Why do we not have clearly defined opposing-lane delimiters?

GreeBo

Hey, twice in the last week I have seen cars driving up the wrong lane as they mistakenly believed they were on a multi-lane 1 way street.

Why do we not have different lane markings to distinguish between lanes and opposing traffic lanes? In the US you typically have the double yellow lane, if you cross this you know you are on the wrong side of the road. In Ireland we have no real way of knowing (other than one way signs I guess)

Did we just copy next door on this one also?

Berty

Because we have a driving test which you must pass(supposedly) to drive upon Irish roads.

The theory test tests you on lane markings and signage so we do not really need to adopt anything the Americans do.

If somebody is stupid enough to drive up the wrong side of a road they are just simply dense.

GreeBo

What are the lane markings that distinguish between a 2 way road and multi-lane 1 way road?
From ROTR:
A broken white line along the centre of the road
These divide two lanes of traffic travelling in opposite directions. You must not cross them unless it is safe to do so.

Berty

In order to access that road you must pass a sign directing you to the purpose of the road.

If you go from any type of road to another type you are informed by a sign.

Wether the sign is a speed sign, no entry, one way, motorway etc etc.

If there is a no entry painted on the road then do not pass through it. If its not there then the road has not changed.

GreeBo

I'm well aware of that, but its often the case that the signs are right at the junction and there are a few of them and so they get missed in the process of making your way onto the junction.

In the same way that I think speed limits painted in each lane are far easier to see than saucer sized signposts, I think a clear delineation between oncoming traffic would be 99% foolproof.

Do you have a particular reason why you are against this or is it just thread bashing?:cool:

Berty

Ask a question expect an answer. Its not thread bashing. :cool: Im not against it. I do not feel the need for it considering there is already a procedure in place through the ROTR.

ROTR are there for a reason. Our roads are there to comply with EU standards.

Why change road markings when a lot of people pay not attention to them in the first place?

If you are at a junction and wish to make a manouver you are expected to make a judgement based on the signage and markings on the road. Nobody should argue anything to the contrary. If you need extra time to make observations of road conditions then you must wait an assess what you are attempting to do in conjunction to what you are permitted to do.

If you are driving on a one way street you are expected to know you are because you would have passed a blue sign with a white arrow pointing in the direction. If you tried to access it from the other end there would be a no entry sign and a solid white line with a broken white line behind it. If you are entering the one way system from a side road you will see a blue sign with a white arrow pointing you in the direction of the one way system and a no left turn sign.

So, the driver should always know what road he/she is driving on by observing signage.

Alun

I agree. Greebo's idea sounds like a solution searching for a (non-existent) problem to me. I've never once been in a situation where I've wondered "Is this a one-way street or not?"

Anan1

Alun wrote: »

I agree. Greebo's idea sounds like a solution searching for a (non-existent) problem to me. I've never once been in a situation where I've wondered "Is this a one-way street or not?"

Mind, you're probably one of those clever types who knows how to use a motorway as well.;)

Seth Brundle

Alun wrote: »

I've never once been in a situation where I've wondered "Is this a one-way street or not?"

Maybe you weren't looking hard enough

Berty

I spoke to a driver driving the wrong way on William Street in Limerick. I asked them if they knew they were on a one way street. They said "yes of course" and went to drive off. I asked them were they aware they were on a one way street and driving the wrong way.

They said as they are about 3/4 down the street already they may as well keep going. They nearly ploughed a few peds at the crossing at Roches stores and headed up O'Connell Street.

Bloody old people.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

I agree. Greebo's idea sounds like a solution searching for a (non-existent) problem to me. I've never once been in a situation where I've wondered "Is this a one-way street or not?"

So you think the signposting in Ireland is perfectly adequate then?
You've never seen someone driving down the wrong side of the road?

It happened yesterday just past leeson st bridge. Cars lined up to go straight from Adelaide Rd and one guy pulled out of the queue into oncoming traffic as he though that lane was for going right.

Second incident was at smaller roundabout from M50 exit going to Stepaside. Car turned right at this roundabout and then proceeded up the wrong lane until the junction at the village.

But maybe Im just more aware of whats going on around me than you are.:rolleyes:

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

So you think the signposting in Ireland is perfectly adequate then?

Nope, but the kind of idiots who don't notice a one-way sign are hardly going to suddenly see the light when the line in the middle of the road is a different colour, are they?

You've never seen someone driving down the wrong side of the road?

Can't say I have, no, except for impatient bastards who do it to skip past queues at lights to turn right, but then that's deliberate. Again, a yellow line isn't going to stop them either.

But maybe Im just more aware of whats going on around me than you are.:rolleyes:

Yes, of course you are :rolleyes: (see I can use a sarcastic smiley too!).

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Nope,

So you think they are inadequate, yet you also think people should be able to follow them without making a mistake? Is that not a contradiction, or at the very least illogical?

