Jump to content

C&RT's most useless signs and money wasted


Midnight

Featured Posts

7 minutes ago, Jerra said:

True I can think of a one or two.  The point is, I suspect more bridges don't carry traffic than do.   As a result a road which carries traffic particularly as we no not a common occurrence is, in Ian's words, unusual.  As a result it needs a "bum covering" warning sign.

You would however expect anybody at that bridge to be capable of noticing the big wide strip of tarmac they were about to put their size nines on, it's not exactly difficult to see...

 

The other problem with putting up warning signs like this in too many places is the "boy who cried wolf" problem -- people start to ignore warning signs as being stupid and pointless, but this includes the ones which are actually telling them of a real hazard.

Edited by IanD
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IanD said:

  The other problem with putting up warning signs like this in too many places is the "boy who cried wolf" problem -- people start to ignore warning signs as being stupid and pointless, but this includes the ones which are actually telling them of a real hazard.

I did complain to , I think head of safety when CRT put up big CAUTION signs that said something like duck crossing  for that reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I did complain to , I think head of safety when CRT put up big CAUTION signs that said something like duck crossing  for that reason

But there are some really evil ducks around, and can give you a really nasty suck.😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/10/2021 at 21:39, Jerra said:

Would you prefer a sign which said something along the lines of.

 

You are entering a wildlife rich area please e as quiet as possible keep dogs on a lead and make no sudden movements or try to give a gentle hint with a touch of amusement as above?

I take your point, but this was lockside at Diglis. Hardly a wildlife rich area. It seemed pretty pointless to me at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IanD said:

You would however expect anybody at that bridge to be capable of noticing the big wide strip of tarmac they were about to put their size nines on, it's not exactly difficult to see...

 

The other problem with putting up warning signs like this in too many places is the "boy who cried wolf" problem -- people start to ignore warning signs as being stupid and pointless, but this includes the ones which are actually telling them of a real hazard.

Deciding on what and where to erect warning signs is not as easy as you seem to suggest, not least because of the above dilemma. Sadly, too often the determining factor is the similarity to cases where a coroner has issued a notice. Most sizable organisations now, as a result, err on the side of caution.

 

I don't know if anyone here knows the actual bridge under debate but it would not surprise me if there had not been an incident that led to that site being recorded as 'dangerous'. 

 

There are very few 'obvious' danger points that have not at some time been the cause of an incident. IanD's approach does seem to suppose that everyone is 100% vigilant 100% of the time but experience suggests otherwise.

 

On the other hand, the crying of wolf is all too common - it seems, for example, that many broadcasters now have to precede a programme with a warning if  a character so much as says 'bother' under their breath.

 

After seeing a news item about the new food labelling law I took an opportunity to look at a supermarket sandwich package. The list is so long and the point size so small that even someone with a known allergy will have to take a long time to work out whether it is safe for them and that assumes they can decode the ingredient names!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

On the other hand, the crying of wolf is all too common - it seems, for example, that many broadcasters now have to precede a programme with a warning if  a character so much as says 'bother' under their breath.

 

The one which annoys me is that otherwise excellent program - The Yorkshire Vet.

 

The clue is in the title - it doesn't need a "may contain scenes of veterinary surgery which some viewers may find disturbing" before every episode

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

Deciding on what and where to erect warning signs is not as easy as you seem to suggest, not least because of the above dilemma. Sadly, too often the determining factor is the similarity to cases where a coroner has issued a notice. Most sizable organisations now, as a result, err on the side of caution.

 

I don't know if anyone here knows the actual bridge under debate but it would not surprise me if there had not been an incident that led to that site being recorded as 'dangerous'. 

 

There are very few 'obvious' danger points that have not at some time been the cause of an incident. IanD's approach does seem to suppose that everyone is 100% vigilant 100% of the time but experience suggests otherwise.

 

On the other hand, the crying of wolf is all too common - it seems, for example, that many broadcasters now have to precede a programme with a warning if  a character so much as says 'bother' under their breath.

 

After seeing a news item about the new food labelling law I took an opportunity to look at a supermarket sandwich package. The list is so long and the point size so small that even someone with a known allergy will have to take a long time to work out whether it is safe for them and that assumes they can decode the ingredient names!

 

I'm certainly not suggesting that, I'm not one of those people who thinks that liberty trumps common sense and everyone should be 100% responsible for looking out for danger.

