19 ms·
German traffic light stays red for 28 years (2015)
- jrcii 10y agoThey must have the same engineers as Cathedral City.
- simplehuman 10y ago32 points and not a single comment. OK, I will bite. > But anyone who waits to cross into Gerokstraße could be waiting a long time - almost three decades if they are patient enough. Did anyone notice the awesome pun ? If you wait that long, you will become a patient :-)
- sid-kap 10y agoI don't see the pun. Can you explain it?
- tylerhou 10y agopatient - able to wait long enough patient - you wait so long that you'll fall ill/die, thus becoming a hospital patient
- nimchimpsky 10y agothats nonsense, and not a pun
- flukus 10y agoMaybe it's that famous german sense of humor...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- nerdponx 10y agoClever, but I don't think that was intended. Too subtle.
- advisedwang 10y agoThe traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,71.03h,88.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scW7PqWjukB-tqiTFHHMidA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,71...
- prance 10y agoThat light is totally redundant. The white-on-blue right arrow as well as the solid line in the middle of the street already mandate that only right turning is allowed there.
- jve 10y agoExcept when it's snowing.
- esra 10y agoYou would need at least a stop sign, as the green arrow mandates you to stop.
- zarq 10y agoI've seen cases where the 'stop' sign is just a red circle, and then it changes to a green arrow pointing to the right when you're free to go.
- niklasrde 10y agoBut a stop sign at an intersection with traffic lights is only to be used as a 'backup' for when the traffic lights fail, so it wouldn't be in force?
- Svip 10y agoExcept you cannot have static signs from one direction, where the other directions have traffic signals. Someone else suggested a great programmer would have changed the rules, but that would have just made the rules more complicated. This solution is neat, because it keeps the basic rules simple while solving the problem. And to most people, they will never notice it is a problem.
- femto 10y agoWhy does the signal include an amber and green light?
- cperciva 10y agoProbably because including two unused bulbs is cheaper than custom-making a single-bulb traffic light. (Also, people who are used to seeing a set of three bulbs might not recognize a single red light as being a traffic light at all.)
- kuschku 10y agoActually, it’s not that easy. German traffic lights are a modular design, and ones with only two or one bulb are common. (You can stick as many modules together as you wish, or remove them)
- pluma 10y agoThat doesn't sound entirely true. I've only seen one-bulb versions for flashing yellow lights (which are sometimes used on crossings to indicate "pedestrians are crossing" at difficult crossings, typically when more than two roads meet and the pedestrians could easily be overlooked). I've only seen two-light versions for pedestrians (i.e. red and green). I think I've seen other one and two bulb versions on non-public roads (e.g. industrial sites) but that's about it. I've never seen a version with four bulbs. And you make them sound more modular than they are: while the part containing the bulb seems to be generally modular the case containing these modules is generally fixed for a certain size. So adding or removing modules after they are deployed is not as straightforward (except maybe for temporary traffic lights). I've actually seen the auditory clue box (whatever it's called -- the ticking thing at crossings to help blind pedestrians cross safely) replace one of the bulbs (on three-bulb lights where there is a redundant second red bulb) instead of being added below the traffic light.
- kuschku 10y agoActually, I’ve got a few intersections right near me with such examples. There’s a traffic light for the lane straight forward. Directly next to it is one for those turning right. The forward light has Red, Yellow and Green, the turn lane’s light has only Yellow and Green (both with the arrow overlay). At another one, there’s lights for busses added below or at the side of the existing light, adding one, or two modules (below or at the side).
- stickfigure 10y agoDoes it really cost ~500€ per month to run a single traffic light?
- ftlio 10y agoHow many drivers a month avoid losses thanks to this traffic light? I'm gonna guess the ROI is positive overall on traffic lights. *Sent from my iPhone while driving 75 on the freeway, eating fast food listening to a book on tape, navigating with Google Maps (Not really, but people do this)
- OJFord 10y agoI was surprised too - the article seems to address 'why on Earth has this light been red for decades' but open and leave the bigger question of 'why on Earth does powering a single light cost €5500pa'.
