Now that the NSL sign has been discussed and agreed upon, why TF is the Give Way sign upside down?
[img] 
[/img]
compared to all the other red triangle signs
[img] 
[/img]
(I think I know the answer but I may have been lied to)
Only guessing but would assume the same reason the stop sign is a different shape, if it's obscured by snow/ice etc you know to stop just by the shape.
Isn't it for when it's covered in snow, so you can still identify it as a give way even if you can't read it? Same reason a STOP sign is octagonal.
heres another question thats bother me privately for years, the 'skid marks' on the slippery road sign don't and never have made sense?
the car must have skidded out of another presumably slippery dimension (were you can skid like that) before being captured on the sign.
I've always liked this one, there's one just up the road where I cycle down to the canal. [img] 
[/img]
heres another question thats bother me privately for years, the 'skid marks' on the slippery road sign don't and never have made sense?the car must have skidded out of another presumably slippery dimension (were you can skid like that) before being captured on the sign.
Still, it's more realistic than the roadworks warning sign which shows a road worker doing some work.
thegreatape - hoho!
is that the sign with the guy putting up a brolly?
jekkyl
We have these.
[img] 
[/img]
Never seen one in a car yet.
Never thought about it but being able to identify it by shape seems like a pretty good theory.
Also I think the shape itself kind of makes sense in a more subtle way.
The other warning signs sort of point up the road indicating a hazard ahead, whereas the Give Way points down the road with the flat part of the triangle across the road like the give way line.
(no idea if that is the intention or not but makes sense to me :))
EDIT: Talking rubbish.
GreatApe has it. Different shape for recognition even when it is obscured by filth or snow.
Having said that, until it was pointed out to me on a recent <cough> 'educational session' I was invited to attend, I hadn't even spotted the difference...
EDIT: Also worth pointing out that it is the same shape across the bulk of Europe.
If it were the other way up, the "GIVE" would have to be written quite small.
zinaru - that's the one 🙂
My fascinating traffic sign question is: why, when we have all those brilliantly designed iconic and readily understandable images for hazards, did we end up with this cryptic pair?
[img] 
[/img]
I mean they put more effort into the "No Vehicles Carrying Explosives" sign and how often is that one used?
[img] 
[/img]
😥 some would say i had it too martin. I just want to be noticed by you, what do i have to do, WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO! Flounces off.
[i]the car must have skidded out of another presumably slippery dimension (were you can skid like that) before being captured on the sign. [/i]
I assume the car has spun around.
I assume the car has spun around.
.. and only has two wheels.
Why do they warn of Ford cars? Surely Audis and BMWs are more dangerous?
No need to get the
[img] 
[/img]
Sandwicheater...
Wasn't there a version with the driver sat on the 'wrong' side?
The Clearway signs really are mental aren't they. Make no sense to me either. Though, I'm not sure how you could clearly signify no waiting / stopping in an obvious manner.
I like it when they put this up:
[img] 
[/img]
Instead of this:
[img] 
[/img]
The second one is correct and means "No Cycling". The first one is therefore "No No Cycling" and marks some kind of mandatory cycling zone.
The first one is therefore "No No Cycling" and marks some kind of mandatory cycling zone.
Sounds like a legal challenge waiting to happen. 😀
Though [i]some[/i] of the red-circle "No" signs [i]do[/i] have a line through them. Which is odd.
e.g.
[img] 
[/img]
I'm not sure how you could clearly signify no waiting / stopping in an obvious manner.
Me neither - but the sign designers were talented people so I don't get why the solution was to say: "**** it, we'll just do a blue circle".
Maybe it was a Friday job.
I mean they put more effort into the "No Vehicles Carrying Explosives" sign and how often is that one used?
Once you've noticed it, you see it in loads of places. France LOVES this one and the exploding trucks sign.
heres another question thats bother me privately for years, the 'skid marks' on the slippery road sign don't and never have made sense?
You understand what the sign means, probably immediately, so it makes perfect sense: the crossing of the tyre marks describes a skid/spin/slipperiness, whereas two parallel wavy lines would be ambiguous and easily misinterpreted. If you're splitting hairs, then how about the fact that there's nobody* driving?
*could be one of fasthaggis's slow-driving red squirrels, I concede
I knew I'd seen a Top Gear piece that included something about the design of road signs! Skip the first two minutes of James May and a white car and meet, briefly, Margaret Calvert, the person who designed our road signs back in the 50s:
It's so that snow falls off of it.
The road sign that really gets on my goat is the one saying "Road liable to flooding". No it's f"£$ing not! The road is either susceptible to flooding or it is liable to flood but it is certainly not liable to flooding!!!
There, I've now gone and annoyed myself without even seeing it.
It's so that snow falls off of it.
Surely it would be more likely to fall off if it was the other way around?
The second one is correct and means "No Cycling". The first one is therefore "No No Cycling" and marks some kind of mandatory cycling zone.
TBH, that's another one that's always irked me. The No Whatever signs would be a lot clearer if they all had the diagonal strike-out through them. I wonder why they haven't?
It's so that snow falls off of it.
If that was the case they'd all be that way around. You're close though.
[img] 
[/img]
@ wanmankylung
Non Sat Nav route for HGVs? ❓
Apparently it means "HGVs don't use your Sat Nav"
Warning - bouncing solar-powered umbrella, Red Stripe Lager trucks must turn left.
Rubbish time to be on a new page - no-one will know WTF I am on about 🙂
Dislike the crossing shorthand on U.S. Signs. E.g.
[img] 
[/img]
Is that the same meaning as this sign wanmankylung?
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Speed Up surely?
Danger of falling off if you try to ride your bike backwards uphill?
Truck Drivers beware of Alien Abduction?
That sign reminded me of the Skylab Landing Bay level of Manic Miner...
It would interesting to see how many of these signs and markings were recognised by cyclists and non-cyclists...
[img] 
[/img]
Some signs I have spotted of which I am fond...
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
aaaand
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
Start of cycle lane
Shared use carriageway/cyclelane
'Virtual' cycle lane
Contra flow dual carriageway/cycle lane
Contra flow cycle lane
Cycle lane starts this way
Crossing a cycle lane coming from the right
Self explanatory
Shared use cycle/foot way
Segregated cycle/foot way
Cycle path
No cycling
Cycle parking
Dead end except for cycles
The three down the right are
Advance stop line (ASL)
Mandatory cycle lane G(mandatory meaning that cars are not allowed to cross the solid white line rather than cyclist have to use it.)
Advisory cycle lane.