 

I'm saying that warning signs should be put up where there's a real danger that people might not be aware of, because if they're put up everywhere there might conceivably be the slightest danger they become like cookie or T&C popups on the web, nobody takes any notice of them because there are too many, and this actually makes things *less* safe overall because people can't tell the "real" warning signs (actual hazard) from the "fake" ones (no real hazard, just arse-covering "in case").

 

Unfortunately this is a case where "erring on the side of caution" could actually make things less safe in reality, even if this is not the intention -- and for sure, putting up signs like this everywhere doesn't come for free, which means there must be less money to spend on useful things like maintenance...

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/10/2021 at 10:29, MtB said:

 

This really is gratuitous signage, for no other reason than 'branding', I suspect. 

 

 

 

With a bit of luck a driver will fail to see the "sharp bend" chevrons, lose control and knock it over. 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Midnight said:

Here's a good one. CRT sign for an angling club. Pity they didn't think to saw the overhanging branch off while they had the ladders there.

20211008_085047_resized.jpg

20211008_085611.jpg

The sign installer might not be trained in safely handling a saw though, they might have only done the sign installation training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

The sign installer might not be trained in safely handling a saw though, they might have only done the sign installation training.

You don't say 

10 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I would suggest it was put up by the angling club, not CRT

I would suggest you're guessing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Midnight said:

 

I would suggest you're guessing

I would suggest if it was CRT, a concreted in wooden sign bollard or a concreted in metal post would have been splashed out on to display the sign. No short cuts allowed to keep the signage budget up where it should be.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I would suggest it was put up by the angling club, not CRT

And paid for by them.

On 07/10/2021 at 10:29, MtB said:

 

This really is gratuitous signage, for no other reason than 'branding', I suspect. 

 

 

Without knowing the location, I wouldn't necessarily agree with you. Having seen  examples of inexperienced crew caught up in their own world of cruising, a reminder of the real world is not always out of place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

And paid for by them.

Without knowing the location, I wouldn't necessarily agree with you. Having seen  examples of inexperienced crew caught up in their own world of cruising, a reminder of the real world is not always out of place.

 

That's to be expected. You seem to have trouble with a lot of what I post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

And paid for by them.

Without knowing the location, I wouldn't necessarily agree with you. Having seen  examples of inexperienced crew caught up in their own world of cruising, a reminder of the real world is not always out of place.

And inexperienced towpath walkers who didn't realise they could enjoy their local canal. Better by water

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

Not really, just passing comment in a similar vein to you.

 

I note you can't quote a post of mine "throwing my toys" as you unfairly and incorrectly asserted in the other thread. Wrongly, as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/10/2021 at 14:10, PeterScott said:

spacer.png

 

I confirm this sign has been replaced with a new one with the new Logo. Land access is not good (too much Giant Hogweed? ) so I suspect they needed a workboat to get over there. I wonder what the total cost of this like for like sign replacement was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

I confirm this sign has been replaced with a new one with the new Logo. Land access is not good (too much Giant Hogweed? ) so I suspect they needed a workboat to get over there. I wonder what the total cost of this like for like sign replacement was?

 

Depends how you count it.

 

I suspect the marginal cost would have been just the new sign (say £500) plus fuel to get a workboat there. (Say £50.)

 

The total cost would be WAY more, as I suspect in addition to the office bod whose job it is to find new opportunities for new signage (or perhaps £35k a year), there are all the employer costs, along with perhaps a team of three (on similar money) whose job it is to actually erect these signs, each with a company vehicle, PPE, tool kit, 'welfare' vehicle and the whole nine yards. 

 

Let's say £100k a year total costs for each of four employees, and between them they manage to identify, design, manufacture, travel to site and put up say two signs a day. £400k divided by 250 working days a year = £1,600 per sign.

 

Bargain!! 

 

So this really does seem like "displacement activity".

 

They often comment on the investment forums that the last thing a failing company does is re-paint the white lines in the car park and re-decorate the directors' toilets, to make the place look smart while it sinks below the waterline.. This seems rather like much the same thing. 

 

 

Edited by MtB
Spelling!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:

Just by a small B road, two sections of the bridge wire grating have come off next to the sign 

 

Then below the bridge not even a hint of a sign warning wide beams of the kink by the bridge 🤣

52A0C0F2-607F-4C62-8947-4E885F90F486.jpeg

 

When we having a falling out one goes to the front of the boat, the other to the back cabin, with a boat like that you just go to opposite sides 😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.