- vacri 10y agoThere are two lit lights on the pole, so you can halve your astonishment :)
- OJFord 10y agoThat is true, but the figure seems to refer to one: > And the total cost of maintaining this one traffic light over almost three decades runs to roughly €150,000. Every year maintenance and running costs come to €5,500. 'Traffic light' is used throughout to refer to the one that's been red for 28 years; not the whole system. Regardless, I don't think I'd have been less surprised or inclined to comment on it had the article stated the cost was €2,750pa!
- brewdad 10y agoI'm hopeful that this cost figure is a result of a journalist getting details almost right as they so often do. In my local town, I've heard a figure of $100,000 to install a new light. If we assume similar costs in this case that's $3,300 per year right there and we still haven't powered it on or put any money into monitoring it nor maintaining it. The systems in place for monitoring are largely a fixed cost across all of the traffic lights in the city. I can only guess that maintenance costs are lower with newer lights and increase with age. If the number quoted in the article includes the initial outlay to erect the signal, then I don't see the 30 year cost being that out of line. If that cost is truly only maintenance and operation, then it does seem quite excessive.
- ams6110 10y agoThis is a light in Ft. Walton Beach Florida. I took a picture of it years ago because I thought it was funny. It's on 35mm film in a box somewhere.... (the linked image is not mine). http://www.funnysigns.net/files/never-turns-green.jpg http://www.funnysigns.net/files/never-turns-green.jpg
- dawnerd 10y agoYou'd think they'd just put up a sign that says "right turn only" or similar.
- ygra 10y agoThat's quite unusual for an intersection that visually can be traversed also straight ahead to be right-turn only from one direction. There are such signs (209-20), or arrows on the lane, but I'd imagine people to heed a stop light more than such signage (purely from experience, many drivers ignore such signs, and even those that don't often don't adhere to the rules by not using turn signals). Edit: Now that I've looked at the traffic light on Google StreetView, that right-turn only sign is also there. But of course, traffic lights take precedence when they exist. The intersection is also marked in a way to really discourage going straight (or left), but I'd still guess with only signs there'd be a few people who actually tried doing that.
- Namrog84 10y agoI grew up in Fort Walton Beach! Spent 20 years there. Now live in Seattle. I've seen this!
- wil421 10y agoWhere is this? I go to Destin a few times a year. Usually visit Fort Walton and all over. Can't figure out where it is.
- djaychela 10y agoThere was one somewhere in Atlanta (where my sister lived for a while, I'm from the UK and was visiting) which is exactly the same; I made her drive back so I could take a picture of it as I thought no-one would believe me (this was in 1998, IIRC). At least after reading the comments in this thread it makes some sense now.
- fiatjaf 10y agoLooks like some traffic lights from my town.
- mc32 10y agoDo they use steady red lights for all "right turn onlys" which on the other end have opposing traffic (do not enter)? Or is this an exception to the right turn only + do not enter at the other end? Harrison and 10th[1] in SF for example. [1]https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7714317,-122.4115453,3a,75y,57.41h,78.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFTZrWFsTzwS5ZGBBz5HIPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7714317,-122.4115453,3a,75y,...
- jplayer01 10y agoThis is an exception and a too-clever-for-its-own-good use of a traffic light. Usually we use a blue sign with a white arrow pointing right to show you can only turn right.
- mc32 10y agoThanks for the clarification. It's a bit odd in that it already has the right turn only sign but they decided to also install a traffic light --maybe the solid striped median line and the right turn only were not enough to signal people and there were enough accidents that the DoT decided to make it really obvious that vehicles should not cross.
- DasIch 10y agoIt does not have a right turn only sign. It just has a green arrow. The only reason you can only ever turn right is because the light stays red, if it were to turn green you'd be allowed to cross the intersection in any direction. There are also different rules that need to be followed when crossing the intersection on account of a green arrow than, if it were merely a turn right only situation.
