Temporary road signs turned 90 degrees while not needed, dangerous practice

**Akzle** · 10th August 2012, 19:23

i bow out. (my last statement stands)

**Gremlin** · 10th August 2012, 19:58

I've seen it previously... I'll keep an eye out in my travels

**FJRider** · 10th August 2012, 20:39

Originally Posted by Berries

Most temporary speed limits at road works sites are not set out correctly. Hate to say it but the workers get what they deserve in those cases.

It is those that ignore the temporary speed signs I refer to ... regardless of how they are set out. Those that DO get what they deserve.

**Berries** · 10th August 2012, 20:46

Originally Posted by FJRider

It is those that ignore the temporary speed signs I refer to ... regardless of how they are set out. Those that DO get what they deserve.

It is the fact that so many sites are poorly set out and so many temporary speed limits unnecessary that has led to speed limits getting ignored. If they were there for a valid reason, always, and set out as per the approved plans, always, then I would agree with you. They aren't, so I take them with a pinch of salt.

Originally Posted by Akzle

i blow out.

I have heard that said lately.

**FJRider** · 10th August 2012, 20:56

Originally Posted by Berries

It is the fact that so many sites are poorly set out and so many temporary speed limits unnecessary that has led to speed limits getting ignored. If they were there for a valid reason, always, and set out as per the approved plans, always, then I would agree with you. They aren't, so I take them with a pinch of salt.

Much the same as stock signs .... but guess wrong and ...

**dangerous** · 11th August 2012, 09:46

Originally Posted by Berries

It is the fact that so many sites are poorly set out and so many temporary speed limits unnecessary that has led to speed limits getting ignored. If they were there for a valid reason, always, and set out as per the approved plans, always, then I would agree with you. They aren't, so I take them with a pinch of salt.

Agree, however the workers to cover their own arse keep the sinage out just in case, like the fords around me, a teaspoon of water in them and the CLOSED sign is out, shit last weekend I crossed one with the bow wave on the bonnet, however had I fucked up no insurance for me and the council or who ever has no resposability.
So yes like I egnored the "ford closed" sign people egnore road work signs. Do remember tho restriction signs even tho there are no workers about and the roads new, reason is due to speed tearing the road up before its cured.
Guess its back to nobody being allowd to think for them selves these days, rules and regs and the hole dumbing down thing.

**FJRider** · 11th August 2012, 10:36

Originally Posted by dangerous

Guess its back to nobody being allowd to think for them selves these days, rules and regs and the hole dumbing down thing.

They may do ... when people stop ignoring road closed signs ... and get themselves (and often their family too) into bother, then need rescueing. If it's only your life at risk ... thats your choice. But if you risk your kid's lives ... and it goes pear-shaped ...

The availability of 4WD's nowdays doesn't help. The "I've got 4WD ... I can get through" attitude is now the norm.

**MrKiwi** · 11th August 2012, 11:04

It's not a matter of riders ignoring the signs, it is more a matter of the way in which the signs are placed make it almost impossible to see at night and therefore are a hazard if placed at the edge of the road in that manner (edge facing the direction of the traffic, message facing directly out across the road as opposed to facing the direction of the traffic). The signs being placed that way are not there to be read or to be seen, they are left there in a deliberate state so as not to be read by oncoming traffic, inappropriately, due to road contractor lazyness. It is this practice, not anything else, jellywrestler raised and rightfully so.

We are not talking about signs left at the road side to be seen, riders ignoring those do so at their own risk.

**FJRider** · 11th August 2012, 11:27

Originally Posted by MrKiwi

It's not a matter of riders ignoring the signs, it is more a matter of the way in which the signs are placed make it almost impossible to see at night and therefore are a hazard if placed at the edge of the road in that manner (edge facing the direction of the traffic, message facing directly out across the road as opposed to facing the direction of the traffic). The signs being placed that way are not there to be read or to be seen, they are left there in a deliberate state so as not to be read by oncoming traffic, inappropriately, due to road contractor lazyness. It is this practice, not anything else, jellywrestler raised and rightfully so.

We are not talking about signs left at the road side to be seen, riders ignoring those do so at their own risk.

I was replying to D's post. but unless the signs you speak of are ON the road ... how can you risk hitting them ... ???
The cutting of corners by motorcyclists is also a dangerous and "lazy" practice ... but seems to be condoned ... if it suits at the time.
More motorcyclists die due to excessive speed than hitting signs on the side of the road.

