Have The Regulation Son The Need For Traffic Lights As Roadworks Changed ?

[Chekhov]

5 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Nope, not tosh at all. The reason you don’t go through a red light is because you are legally required to stop.

Pretty much the only exemption from that is if you do stop and find that the signals are obviously not working correctly, it’s ok to proceed with due caution.

OK, just for you,  I thought the light had stopped working because loads of those temporary lights are unreliable and  there was nothing on the other side and nothing coming either therefore it must be out of order, so I went through it.

Edited January 10, 2023 by Chekhov

[Guest sibon]

3 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

OK, just for you,  I thought the light had stopped working because loads of those temporary lights are unreliable and  there was nothing on the other side and nothing coming either therefore it must be out of order, so I went through it.

You’re a proper rebel aren’t you.

 

I bet that you even wear odd socks some days.

[Chekhov]

25 minutes ago, sibon said:

You’re a proper rebel aren’t you.

I bet that you even wear odd socks some days.

Well ones with different patterns at the top anyway.

 

Seriously, I don't want a false impression to be made here.

Roads are dangerous, I stick to the speed limits and pretty much all the rules of the road regardless of if the Cops are on the scene or not.

But I do not regard driving through a temporary (and short) set of traffic lights - with nobody waiting on the other side and nobody even approaching the lights - as dangerous in any way whatsoever.

[HeHasRisen]

6 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Well ones with different patterns at the top anyway.

 

Seriously, I don't want a false impression to be made here.

Roads are dangerous, I stick to the speed limits and pretty much all the rules of the road regardless of if the Cops are on the scene or not.

But I do not regard driving through a temporary (and short) set of traffic lights - with nobody waiting on the other side and nobody even approaching the lights - as dangerous in any way whatsoever.

Seems fair enough. I drive down pavements when I dont see any pedestrians. Same thing, innit.

[Guest sibon]

6 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Seems fair enough. I drive down pavements when I dont see any pedestrians. Same thing, innit.

It’s people like you who have made me abandon my invisibility cloak.

[MJ01]

21 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

SNIPPED

I stick to.....pretty much all the rules of the road 

Me too - although I regularly drive whilst 4 or 5 times over the legal limit for drugs & alcohol

If I see anyone coming I have a Trebor mint

I've never had an accident but I've seen lots.....

[Chekhov]

13 hours ago, HeHasRisen said:

Seems fair enough. I drive down pavements when I dont see any pedestrians. Same thing, innit.

You're not on your own there. Almost everyone parks on the edge of pavements and, in fact, some actually drive up onto them when the road is blocked, say by selfishly parked cars.

[Planner1]

16 hours ago, Chekhov said:

OK, just for you,  I thought the light had stopped working because loads of those temporary lights are unreliable and  there was nothing on the other side and nothing coming either therefore it must be out of order, so I went through it.

A few years ago when I was working at SCC we had a person who tried to get off a red light running ticket by claiming that there were so many faulty traffic signals and road signs in Sheffield that  it wasn’t safe to rely on them ( the driver had been previously rear ended when stopping at a red light). They went around at all hours of the day and night taking photos of all the faults and handing the prints to us. They clearly hoped it would help to  get them off when their case came to court.

 

They went to court on the red light offence and defended themselves. The magistrates listened to their ( lengthy) argument and looked at the photos. It didn’t do the driver any favours. They got a bigger fine and more points than they would have done by simply pleading guilty.

 

By the way, temporary signals tend to sit at red on all approaches when there’s no traffic around, so approaching them and having a red signal facing you when there’s nothing coming the other way is a pretty normal experience. You’d need to stop and wait for a minute or two without getting a green to be able to reach an evidenced decision that the signals weren’t working properly.  You don’t need to convince me, save the excuses for the magistrates, but be aware that by contravening a red light at temporary signals you are potentially committing an offence which can lead to a fine and points on your license.

[Chekhov]

On 11/01/2023 at 10:48, Planner1 said:

By the way, temporary signals tend to sit at red on all approaches when there’s no traffic around, so approaching them and having a red signal facing you when there’s nothing coming the other way is a pretty normal experience. You’d need to stop and wait for a minute or two without getting a green to be able to reach an evidenced decision that the signals weren’t working properly.  You don’t need to convince me, save the excuses for the magistrates, but be aware that by contravening a red light at temporary signals you are potentially committing an offence which can lead to a fine and points on your license.

Say what you want but that set of lights on Cockshutts was doing absolutely sweet FA to contribute to road safety, I know that for an absolute fact.

 

Surely even Planner1 cannot defend this.....

The three way temporary lights on Birkswood were still up this morning, and causing lengthy tailbacks, but job had been finished (and it really was a pathetic little hole, significantly smaller than a - legally parked - car, never  mind a van) !  They just could not be arsed to move the cones and lights ! ! I have had this before. Often the team that does the repair is not the same one that removes the cones and lights, so, frequently, much additional inconvenience is caused for no safety reason whatsoever.

The fact is the whole permit system for temporary lights is ludicrous. It doesn't cost that much more for a long permit than as short one. What should actually happen is they should be charged by the day, or even better by the the hour, and a significant amount of money. That might motivate them to finish these jobs more quickly. I'm soddin' sure if they were paying £50 an hour for that permit they would not have left the cones and lights up "because a  different team clears it away".

But they won't because motorists time is, very arrogantly, of no concern to the powers that be. This is provably correct.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

Here's a clincher.....

They have appear to have stopped working on the roadworks on Birks Wood Drive in Oughty, though there is still a hole in the road.

However, although it still takes up as much room as when they were working on it the traffic lights have disappeared and traffic is now flowing freely.

As well it might because, as mentioned before, err, the roadworks take up no more room than a legally parked car anyway.

All that disruption, hundreds of cars every day waiting (and puthering out unnecessary pollution) : Health & Safety Bull****.

 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Chekhov