- mc32 10y agoHalf meter above that green arrow right, is a blue right turn only sign. It's on the same pole.
- kyle-rb 10y agoThis sounds like it could be straight out of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
- dustedrob 10y ago"It's not a bug, it's a feature"
- peterburkimsher 10y agoIs it in the red light district? (When I was a child, I actually thought that the meaning of that phrase was related to traffic lights. I was so naïve.)
- am185 10y agoshould put red plastic or colored paper there. or just paint it red.
- quasimodem 10y agoHow did it stay red during bulb replacement? Article is totally misleading!
- blahedo 10y agoI wonder if this article (from 2015) has now become obsolete? I notice that the OSM of that location[0] appears to indicate that Ziegelstraße now dead-ends just before the relevant intersection, and the Bing satellite maps, though difficult to interpret with all the tree cover, appear to match that. [0] http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.05376/13.75783 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.05376/13.75783
- arrrg 10y agoYes, the road is now a dead end.
- ryanjmo 10y agoI came across a light like this once and noted it. After some thought though I realized that it actually makes perfect sense. The goal of the light is to never let people go straight and people can only turn on a green arrow. It is the only logical output for this goal as far as I can tell. If it were just a red arrow and a green arrow, without a full red people may think they can go straight, because there is no light preventing them explicitly. It's pretty funny.
- rootlocus 10y agoExcept, If I see a red light, I expect it to turn green eventually. On the other hand, If I see a sign telling me I'm only allowed to turn right, I know exactly what's going on. Explicit is better than implicit.
- ryanjmo 10y agoWhether or not there is a sign, you still need the light.. A sign is not sufficient as it puts the decision of when to turn on the driver of the car, instead of being dictated by the light as is the desired behavior...
- a_bonobo 10y agoCouldn't you combine a STOP sign with one of those 'turn only right' signs, like this one? http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/95a9489a7d8b4c418cb6cfd3b6753295/right-turn-only-road-sign-uk-e16jea.jpg http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/95a9489a7d8b4c418cb6cfd3b6753295/r...
- kolinko 10y agoThe street also has that (well, a triangle "yield, no stop necessary" sign). The thing is, in Europe, you have priorities in traffic - first the lights, when those are off/unavailable - the signs, and finally "the one on the right goes first". The rationale behind this intersection is that you need all the vehicles obeying the same set of rules. So you can't have one car approaching the intersection obeying the signs (because no lights on that road), and another car obeying the traffic lights.
- hermitdev 10y agoOk, why not just put up signs saying "do not enter" and "right turn only"? And, then, just have a signal for the assumed protected right-turn (Germans do drive on the right, correct?) This "solution" seems very confusing. In every US/Canadian jurisdiction I've visited has nothing like this German solution. Just indicate with lights, signage and road furniture that the particular route is not allowed. To technically keep the route open, but prohibit by lights seems prone to confusion, especially for individuals not from the area. Also, how do mapping apps deal with this intersection (curious)? Do mapping apps properly route through such an intersection? (edit: clarity)
- nerdponx 10y agoTake a look at the light: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13873787 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13873787 Any jurisdiction in North America would just put a Stop or Yield sign there.
- ant6n 10y agoIn North America, they use a stop sign for basically every situation. So the continent is plastered with stop signs, none of which show their intent.
- nerdponx 10y agoI'm not sure what you mean by this. The intent of a stop sign is to require the driver to stop and check that it is safe to continue before doing so. I don't see how a stop sign could fail to convey that intent.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- soheil 10y agoIt's not red when they're replacing the bulbs for maintenance or when there is a power outage. So this story is false. Also this is a pretty random story to be topping HN. Sure there is an edge case where this could happen, so what.
- tempodox 10y agoWould that light actually stop anyone? In France and Italy, traffic lights are just recommendations. We once got honked at for waiting at a red light when there was no cross traffic.