Alun wrote: »

but the kind of idiots who don't notice a one-way sign are hardly going to suddenly see the light when the line in the middle of the road is a different colour, are they?

So you dont think its easier to spot a line down the entire length of the roadway versus a single sign at the start? Can I refer you to my illogical point above?

Alun wrote: »

Yes, of course you are :rolleyes: (see I can use a sarcastic smiley too!).

Actually I can use them all, but dont like to show off.

Meh, feck it.
:pac::D;):rolleyes::):p:o:mad::(:P:cool::eek:

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

So you think they are inadequate, yet you also think people should be able to follow them without making a mistake? Is that not a contradiction, or at the very least illogical?

Since when was the opposite of "perfectly adequate" "inadequate"? They're adequate for their purpose.

So you dont think its easier to spot a line down the entire length of the roadway versus a single sign at the start?

Not really, no. But maybe I'm just more aware of what's going on around me than you are. Where do you draw the line? Speed limit signs every 5 m in case someone hadn't spotted the last one?

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Since when was the opposite of "perfectly adequate" "inadequate"? They're adequate for their purpose.

The opposite of adequate has always been inadequate
I asked you were they adequate and you said "nope". Now you are saying that they are "adequate for their purpose"? So what do you think are are inadequate for then? What was the "nope" in relation to?

Are you just bashing my threads without any thought behind it and have confused yourself now or what?

mikemac

GreeBo wrote: »

It happened yesterday just past leeson st bridge. Cars lined up to go straight from Adelaide Rd and one guy pulled out of the queue into oncoming traffic as he though that lane was for going right.

Second incident was at smaller roundabout from M50 exit going to Stepaside. Car turned right at this roundabout and then proceeded up the wrong lane until the junction at the village.

I don't know the roads but I'm more inclined to believe the driver knew exactly what they were doing and was trying to skip a queue.
There is a very short one-way street outside that stadium complex in Ringsend and EVERYONE drives up it as it's a massive time-saver.
And I'd say driver behaviour is more of a problem then signage.

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

The opposite of adequate has always been inadequate

OK, maybe I didn't mean opposite exactly, more like "just because something isn't perfectly adequate, that doesn't make it necessarily completely inadequate". There's a whole spectrum of "adequateness" between "perfectly adequate" and "inadequate" and I feel the current signage occupies a position somewhere between those two extremes, leaning more towards the "adequate" end of the scale.

Are you just bashing my threads without any thought behind it and have confused yourself now or what?

Possibly, but only because you keep coming on here suggesting hare-brained solutions to problems that no-one else apart from yourself on here seems to have.

Anan1

Alun wrote: »

OK, maybe I didn't mean opposite exactly, more like "just because something isn't perfectly adequate, that doesn't make it necessarily completely inadequate". There's a whole spectrum of "adequateness" between "perfectly adequate" and "inadequate" and I feel the current signage occupies a position somewhere between those two extremes, leaning more towards the "adequate" end of the scale.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

OK, maybe I didn't mean opposite exactly, more like "just because something isn't perfectly adequate, that doesn't make it necessarily completely inadequate". There's a whole spectrum of "adequateness" between "perfectly adequate" and "inadequate" and I feel the current signage occupies a position somewhere between those two extremes, leaning more towards the "adequate" end of the scale.

"Dig up you fools!"
Thats such a load of crap its unreal. Adequate is the bare minimum. Something is either adequate or its not. In the same way as something is sufficient or not. Things arent "sorta sufficient". Your food supply is either adequate or not. It can be more than adequate, e.g a surplus, or less than adequate, a deficit, but not somewhere between adequate and inadequate.

Alun wrote: »

Possibly, but only because you keep coming on here suggesting hare-brained solutions to problems that no-one else apart from yourself on here seems to have.

I have made 2 posts.

How is it hare-brained exactly? Its different to what we have now.

I have never (knowingly!) driven on the wrong side of the road, but have witnessed it twice recently, so I made a post.

Can I suggest that either
a) you lean to have conversations/debates on topics
b) you stay away from any thread I start?

In fact maybe I should just add you to my ignore list and then you can post away to your hearts content.

robbie99

Alun

I was ready to pen a lengthy reply, but you know what, I have better things to be doing with my time. Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, not one person on here agrees with you on this, not just me, neither did they agree with you on your other thread regarding lane discipline and merging. So killfile me if you like, I couldn't care less.

Big Nasty

Alun wrote: »

I was ready to pen a lengthy reply, but you know what, I have better things to be doing with my time. Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, not one person on here agrees with you on this, not just me, neither did they agree with you on your other thread regarding lane discipline and merging. So killfile me if you like, I couldn't care less.

Bravo!

GreeBo

Alun wrote:

Thanks from:
Anan1, eringobragh, quirke_folder

:rolleyes:
The Usual Suspects.

peasant

enough

closed