speedyguy:
The Ha policy is that ‘spray slow down’ is not used routinely, only for a ‘specific’ problem/area.
Operators have taken to using them incorrectly against policy, end of.
You will of course be able to quote “Policy” on setting spray signs.■■
Tadaaa V1.1 23rd Dec 2011 page 37
policy:
SPRAY SLOW DOWN
To be only used in situations where a sudden or sporadic loss of visibility is likely due to surface water. In addition, this legend MUST NOT be used in a blanket fashion, overriding other important legends. As a general guideline, the setting of one VMS down stream of entry slips may be considered suitable for this legend.
The real Biffo:
Depending on the operator, signs are set either,
A) If large amounts of spray is seen to be kicked up by vehicles, & cleared once no longer a problem.
B) Only if a patrol / police patrol shouts up for them, and will only clear them if a patrol tells then to.
The “POLICY” says that SPEEDS will not be set for any weather event, unless authorised by an OM.
policy:
V1.1 23rd Dec 2011 page 17 & 18
6.7 SEVERE WEATHER
Non-visible weather conditions.
Advisory speed limits and associated legends shall be used to advise drivers of weather conditions that they cannot see (e.g. strong winds, ice) both on the approach to (around 2km before) and through the weather zone as required.
Visible weather conditions
Weather conditions that are visible to drivers do not require advisory speed signals to be set, unless required for high structures or other known localised conditions
Nowhere are OM’s even mentioned which is a good thing given the quality of them
The real Biffo:
“Head of polices” don’t get me going!!! Maybe they should ask if they’re practical before they decide on them!!
One MASSIVE problem is that what is practical is usually illegal and no one can be assed to try and change it.
The real Biffo:
And if RCC’s are setting VMS wrong, why is no-one being told about it? (Well at our RCC anyway)
Signal setting is checked all the time by a quality team, each operator constantly has a number of their setting checked at random, both for being correct, set within the time limit from the start of the log, and cleared within the time limit from the request to clear being made. The average for our RCC is normally between 93% to 97%
Very recently an exercise was carried out using data from your RCC by the TTD bod and there is a massive mount of ‘manual’ signal issues (i’ll pm or email them if you want where there are problems) but seeing as they are lumped in one big box with all the autosettings the overall kpi figures still come in looking good, The issues were very recently pointed out to the Head of RCC’s but why would he want it publicicing when his figures look good and hit KPI’s, there is room for big improvements, but it is being buried by the head off.
Plans for spray VMS are usually set the first VMS downstream of a junction, and are not set as blankets (that I know of)
Non-visible weather conditions.
Advisory speed limits and associated legends shall be used to advise drivers of weather conditions that they cannot see (e.g. strong winds, ice) both on the approach to (around 2km before) and through the weather zone as required.
Most are set automatically, but we would not set speeds for icy conditions, there are VMs for “gritting”, “snow”, “risk of ice” & “Skid risk”, but we’re instructed that “skid risk” should only be used for a localised event, ie spillage, not for weather. (some however do use it! - usually because a patrol has asked for it)
Very recently an exercise was carried out using data from your RCC by the TTD bod and there is a massive mount of ‘manual’ signal issues (i’ll pm or email them if you want where there are problems) but seeing as they are lumped in one big box with all the autosettings the overall kpi figures still come in looking good,
Please do, that should make interesting reading.
One MASSIVE problem is that what is practical is usually illegal and no one can be assed to try and change it
Not illegal, more that there are so many hoops and meetings about meetings, everyone has to like them etc before they’re passed off, it just doesn’t happen!
I’ve tried, but I’m just one of the oily rags, I don’t count, so I’ve given up now!
Gouls:
Car fire on the A9 today near Aviemore, radio bulletin said it was closed and police were diverting traffic, turns out they had a very brief closure and no diversion, plod then directed traffic past the scene (vehicle was in a layby, fire service were part on the carriageway). Two miles past the incident is a matrix sign “Road closed, follow diversion, drive safely”
This is nothing to do with us, Traffic Scotland operate the matrix north of the border.
Well its lovely to know that when I’m heading along the M25 at 4am and the matrix signs and variable speed limit signs (backed up by speed cameras) are telling me to slow down to 40 mph on a 6 lane empty motorway because of non-existant queues, that the whole system is working fine.
The real Biffo:
0300 123 5000 if you’re not happy with signs, messages or anything else the HA does, phone this number and tell them!!
These matrix signs have cost the taxpayers ££££ to install, maintain and operate (wages)and now we are expected to pay for mobile phone calls to tell you whats wrong with them
■■■■■■■ unbelievable
The real Biffo:
0300 123 5000 if you’re not happy with signs, messages or anything else the HA does, phone this number and tell them!!
Do we use this number 24/7 to highlight errors in these messages in real time or just in hindsight ■■
Like others here I have found myself complient with a 30mph restriction backed with VSL in the early hours on a motorway only to find myself quickly swamped by fast moving traffic ignoring the signs, very dangerous, especially when you discover it was a false alert !!!