- actuallyalys 10y agoGiven Germans' penchant for carefully obeying even pedestrian crossing lights, I suspect traffic lights are a rule, not a recommendation.
- manmal 10y agoYes. In Austria, you run a red light twice, you can lose your driver's license. Cross a red light as a pedestrian and a heavy fine is awaiting you.
- andrewshadura 10y agoNot true.
- jankassens 10y agoCrossing a red light is a pretty strong traffic violation in Germany. If the light was red for longer then 1 second apparently 200€, a 1 month driving suspension, and 2 out of 8 points to lose your license. https://www.bussgeldkatalog.org/rote-ampel/ https://www.bussgeldkatalog.org/rote-ampel/
- janci 10y agoSo for running a 28 years long red light would be decapitation and two consecutive perpetual prisons.
- pluma 10y agoLuckily Germany abides by the international convention on human rights and doesn't have the death penalty so it'd probably be three life sentences. And because of § 54 section 1 StGB they'd be flattened into a single life sentence, which in practice translates to "at least 15 years". The German equivalent of "life with no chance of parole" would be "Sicherheitsverwahrung" (preventive detention, consecutive to the life sentence) which is an extremely dodgy instrument that is probably in violation of the constitution and the international human rights charter if you look too closely but still used when punishing people who probably should instead be treated for difficult mental health problems. But I admit that makes for a less funny joke.
- golergka 10y agoWhen you have a steady, well working system and only one special case that causes that system to waste resources, you don't put special if cases and switches to optimize for this special case. Especially if it's one in a million.
- iopq 10y agoI object for having to pay for the green and yellow light bulbs. They should be empty on purpose.
- germanier 10y agoThen the crew changing the lights would need a second checklist. The chance that they apply that wrong one to a regular intersection is not negligible.
- iopq 10y agoIf they're empty to begin with, new ones shouldn't be put in. How hard is that?
- germanier 10y agoIt's harder than it looks. I see two possible interpretations of your proposal: a) Not change the worker's checklist. That would mean they should deviate from the list, creating a dangerous precedent. b) Adding another rule to the worker's checklist. Great, now they need to check this for every single light they are working on, which means more work (is that really cheaper than the bulbs even if it's only a few seconds per light?) and more possibilities of doing mistakes. Not to mention that the traffic light probably refuses to turn on when not all lights are installed. That means the software needs to be changed. Yet another possibility to introduce fatal mistakes at other intersections. I prefer paying for a bulb every now and then to putting human lives at risk. Note that changing something for this intersection means changing things for all intersections, including high-traffic complex ones.
- 10y ago
- mannigfaltig 10y agoI'm not quite understanding the reasoning behind this. It seems a stop sign plus a "right turn only" sign would imply the same rule.
- Smaug123 10y agoBecause the regulations state they can't have an intersection controlled by both signs and lights. The rest of the intersection is controlled by lights.
- curun1r 10y agoI feel like there's an analogy to software in this story. Someone put in a hack that, while ugly, works. I'm sure many city planners over the years have looked at it and thought it should be fixed. But when the current solution is working, taking the time to do the necessary testing to ensure that a new, cleaner solution works would be painful. So, 30 years later, the hack is still in place. I know I've come across the software equivalent of this many times in my life as a developer. "Hmm...that's a really odd way of doing that, I should refactor this. But I need to write a bunch of tests for this since the original developer didn't write any. And am I really thinking through all the possible use cases properly? Even if I am, this is now a 3-day estimate, which means it will probably take 5 days, and all to "fix" something that's technically working. That's a lot of risk/time commitment for very little payout. Maybe I should just leave it be and move on to a project that's better setup to succeed." Yep...makes total sense that this light still exists. Still doesn't explain why they replace the green and amber bulbs though...
