the road surface and look a bit like Corporal / Sargent stripes accross the lane. There'll be two loops too. One set about 25M back from the lights.

There aren't many of them in the UK - the vast vast vast majority of lights have a default timing sequence and some have sensor overides to aide traffic flow. If you can't figure it out then ask the Highways Dept about specific lights. I only proceed through the Red Light at the bottom of my road becuase I know that the lights are not activated by my bike and therefore I am allowed to under the RTA.

mk1fan - I'm aware of the timings etc, they are governed by guidelines rather than rules IIRC.

However if you check either the RTA 88, or later, or the TSRGD you'll find no provision for passing red depending on vehicles not being sensed. Both of those acts/guidelines suggest you will be breaking the law should you pass the stop line?

Coffeeking,

They're not broken, they are brand new well 8-months old and have always worked like this.

Road Traffic Act - I believe the current version is 2006. You'll be amazed at what you can and can't do on the Public Highway. Like the difference between Parking, Waiting, Picking Up and Dropping Off.

To all - Educate yourself and become a safer Road User.

As for light timings they are more than guidelines.

mk1fan - feel free to point it out - I've scanned 1988, 1991 and 2006 now and see no provision. And whats with the Capitals on Any word that seems Vaguely Important?

If you're telling us we're all wrong, the police are all wrong and unaware of the laws and that there is a hidden clause allowing you to sneak through on red if you think the light hasnt seen you then point it out - all UK RT law is available online. I've just spent 20 minutes searching it but I can't find it, without written proof on a government website what you say means nothing? I'll have a chat to a member of my family who designs road junctions and their lights/timing sequences on a day to day basis (this is how I know they're guidelines) - it'll be interesting to see. If you can point out the letter of the law I'll forard it to him as I dont think he's heard of it.

Incidentally the best way to get a bike to be spotted by an inductive loop is to ride with the bike vertical along one of the lines that runs in teh direction of travel, apparently.

The set I used to pass definitely did not go to green on the side road unless triggered - and Infra red trigger as well not inductive loop. Two main roads with lots of traffic and one small side road. the two main roads would change between red and green and the small side road would not unless triggered by a car. Not broken - just how it was set up.

another set at the old eastern general hospital were the same - the access road to the hospital had a set of lights and they wouldn't ever change unless a car came to them from the hospital.

I'm capitalising the words because they are a specific term [in this case legal] and have a specific meaning as opposed to having their normal (noun / verb etc) meaning. A bit like Building Owner in reference to the Party Wall Act.

I didn't say the the Police were 'wrong', just possibly unaware of an obscure item of Law.

I didn't realise that you know a family member who - I assume - is a Civil Engineer of sorts therefore you must be fully conversant with all guidelines, laws, regulations and standards. How could anyone else know anything?

Oh, by the way they're is 'they are'. Did you mean 'that there are'?

I will gander through the RTA and find it.

I'm capitalising the words because they are a specific term [in this case legal] and have a specific meaning as opposed to having their normal (noun / verb etc) meaning. A bit like Building Owner in reference to the Party Wall Act.

You're doing it on a lot of words that dont need it, such as "Picking Up" (used in the RTA non-capitalised if you look) and Civil Engineer. There's simply no need, however it was more of a passing observation than a criticism.

I didn't realise that you know a family member who - I assume - is a Civil Engineer of sorts therefore you must be fully conversant with all guidelines, laws, regulations and standards. How could anyone else know anything?

I never claimed to be, I raised the question and asked you to prove it since you're so insistent.

I didn't say the the Police were 'wrong', just possibly unaware of an obscure item of Law.

If they stop/fine/prosecute you under the rule that you're not meant to be passing red they'd be wrong.

Oh, by the way they're is 'they are'. Did you mean 'that there are'?

Correct, I mis-cut-n-pasted that line while I was editing my response - I was in the middle of writing "that they're wrong" and re-worded it, thanks.

Shall be interested to see this as I couldnt find it by several searches, when you find it let us know if you did it by manual searching or by the search facility on the site - I failed with either 🙂

Another set of lights near me that arnt timed. Its a side road where buses pull in then exit again. The lights have closed loops in the roads for normal people who are made to wait about 2 minutes, and a movement sensor aimed high and to the right side of the road so they change within a few seconds for the buses. If I drive very close to the kerb in my van I can activate the bus sensor and get through quickly 🙂 No timer on these, cars often stop well back from the stop line as the buses like to cut the corner, so far back that they are not on the sensors. Ive sat there for 6 minutes waiting for the car in front to finally roll towards the lights 👿

spooky - cant invisage the junction you mean, but doesnt sound right somehow. As per mk1fan I'd contact the local council as it shouldnt be like that.

You're doing it on a lot of words that dont need it, such as "Picking Up" (used in the RTA non-capitalised if you look) and Civil Engineer. There's simply no need, however it was more of a passing observation than a criticism.

I capitalise words that require it. It maybe old fashioned but I prefer that to inacurate, slap dash approach to English that most people like to use nowadays. The incorrect use of their, there and they're is something that should be left behind at school. But your poor English is just an observation I've made over a lot to threads. Secondly, out of courtesy a Professional title should be recognised with capitals.

I never claimed to be, I raised the question and asked you to prove it since you're so insistent.

You are claiming to be by the contents of your posts. You haven't raised a question you've stated facts about all traffic lights and stated that I'm wrong. You back this up by saying that you're right because you're related to a CE.

If they stop/fine/prosecute you under the rule that you're not meant to be passing red they'd be wrong.

But I won't be prosecuted because you are allowed to pass. Although, and this is my reference to the Police, I doubt a 'Beat Bobby' would be aware of the excemption. I would be reported, my statement taken and the CPS would drop the case as no offence had been committed.

I'll look tonight.

