"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Clot" wrote in message
...
Clive George wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:17:32 -0000, "Clive George"
wrote:

"T i m" wrote in message
...

The excuse used by poor drivers that they spend all their time
looking for
hazards and can't see the speed limit signs or the speedo is just
plain cr@p.


I think we've established that regularly driving the route doesn't
mean you know the signs. They may change.

Dunno about you, but I notice new works taking place on routes I drive
regularly. I'll see new sign posts, etc, and they're dull grey
things, not a shiny new reflective sign. A new speed limit sign is
more visually intrusive than many of the things you're looking out
for anyway, so claiming you missed it because you were lookig for
other things is bogus.
No one has said you can't see kid AND sign but most people would
assume the sign read today the same as it read for the last 10 years.

Was the case which prompted this thread a simple number change on the
sign? How common is a simple number change, as opposed to moving it,
putting some red paint down, putting a new yellow border on, putting
up a "Speed limits changed" sign? Every time I've seen a new speed
limit, it's not just been rewriting the number, it's always had other
changes to point it out.

You raise an interesting point there. Both the examples I mentioned in
the thread have been maintained by one county, (not Highways Agency). May
be the practice of moving numerical lollipops varies? Certainly in both
the cases, it appeared that the lollipops were moved "overnight" without
evident warnings. Possibly there were some waterproof notices attached to
the posts for a period of time before the transition and also some notice
in the local paper.

Moved, rather than just the number changing?


Ours did both. Overnight. No warning.

Arfa