- nerthus 10y agoIt is more like "convention over configuration". In fact, it isn't a hack. It is the simple applyance of putting elements in a system, because of a contract. Another good analogy in software would be UX and style guides. You'd like the user to have a consistent experience. The replacement is like running a cron job to do some stuff and forget to check if it makes sense. It can be done better, but on the other hand, it's less complicated this way (and never change a running system). This one red light has been removed btw. The street is a dead end towards the intersection now. But you can find another one near Wasaplatz.
- EugeneOZ 10y agoOne more evidence that "convention over configuration" principle should be avoided :)
- golergka 10y agoI think it's evidence to the contrary. We only know how much one street light cost; we don't know (from this article) how effective the overall system that manages the whole country is. I can bet that because of these rules it's much more effective then a system where every single streetlight has to be considered and configured by a bureaucrat who makes an individual decision.
- peterkelly 10y agoI guess it's like the "no smoking" lights in airplanes. Even though they're always on (it's not like there's times during the flight when you can smoke and other times when you can't), they serve as an important reminder, and therefore have a purpose.
- kogepathic 10y ago> I guess it's like the "no smoking" lights in airplanes On newer planes the no smoking light is now only a sticker/sign. They're using the bulb that used to be for smoking now to indicate when WiFi/GSM is available (satellite based, so only above 20,000ft). At least this is my experience flying internationally from Europe in the past years.
- Dylan16807 10y ago> satellite based, so only above 20,000ft Wha?
- kogepathic 10y agoI'm guessing it has to do with the frequencies/power levels they're using for communications not being permitted below 20,000ft, although I haven't dug much into it. The brochure on my flight said the plane had a 5/1MBit link (shared between all users). Not exactly what you'll watch YouTube videos on, but I suppose it works for email and message apps. https://www.panasonic.aero/inflight-connectivity/global-communications-services/ https://www.panasonic.aero/inflight-connectivity/global-comm...
- grecy 10y agoOf course, the lights used to go on and off when smoking on planes was permitted. I'm not 100% certain, but I'm willing to bet it's still permitted in some countries.
- angry_octet 10y agoI don't know anywhere it is officially permitted for passengers, but anecdotally it still happens in some countries. http://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com/2016/07/27/smoking-on-china-eastern-airlines/ http://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com/2016/07/27/smoking-on...
- thought_alarm 10y agoI get why that road is signalled. It intersects right in the middle of another signalled intersection. But in my neck of the woods we'd probably show a green right arrow when intersecting traffic from the left is stopped at a red light.
- nerdponx 10y agoAh, thanks for pointing that out. The green arrow is definitely what we'd have here in the US.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- lucaspiller 10y agoThe green arrow is pretty common in former-Soviet areas (Dresden is near the Czech border). Usually it's used at crossroads, so if the crossing lane is clear or not busy you can still turn right without being held up. Here is a good example near me: https://www.google.lt/maps/@54.7056651,25.3040075,3a,75y,99.24h,88.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQHL6lSlyl7sASzlW9JgvSQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en https://www.google.lt/maps/@54.7056651,25.3040075,3a,75y,99.... (And if you go forward two steps the Google car goes through the red light :D) If you aren't used to it you need to be careful though, as often the street you are turning into is green for pedestrians to cross - so you need to give way. Usually you can use this lane if you are going straight, so it's somewhat courteous to go over one lane and not to block it.
- runholm 10y agoAt least in Norway the green arrow doesn't only tell you that you are allowed to make the turn, but it also tells you that other traffic has red light so that you know you are guaranteed the right of way.
- lb1lf 10y agoIn some places (definitely in Norway) a green arrow doesn' just imply you can turn right if safe; it tells you other traffic is halted and you've got the intersection all to yourself. Edit: ninja'd by runholm
- ben_bai 10y agoThere is a denial-of-service attack possible. Red light with green arrow means you may turn right if you feel like it or wait for green. Just park your car in front of the traffic light... it'll be fine.
- flyx86 10y agoParking is not allowed on direction lanes (this one is a turn-right lane). You may halt your car there, but you may not leave it (thus park it). So while you can do this, you will also block yourself from doing much else. Of course, a DDoS attack would be possible by having a couple of friends and switching the driver every once in a while. A witty state lawyer may also try to sue you based on StVO §30 (1), though winning that trial won't be very likely, because you can simply stop the engine (allowed at traffic lights).