Said junction:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Newhaven,+East+Sussex,+United+Kingdom&sll=50.336691,6.948287&sspn=0.01208,0.038624&ie=UTF8&cd=2&geocode=FW4YBwMdMtkAAA&split=0&ll=50.795144,0.048433&spn=0.000374,0.001207&t=h&z=20&iwloc=A

Im happy, I know how to get through quick and its very rare I go round there in my car!

I capitalise words that require it.

Naturally - but 50% of your text didn't require it.

The incorrect use of their, there and they're is something that should be left behind at school.

I agree, no arguments there.

But your poor English is just an observation I've made over a lot to threads.

A lot to threads? Curious. I'd have thought the incorrect use of "to" and "of" would be something else you'd think should be left behind at school?

Regardless of that I'm not sure where you're referring to, nor do I care to check as my general standard of writing is far from poor, however anyone capitalising Picking Up, Civil Engineer and Red Light, where it is not even so in legal documentation referring to them, would seem ill-placed to judge others. Especially when they dont know the difference between to and of.

When answering posts on forums I admit I do, as do others, tend to slip into conversational English rather than formal - I find it makes people sound a bit less of a self-important tit. Each to his own.

Secondly, out of courtesy a Professional title should be recognised with capitals.

Novel. Especially in a weak-context situation. Again, your call though. Personally I find smattering sentences with un-neccessary capitalisation makes it look somewhat stupid; as though someone were trying to make their post seem to come from a position of authority on the matter. Also, I tend to tailor my text to the audience - it's a skill I picked up so far through life which helps to get the message across in different circumstances - which is, after all, the purpose of language.

Regardless of your return critique of my use of English in online fora, I'm still interested to hear what you find.

whew, go out for a ride and return to this 8)

Can't see the link spooks - think I have a browser problem going on here. Well so long as you're happy I don't suppose it matters really!

In your poor version of English, yes my replies may not warrant capitalisation but then again, as I said, I have higher standards. If you want to use lazy grammar then that's your call and no doubt in 100-years time English will be signifficantly different.

If a person makes the effort and sacrifice to become and remain a qualified Professional then capitalising their title is reflective of their effort. If you choose not to show such courtesy then, again, that's your call.

There's nothing you could do not to sound like a self-important ****. I'm sure though that STW members appreciate you trying though.

so what's the point? - I'm not bothered about waiting but it bothers me not understanding why they just don't change immediately

Because when the next pedestrian turns up 10 seconds after you they'll press the button again and traffic is stopped twice. By putting in a short delay there's a chance that peds will cross in groups rather than singly. Presumably there should also be a delay once they've been activated so that they don't change again without a delay.

That said, increasingly lights seem to favour peds over road users - I can't see the benefit myself, you sit in a 5 minute traffic jam to get to the shops but then can cross from the car park to the bank without having to wait 20 seconds. Don't they realise pedestrians and drivers are the same people?

mk1 - you suggest your version of English is "correct" (moreso than others) - having spent too much time in education I've never seen a version like it, with such odd capitalisation, though that doesn't make me right of course. At no point did I assert that my "forum English" was any better.

If a person makes the effort and sacrifice to become and remain a qualified Professional then capitalising their title is reflective of their effort. If you choose not to show such courtesy then, again, that's your call.

If you insist, from a family of qualified engineers and from my team I thank you for your distinction of our efforts 😉

There's nothing you could do not to sound like a self-important ****.

You're the only STW member to voice that opinion, and remaining quiet on such issues is not a strength of the STW posse - thats why it's fun to be here! 😉

All I did was ask for proof of the law you suggest and ask why you were capitalising odd words (as I assumed you were quoting verbatim; I used those words in the search of the legislation and got very few hits hence asking) and you got very upset and personal over it - I find this to be slightly strange behaviour?

Was it too much to ask for proof?

Was it self-important of me to ask why you were capitalising words/phrases that don't require it or appear so in the source of proof?

It seems your answer to both is yes, to which I'll have to disagree and move on. I'll check back for your link to the law though, genuinely interested.

From a family of qualified Professionals and my Practice I applaud your sterling efforts to devalue the term Professional.

I don't see how my behaviour was strange but then again I expect you'd say the same. You're the one that got 'personal' about things. You asked in a condescending way why I capitalise certain phrases, I responded. You choose to use less formal english, I don't. No, it wasn't self-important of you to ask why I capitalise things, but it was to state 'don't require it' and similar. You started the 'I'm better at English than you are' childiness. I merely responded in kind.

You'll demonstrate this flaw further by responding to this.

OT:

S176 of the Highway Code contains 'If the traffic lights are not working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care. [Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 36]'

As the sensors do not register a bicycles approach then the lights will not change. This is the not working bit. Although, I would argue that this doen't mean that they are broken. I would also argue that the proceed with great care bit means Give Way. If they said Give Way then, as the average motorist is inept and interprits this to be 'give way to other cars', I would foresee pedestrians being run over.

I am fully aware that the Highway Code is not a Statute but the interpretation of current laws (noted after). I have merely opened the door it is for the individual to walk through it.

Mk1fan - ill respond to that - the lights not working means no lights - not one that won't change for you - hence you are still going thru a valid red light.

No way of knowing which interpretation is right without case law but I wouldn't like to base a legal defence on your interpretation

I'm with TJ on this. The Highway Code may refer to lights not working - but neither the RTA or TSRGD refer to "not working" in the sections you cited or elsewhere. What they do refer to is defines the correct character, size etc of traffic signs/lights (but not how they are triggered). Therefore what it seems to say to me is if its not illuminated it is no longer a valid traffic sign.

if you want confusing, then try the crossings / lights around the Canon Street/King William Street/Eastcheap/Gracechucrh Street in London. It's a real treat for first timers