Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#91
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark Brader:
ObOn-topic version: indicates that none of the next *four* signals is red, intended to authorize speeds above 125 mph... Clive Feather: Next *three*; the fourth can be red: FG, G, YY, Y, R. Inclusive reckoning? Yeah, that's it, it was inclusive reckoning. -- Mark Brader, Toronto | "Domine, defende nos | Contra hos motores bos!" -- A. D. Godley |
#92
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in
: I was led to believe that the law regarding filter arrows is thus: Here's what the law actually says: [ ** snip chapter & verse ** ] Thanks Clive. Wading through the legalese (*when* are the Plain English Society going to start having an influence on those who draw up legislation? ![]() lights! But more importantly you (and other posters) have corrected an erroneous belief that I had. Thanks. Iain |
#93
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#94
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Richard" wrote ...
I have a vague memory of seeing a red filter arrow in France. Quite intuitive after you've got over the surprise. Yes, fairly normal in France, as is the more sensible Red to Green with no amber (actually used within the British Isles as well - Jersey for example). Mind you, our lights are far better when it comes to visiblity. The French lights are so dim that they almost disappear in daylight! |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Banned left turn in Kingsbury, London | London Transport | |||
traffic is better, but livingstone is thinking of more traffic zone? | London Transport | |||
Our ways to reduce Vandalism (was: Ways to Reduce Vandalism) | London Transport | |||
Ways to Reduce Vandalism | London Transport | |||
Ways to Reduce Vandalism | London Transport |