- pluma 10y agoThey could still get you for plain old obstruction. The thing about laws that makes them different from code is that intent matters. Even if you follow the letter of the law you can still get into trouble if you blatantly obviously try to violate its spirit.
- kriro 10y agoI don't know the intersection but StVO §12 probably applies as it's likely to be within 5m of the intersection (3/1.) and thus parking isn't allowed.
- jhh 10y agoI am German (and drive a car) and as per my understanding this traffic light could simply be removed with the only change necessary being a stop sign instead of the Yield sign. The explanation given by the city (or its translation) don't make any sense to me. EDIT: After re-reading the explanation I guess the idea is that since the crossing street shows a green light, the "opposing" street must have a red one.
- rurban 10y agoI know this light personally. I live there. It is no problem for the casual driver, as Dresden is one of those rare german towns with US "Rechtsabbieger" rules. You may turn right even with red lights. And the german law clearly states if one entries to a crossing has lights, all others have to get lights also. This is the only case in Germany where this law makes no sense. But the best is the last sentence: They do change all the green and yellow light bulbs also in their regular maintenance schedule. The justification goes like this: Bulbs mostly wear due to hours in usage, yes. Red and Yellow are not used, so should not wear, and thus should not be replaced. But hours can not be the only cause for problems, and while we are there and there's a budget for replacement, we'll do it all together. Not really a just technical justification, just a practical one. We do the same in software also all the time. There are two principles: 1. Make minimal changes to cause only minimal effect. 2. Harmonize your changes to avoid unnecessary asymmetries. They went with 2. You can fight the system, or you can live with it. In this case there is no reason to rock the boat. [Update:] The lawful alternative would have been to close this crossing for the Ziegelstraße into the Güntzstraße. People would have protested over this sillyness. And Dresden has enough budget surplus to do such things. In fact Dresden was very lucky in its real-estate deals, where they sold all of their old residential apartment complexes to a US company Fortress for billions: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/milliardendeal-dresden-verkauft-wohnungsbestand-und-wird-schuldenfrei-a-405194.html http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/milliardendeal-dresden-verk... Normally such deals turn out bad and unprofitable, but in this case not. Both parties are happy.
- pluma 10y ago> Dresden is one of those rare german towns with US "Rechtsabbieger" rules If it's anything like the picture, the reason right turns are allowed is the green arrow (it roughly translates to "when red, right turns are allowed if you don't interfere with other traffic"). I strongly doubt random towns in Germany can bypass the StVO (the laws which govern public roads). EDIT: To clarify, I was born in Cologne, which is on the opposite of Germany, and green right arrows exist here as well and they are part of the material you learn for taking a driving exam.
- rurban 10y ago
- gambiting 10y agoSurely, a stop sign: https://www.stickergenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/stop_sign_sheet.jpg https://www.stickergenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/sto... Plus a "turn right only": http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/95a9489a7d8b4c418cb6cfd3b6753295/right-turn-only-road-sign-uk-e16jea.jpg http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/95a9489a7d8b4c418cb6cfd3b6753295/r... Would achieve the same effect? People would have to stop at the intersection, and then they can only turn right. Same as red light+green right arrow. edit: sorry, yes, I now understand - it has to be a traffic light because all other sides have traffic lights.
- pluma 10y agoPresumably you could modify the way the road intersects to make it an inlet (which automatically has lower precedence regardless of lights) but that'd probably just be as confusing.
- TheCoreh 10y agoPerhaps they could put a physical barrier in front of that, so that it's no longer possible to go forward, and then it's no longer part of the intersection?
- lb1lf 10y ago-Then again, would that be cheaper or less confusing than simply keeping the light?
