Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MandelSoft

Signage: US vs.European systems.

95 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Over at the topic  Show Us Your...Highway Signs!!! I see two main approaches to sign design: the American and European aproach. Since I don't want to fill that topic with the discussion about the differences between the two approaches, I decided to create a new topic. So let's compare them side by side.

Orientation/navigation

European signage system are oriented to cities to point direction. For example we take the Netherlands. To navigate through the Netherlands, you should know where the location of the largest cities are. Important cities in the road network of the Netherlands are Amsterdam, Utrecht, Rotterdam, Eindhoven, and off a little less importance Arnhem, Groningen, Zwolle, The Hauge and Breda. If you know these locations in general and you know which of these cities is close to your destionation, you'll find it.

American signage systems however are navigating mainly onto route numbers and wind directions. City locations don't play as much of a role in navigation as in Europe. You can find your location by following a certain route in a certain direction. The only European country that has a simmilar system is the UK, but instead of wind directions, the UK use region names. However, most of the time they actually cover wind directions, except the regions Wales, London, the Midlands and Scotland.

Pros to the European systems:
  • By navigating on place names you get to know where every city is located.
  • Easy to follow a certain direction over different routes.
Cons to the European systems:
  • You got to know some topography before you can navigate properly.
  • Larger signs, since you need placenames to navigate.
  • Not very usefull for large countries.
Pros to the American systems:
  • Simple navigation. Route number + direction, that's it.
  • Very usefull for large countries
  • Smaller signs, since you only need route numbers + direction.
Cons to the American systems:
  • Hard to find a specific city.
  • Hard to follow a certain direction when changing routes.

 

Text vs. Symbols

European sign systems use more symbols compared to American sign systems. While in the US it can be partially justified to the fact that the majority speaks English, but this wouldn't work in Europe. Here we have several language areas quite close together, even within the same country (UK, Belgium, Switzerland). Also, there is a lot of border-crossing traffic and it would be useful and safe that you can understand the signs in a neighbouring country. That's why Europeans use symbols. Because this sign...

200px-Nederlands_verkeersbord_F3.svg.png

... is easier to understand than a text sign saying "Inhaalverbod voor vrachtwagens." (which only Dutch people can read).

Pros to the European systems:
  • Symbols make signs smaller.
  • Easy to understand.
  • Language is no problem.
Cons to the European systems:
  • Some symbols still need some explaination.
  • Some of these signs are combined with text signs.
Pros to the American systems:
  • Very specific
Cons to the American systems:
  • You are forced to learn a certain language
  • You can get very large signs filled with text, which you may not be able read completely when passing by.

Routeshields

In America the routeshields are easy to recognise. They often are prominently present at the signs and they have a distinctive shape. Here are some examples:

200px-I-1.svg.png     200px-MUTCD_M1-4.svg.png     200px-CALTRANS_G28-2_(CA).svg.png


In Europe the routeshields are much more simple and basic. In some countries, like the UK, there are no routeshields at all, but instead they use plain text:

Cowes_Somerton_Roundabout_sign.JPG


But most European countries use a square for their route numbers, often with a pre-fix:

200px-Nederlands_verkeersbord_K5.svg.png Ausfahrt_4.pngChalon_sur_Saone_sign.jpg

Some European countries are a little bit more elaborate with their route-shield design:

200px-Bundesautobahn_42_number.svg.png   500px-Italian_traffic_signs_-_direzione_
200px-M0_(Hu)_Otszogletu_kek_tabla.svg.p

But even these route shields are simple compared to the US route shields.

Pros to the European systems:
  • Small
  • Very basic. Easy to read.
  • Easy to make new shields when required.
  • Can easily handle long route numbers, let's say D1024.
Cons to the European systems:
  • Not really easy to recognise.
  • No "X-factor". What would the US-66 be with just a simple, square route shield?
Pros to the American systems:
  • Cultural background
  • Easy to recognise.
Cons to the American systems:
  • All these different shields can be quite confusing.
  • Especially when the shield contains a drawing (like the Texas State Routes) these shields are hard to read)
  • They take up a lot of space.
  • They can't handle long route numbers.

Well, that's it for today. Feel free to comment and correct me if I'm wrong. But as you can see, there are some large differences between the European and American Signage system, both with their pros and cons.

Best,
Maarten

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice write-up Maarten! And I could actually understand most of that Dutch sentence. It's the first half of the first word that lost me though - "Inhaal".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would crash my car before finishing to read the Dutch sentence above...