Cosmic:
Every morning without fail on the M5 past Taunton they put “Queue Ahead” regardless of whether there is a queue or not. This message seems to be programmed to display every day between 8am and 9am. It’s nonsense and it makes people accustomed to disregard the signs.
it’s regularly on around 5am approaching membury westbound. i wonder if the person who programmed it doesn’t understand 24 hour clock
speedyguy:
The Ha policy is that ‘spray slow down’ is not used routinely, only for a ‘specific’ problem/area.
Operators have taken to using them incorrectly against policy, end of.
You will of course be able to quote “Policy” on setting spray signs.■■
Tadaaa V1.1 23rd Dec 2011 page 37
policy:
SPRAY SLOW DOWN
To be only used in situations where a sudden or sporadic loss of visibility is likely due to surface water. In addition, this legend MUST NOT be used in a blanket fashion, overriding other important legends. As a general guideline, the setting of one VMS down stream of entry slips may be considered suitable for this legend.
The real Biffo:
Depending on the operator, signs are set either,
A) If large amounts of spray is seen to be kicked up by vehicles, & cleared once no longer a problem.
B) Only if a patrol / police patrol shouts up for them, and will only clear them if a patrol tells then to.
The “POLICY” says that SPEEDS will not be set for any weather event, unless authorised by an OM.
policy:
V1.1 23rd Dec 2011 page 17 & 18
6.7 SEVERE WEATHER
Non-visible weather conditions.
Advisory speed limits and associated legends shall be used to advise drivers of weather conditions that they cannot see (e.g. strong winds, ice) both on the approach to (around 2km before) and through the weather zone as required.
Visible weather conditions
Weather conditions that are visible to drivers do not require advisory speed signals to be set, unless required for high structures or other known localised conditions
Nowhere are OM’s even mentioned which is a good thing given the quality of them
The real Biffo:
“Head of polices” don’t get me going!!! Maybe they should ask if they’re practical before they decide on them!!
One MASSIVE problem is that what is practical is usually illegal and no one can be assed to try and change it.
The real Biffo:
And if RCC’s are setting VMS wrong, why is no-one being told about it? (Well at our RCC anyway)
Signal setting is checked all the time by a quality team, each operator constantly has a number of their setting checked at random, both for being correct, set within the time limit from the start of the log, and cleared within the time limit from the request to clear being made. The average for our RCC is normally between 93% to 97%
Very recently an exercise was carried out using data from your RCC by the TTD bod and there is a massive mount of ‘manual’ signal issues (i’ll pm or email them if you want where there are problems) but seeing as they are lumped in one big box with all the autosettings the overall kpi figures still come in looking good, The issues were very recently pointed out to the Head of RCC’s but why would he want it publicicing when his figures look good and hit KPI’s, there is room for big improvements, but it is being buried by the head off.
Urgh, too many acronym’s TTD, OM, RCC, KPI, (eh?) its funny really, there’s all these policies which i’m sure are produced in an offfice where many people all have thrusting, non-important highly paid jobs ( ) when:
a) Most people ignore them anyway, i’ve even seen the police ignore the varible speed limits
and
b) They seem to be wrong much of the time.
In the day time at least, if you can’t see there’s fog up ahead, or a queue, perhaps you shouldn’t have a licence lol.
If the powers that be really do want our motorways to run smoothly they should just switch them off. But unfortunately they would rather listen to a think tank or some boffin with a degree in motorway science!
In my opinion we should be allowed to make our own judgement on the motorway, we don’t need a big screen to tell us how to drive, we all should no our Highway Code and we should adhere to it.
Save the country millions in maintenance and staffing of these things, and the money saved could be ploughed in to improving our roads.
That would be a good idea but the stupid ■■■■■■■ can’t even avoid driving into the vehicle in front most of the time even with automatic queue protection how much worse would it be without
speedyguy:
That would be a good idea but the stupid [zb] can’t even avoid driving into the vehicle in front most of the time even with automatic queue protection how much worse would it be without
I certainly see where you’re coming from Speedyguy, however I think the fatal flaw in the system is that the majority of road users (and I include myself in this) simply don’t believe a single word written on these signs. The ones that do believe tend to overreact to any signs displayed. Case in point being the M5 this afternoon, matrix flashing up “queue caution” and yep, it caused a queue at the sign as the muppets anchored up. Half a mile later the poor lambs realise there isn’t a queue and happily accelerate off.
I wonder what the knock on effect of this was say 30 minutes later? A kind of self fulfilling prophecy methinks.
As an aside I think Scotland has a ministry for stating the bleeding obvious in charge of their matrix signs, never have I seen such inane drivel displayed on their signs, everything from “cold weather drive carefully” to “surface water expected next week”. You couldn’t script that calibre of bull.
where there are problems) but seeing as they are lumped in one big box with all the autosettings the overall kpi figures still come in looking good, The issues were very recently pointed out to the Head of RCC’s but why would he want it publicicing when his figures look good and hit KPI’s, there is room for big improvements, but it is being buried by the head off.
TTD, OM, RCC, KPI, (eh?) its funny really, there’s all these policies which i’m sure are produced in an offfice where many people all have thrusting, non-important highly paid jobs (