- GFischer 10y agoI think it's certainly less confusing to put a physical barrier. I could see myself waiting for the light to turn green :) . And it shouldn't cost more than 10.000 euros (a couple of years of maintenance of the traffic light). I don't understand which of the lights is the offending one: https://www.google.com/maps/place/G%C3%BCntzstra%C3%9Fe,+Dresden,+Germany/@51.0535697,13.7579662,18z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x4709cf5020d50865:0xb54dabd4097d0087!8m2!3d51.0497513!4d13.7571707 https://www.google.com/maps/place/G%C3%BCntzstra%C3%9Fe,+Dre...
- lb1lf 10y agoFirst of all, the offending light, if you can call it that, is the one where Ziegelstraße opens into Güntzstraße, here: (0). Also, the only way that unit maintenance cost makes sense is if it is calculated by taking whatever amount they spend on anything traffic-light related in a year and divides it by the number of traffic lights; that infrastructure remains in place even if this light is removed. So - you don't really save anything except the annual maintenance trip, whose cost is probably measured in the low hundreds (educated guess: two blokes with high-visibility vests, driving a VW Caddy packed to the gunwales with traffic light bulbs to the site, spending ten minutes swapping out the light bulb before proceeding to the next light.) Also, you'd need to change the law for it to happen. That being said, I suspect I'd keep you company waiting at that light; when in doubt, I tend to not move into traffic just to see what happens... :) (0) https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,111.79h,84.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scW7PqWjukB-tqiTFHHMidA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,11...
- sharpercoder 10y agoWhen I was about 15 years old, a friend tried to convince me a traffic light in front of his house was always green. I never believed him. Fast forward 15 years later. I moved to an apartment, cycling past my friends house to go to work. After a few weeks, I started to notice a traffic light which is always green! It was the same light my friend told me about. I remembered. It is here: https://goo.gl/maps/2cgcx1b92LL2 https://goo.gl/maps/2cgcx1b92LL2. Streetview direct link: https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2%B000'00.9%22N+5%C2%B052'50.8%22E/@52.0002327,5.8806822,3a,75y,46.34h,87t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slkaTropfTSDF9LePnooSlg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DlkaTropfTSDF9LePnooSlg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D234.67867%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d52.000242!4d5.880775?hl=en https://www.google.com/maps/place/52%C2%B000'00.9%22N+5%C2%B...
- jobigoud 10y agoSeems to be for pedestrian crossing. Isn't there a push button on the pole?
- data_hope 10y agoFunnily enough, there is precedent, that a red light can be ignored if it doesn't change for 5 minutes. And I really doubt that there isn't a way to regulate the crossing without a permanent red light. http://www.stvo.de/info/faq/165-ampel-bleibt-rot http://www.stvo.de/info/faq/165-ampel-bleibt-rot (German)
- mmarx 10y agoThat allows you to assume that the traffic light is defective, in which case the traffic signs would apply and require you to turn right—but that is exactly what is allowed by the green arrow even at a red light.
- data_hope 10y agoah you are right, probably there is a blue right-turn only sign (I just thought about the Grünpfeil depicted in the illustration image).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 10y agoLet's assume a North-South/East-West intersection. Eastbound traffic (on the Western road) sees this light. If the Eastbound traffic can only go right, I presume the Westbound traffic can only go left. (Otherwise the Eastbound traffic would be permitted to go straight and/or left.) If that is true, then the Southbound traffic can only go straight; no turns. (It follows that there is no Northbound traffic.) In essence, three roads converge to one. If that's so, why is this an intersection? Why not merge the roads or build a wall making incorrect crossings or turns obvious?
- herpdorplarp 10y agohttps://www.google.no/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,78.56h,87.49t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1scW7PqWjukB-tqiTFHHMidA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i33!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.no/maps/@51.0539102,13.7575856,3a,75y,78....
- losteverything 10y agoRt turn on red is voluntary. Not one to have road rage much but I enjoy waiting for the green if a jerk is behind me. Also being paid by the hour to drive red lights are your friend
- discordianfish 10y agoThis is so german of you!
