Temporary traffic lights - most pointless

[eggsarascal]

2 minutes ago, Peasgood said:

More often than not the only obstruction where the lights are is the fat twat asleep in the Transit pickup that brought the lights in the first place.

One of these days I am going to pinch all the lights and see what happens when he wakes.

Yes but, you don't see that fat twat in the middle of the night when he's taking the central reserve barrier out and putting a contrafolw in place on the M6 before the police rolling road block turns up, 

 

If the company I worked for on Dartford Crossing got it wrong they were fined £10k/hour/lane closed, it does tend to concentrate the mind, and flood the job with lads.

[Rob_the_Sparky]

I'd be very surprised if the lights didn't have an override that detected if all the lights were red for longer than a set period.  It is easy to design the electronics for a system that would on detecting this case would drop back to a timer based system.  Sounds like this is not part of the design though, I guess it is cheaper not to include this but really ought to be mandated this this type of system is included.  Similarly it would not be hard to include a system that detected any one light that had been red for too long or to include one that could contact base if if all went tits up.  None of this stuff is hard from an engineering PoV but just more expensive to include.

[eggsarascal]

3 hours ago, Rob_the_Sparky said:

I'd be very surprised if the lights didn't have an override that detected if all the lights were red for longer than a set period.  It is easy to design the electronics for a system that would on detecting this case would drop back to a timer based system.  Sounds like this is not part of the design though, I guess it is cheaper not to include this but really ought to be mandated this this type of system is included.  Similarly it would not be hard to include a system that detected any one light that had been red for too long or to include one that could contact base if if all went tits up.  None of this stuff is hard from an engineering PoV but just more expensive to include.

You might have hit on something there if you could design the system, after all I don't suppose TM companies enjoy paying lads to go out to unmanned jobs when a sensor fails and sends everything all red.

[Mark Bolam]

They are paying them anyway.

Just means they have to take their boots off the dash for a bit.

[eggsarascal]

1 minute ago, Mark Bolam said:

They are paying them anyway.

Just means they have to take their boots off the dash for a bit.

Asking a bit much, don't you think?

[Mark Bolam]

Disgraceful mate, modern day slavery.

[maybelateron]

23 hours ago, eggsarascal said:

The sensor is a motion sensor the detects approaching vehicles, nothing to do with flashing lights.

Agree with you on that - we were taught this on my Chapter 8 course some years ago.

[Billhook]

In a similar vein, a friend of mine, now sadly no longer with us, was out on a call with his reflective jacket BT gear on.  He came to a level railway crossing where people had obviously been stuck for ages and had become frustrated and had started to cross the line, the barriers being half barriers so they could weave their way through.

Fearing a dreadful accident, and not being able to stop the drivers from crossing, he decided to conduct the traffic from the centre of the crossing as he could then see a long way down the line either way to make sure it was clear

When the police came eventually he of course received a major bollocking, but I think he had a strong argument and was not prosecuted.

 

Which brings me to our line of work.  How much authority does an individual have to put his hands up and stop the traffic if he is warning of imminent danger, say a tree fallen on a blind bend or an accident, and can people be prosecuted for ignoring such a warning.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Billhook

[eggsarascal]

3 minutes ago, Billhook said:

In a similar vein, a friend of mine, now sadly no longer with us, was out on a call with his reflective jacket BT gear on.  He came to a level railway crossing where people had obviously been stuck for ages and had become frustrated and had started to cross the line, the barriers being half barriers so they could weave their way through.

Fearing a dreadful accident, and not being able to stop the drivers from crossing, he decided to conduct the traffic from the centre of the crossing as he could then see a long way down the line either way to make sure it was clear

When the police came eventually he of course received a major bollocking, but I think he had a strong argument and was not prosecuted.

 

Which brings me to our line of work.  How much authority does an individual have to put his hands up and stop the traffic if he is warning of imminent danger, say a tree fallen on a blind bend or an accident, and can people be prosecuted for ignoring such a warning.

Only authorised people should direct traffic using hand signals, police officer, dvsa officer and lollipop crossing staff (couldn't think of the lasts proper title), I'd like to think like your friend if you had a valid reason no more than a bollocking would be issued.

[Billhook]

3 minutes ago, eggsarascal said:

Only authorised people should direct traffic using hand signals, police officer, dvsa officer and lollipop crossing staff (couldn't think of the lasts proper title), I'd like to think like your friend if you had a valid reason no more than a bollocking would be issued.

So if somebody is lying unconscious around a blind bend, you should not be allowed to stop traffic because you are not authorised?????