**baffa** · 11th August 2012, 11:46

FJ:
Picture the sign on the side of the road, right next to the white line. You are taking a left hand bend, with your wheels hugging the inside of the corner, near the white line, which means the upper half of the bike, and your torso and helmet are over that white line. So you arent breaking any law, but potentially you could go straight into it.

When I dont see any obstacles, I will automatically take a "racing line" hugging the apex to help straighten the corner. Obviously on right hand corners you cant do this as much as your body is leaning into the opposite lane, but I can see how an invisible object on left hand bends could catch people out.

**MSTRS:Me** · 11th August 2012, 11:53

Originally Posted by FJRider

More motorcyclists die due to excessive speed than hitting signs on the side of the road.

If I may be flippant - death is usually a result of excessive stopping...

My first post about getting complacent re temporary road signs is valid.
Yes - it is the motorist's problem if they ignore such signs BUT their problem can and does quickly become an innocent party's problem too.
We've no doubt all seen signs out, that for whatever reason were inappropriate just like I said. How many times do you see road cones lined up along the roadside with a 30/50/70/whatever sign out too, and that's it. No men, no machinery, no torn-up road, nothing. Maybe someone is coming tomorrow with a shovel to clear the watertable...?
Like I said - inappropriate signage. See it often enough and where's the incentive to believe it?
Got caught a couple of years back on a single journey of 150k. Repeated sections of road having been resealed. These sections were basically finished, had the painted lines done, just hadn't had the last loose stuff swept off. Signs for Africa - all for 30kph. Maybe 6 or 7 sections like this and then we approached one that said 70kph temp...seal torn up and driving surface now a length of uncompacted basecoarse. That was an 'Oh shit!' moment.
I mean - how can a basically finished road be 30kph and a pile of rocks to drive on be 70kph? Same as expecting an observant motorist on the open road to obey a 30kph limit for a few roadcones...

**jellywrestler** · 11th August 2012, 11:53

Originally Posted by FJRider

but unless the signs you speak of are ON the road ... how can you risk hitting them ... ???

fact is i've seen them on the road in this state, on narrow country roads, it's not hard to stop this behaviour by roadworkers, just need a couple to be highlighted with photographic evidence then it should sink in to them

**FJRider** · 11th August 2012, 12:14

Originally Posted by jellywrestler

fact is i've seen them on the road in this state, on narrow country roads, it's not hard to stop this behaviour by roadworkers, just need a couple to be highlighted with photographic evidence then it should sink in to them

Fact is ... narrow country roads at 100 km/hr is dangerous too. (but that is ok ... because it's legal ... right ... ??)

It's been a regular policy of police to take photo's of law-breakers (thats working well ... right ... ???)

There is a big difference between dangerous and illegal. The assumption ANY road is in the same condition ... and with the same numbers of dangers as it was the last time you rode down it ... is not always the correct assumption. It might even be called a dangerous assumption ... and take measures to stop it.

**huff3r** · 11th August 2012, 12:15

Originally Posted by MSTRS

If I may be flippant - death is usually a result of excessive stopping...

My first post about getting complacent re temporary road signs is valid.
Yes - it is the motorist's problem if they ignore such signs BUT their problem can and does quickly become an innocent party's problem too.
We've no doubt all seen signs out, that for whatever reason were inappropriate just like I said. How many times do you see road cones lined up along the roadside with a 30/50/70/whatever sign out too, and that's it. No men, no machinery, no torn-up road, nothing. Maybe someone is coming tomorrow with a shovel to clear the watertable...?
Like I said - inappropriate signage. See it often enough and where's the incentive to believe it?
Got caught a couple of years back on a single journey of 150k. Repeated sections of road having been resealed. These sections were basically finished, had the painted lines done, just hadn't had the last loose stuff swept off. Signs for Africa - all for 30kph. Maybe 6 or 7 sections like this and then we approached one that said 70kph temp...seal torn up and driving surface now a length of uncompacted basecoarse. That was an 'Oh shit!' moment.
I mean - how can a basically finished road be 30kph and a pile of rocks to drive on be 70kph? Same as expecting an observant motorist on the open road to obey a 30kph limit for a few roadcones...

Easy, the pile of rocks is already fucked so who cares, but say a 40 tonne truck doing 70 on a brand new road that has barely been worn in? That could likely completely ruin the brand spanking new road and destroy weeks or months of effort, as well as waste a fuck-tonne of money.

Speed restrictions for roadworks aren't always there for safety, sometimes they are there to protect the road surface! So people should bloody respect them or expect road user charges to just keep going up and up and up.