- nevex 10y agoThis article is from 2015 and noone seems to have mentioned yet that the light got removed in 2016: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/ewiges-rot-an-dresdner-ampel-hat-ein-ende-genommen-14435741.html http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/ewiges-rot-an-dresdn...
- chiph 10y agoI had a German colleague come to visit me in the US one time. When we went out to lunch, and I made a "right on red after stop", he just about put his foot through the floorboard trying to push his invisible brake pedal. German driver training is very thorough. :)
- lsaferite 10y agoI'd just like to understand how on earth it costs 458€ per month to maintain this single light? Does anyone have some insight into that data point? Edit: I know the 150k over 28 years number is a bit rounded, but even using that it's 446/month or 14.60/day to run the light?!?
- soundwave106 10y agoGoogling, I've seen the rough figures from $1,000 to $10,000 (USD) a year to maintain a traffic signal -- all over the place for sure, but the €5300/yr cost doesn't appear to be that out of line. However I can't Google a really good breakdown of costs. My assumption is that the bigger percentage of that is maintenance. There are three lights in the Google street view. Assuming these are old incandescent bulbs and Germany's high kWh price, electricity costs would be roughly be about €1500 at most a year (assuming €0.35 per kWh, 150 watt bulbs, and 3 lights "always on"). Maybe add another €500 at most for the controller although it probably should cost less than that. (LED lights would drop this part of the bill a lot, too.) However, there is probably some maintenance costs for both the controller and the light: changing all bulbs yearly (if incandescent), cleaning the bulb lenses, controller maintenance (wiring checks, etc.), etc. I imagine that the bulk of the costs would fall here: labor costs plus some equipment costs (trucks, tools, etc.). A) http://pugetsoundblogs.com/roadwarrior/2012/09/25/comparing-costs-of-roundabouts-and-traffic-signals/ http://pugetsoundblogs.com/roadwarrior/2012/09/25/comparing-... B) http://bmtsonline.com/sites/default/files/Reports%20and%20Documents/FINAL%20Traffic%20Signal%20Maintenance%20Consolidation%20Study.pdf http://bmtsonline.com/sites/default/files/Reports%20and%20Do...
- lsaferite 10y agoEven if 2000/year is the base electricity cost, that still means it's costing 9.20/day in materials and labor for a single light. That still seems very excessive to me.
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago> While this may seem nonsensical and a waste of money to your average motorist, the Dresden authorities can explain in exact detail why the light never changes colour. And their explanation might show another habitat that dies hard - a love of convoluted, self-defeating regulation. That seems unnecessarily critical. Clear and consistent communication is pretty important when you're talking about traffic, and the cost is surely a drop in the bucket compared to the city's overall budget.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- scarhill 10y agoThis traffic light in Harrison, NY has been green for decades: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0142226,-73.7217408,3a,75y,107.41h,91.22t,-4.1r/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svoT-mRiS1H3x4nXfyo05NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0142226,-73.7217408,3a,75y,1... I have been driving through there since the late 70's and I'm pretty sure that the intersection configuration was in place earlier than that. So it's likely that this light has been green for over fifty years.
- fl0wenol 10y agoI've been through there before and it makes sense. They want the whole exchange signalized for consistency but that one lane's configuration means it's protected. I imagine you can make it red at the control box for an emergency or construction; I wonder if that's ever happened.
- husam212 10y agoI'm curious, do self-driving cars handle a case like this without intervention from the driver?
- ygra 10y agoIf they want to drive in Germany, they should surely know the local driving rules (including the green arrow sign), otherwise there'd be little point in a self-driving car. And since there is no way of not going right at this point there should be no problem. But I don't think there is much self-driving in city traffic yet. Especially rules about who has to yield where are not always governed by signs visible directly to every driver (e.g. Verkehrsberuhigter Bereich).
- mikejmoffitt 10y ago"And their explanation might show another habitat that dies hard" Another... habitat?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]