Now seriously, very interesting analysis; I had never thought in these differences. Do we know why historically this divergences have happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by: TekindusT

I think I would crash my car before finishing to read the Dutch sentence above...

Now seriously, very interesting analysis; I had never thought in these differences. Do we know why historically this divergences have happened?quote>

Because of multi linguality. The US only speaks English. In Europe, there are many languages (English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Danish, Dutch etc.) so symbols are needed to convey a message. It also doesn't help that some countries are officially bi-lingual (Belgium, Switzerland).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by: mrtnrln

Not really easy to recognise. No "X-factor". What would the US-66 be with just a simple, square route shield? quote>

That's a good point, but the car culture isn't the same in European countries as it is in America. People in Europe doesn't have the same relation to roads, than people in America have. If all routeshields had "X-factor", wouldn't it be the same as if no routeshields had it?

Good presentation by the way! 4.gif

(Sorry for the colour, there's something wrong with the editor today.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by: TekindusT

Now seriously, very interesting analysis; I had never thought in these differences. Do we know why historically this divergences have happened?quote>

Most European countries are part of the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. The convention itself is from the 70s, building on agreements stretching back to the 30s.

Originally posted by: ROFLyoshi

It also doesn't help that some countries are officially bi-lingual (Belgium, Switzerland).

quote>

Switzerland has four national languages; three of these are of equal status. Although most countries have one large official language, few if any (except from the microstates) have one official language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting reading, this. Especially the "Text vs. symbols" part. Sometimes I'm amazed by how much text the Americans can actually fit into a single sign, not to mention how the drivers are supposed to read it whilst passing by..

As a European, It's easy to think that the European system is better. However, I do agree with the pros and cons that you've listed. I do believe that less text is better, though. The modern traffic flow is high paced and carries a lot of dangers and challenges that call for aware drivers. I'd rather look at the traffic in front of me than spending several seconds reading a sign.. I also like the fact that when driving from one country to another one can easily recognize and understand the different signs with a glance (but then again, this may not be of the same importance in the U.S.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, you do have interesting points, Maarten. However, recently, USDOT (US Dept. Of Transportation) is experimenting on making most of traffic signs to be symbolic so other foreigners would understand what it said instead of trying to read English. MUTCD (Manual Uniform of Traffic Control Devices which it covers signs, signals, marking, etc.) have some new traffic signs that are symbolic like no passing sign or falling rocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here's a sign you can find on your way to Manhattan from JFK. From my European mentality, I don't feel confortable at all with this signage; but I'm not that silly to not to find the way to my destination.

aupto.jpg

But yeah, for example, I guess that replacing these "Right lane" and "Left lane" signage by two arrows will be much more understandable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australian signage is a lot like American signage, I think:

BGS1.jpg

And I'll just throw in a more 'iconic' sign:

4327789_f520.jpg

200909_03_seaford_frankstonfwy_morningto

Another advantage is that the colour scheme CLEARLY shows toll roads.

Austraila's signs are more text based, but I find them easy to read as they clearly show which road the exit leads from, and its easily distinguishable from the destination sign. Opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia has always fascinated me.. I admit knowing close to nothing about it, but still I feel it's a country (and continent) with European history but strong American influence. Am I wrong?

My perception of the country is also reflected in the road signs shown by ROFLyoshi: In my opinion the signs look quite European (very similar to British road signs), but the route number shields look more like the American ones.

The yellow symbolic signs are iconic to me; that kangaroo sign is a symbol of Australia - much like the Norwegian elk sign, which is often removed and taken as a souvenir by tourists..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd be correct Heitomat

Just for fun some more signs showing how both US and European styles get combined (i.e Aus signs 3.gif)

200802_03_perth_mitchellfwy_sr2.jpg

4000697964_21ab0921c5.jpg

And for a laugh, distances 290 km? Yeah that's close 3.gif

vic_reass.jpg


On the main topic, I personally prefer European Signs over American signs, maybe because I've been to Europe a lot more than I have been to America. But for me the clean simple layout of European signs is nice and simple, nothing too cluttered easy to understand regardless of the country you're in. Yeah you get the picture 3.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  •  It seems I've got quite a lot of replies on this subject. Let's aswer some:

    Originally posted by: TekindusT

    I think I would crash my car before finishing to read the Dutch sentence above...

    quote>

    That's exactly my point. You get past the sign before you can understand it, or read it completely.

    Originally posted by: TekindusTNow seriously, very interesting analysis; I had never thought in these differences. Do we know why historically this divergences have happened?quote>

    As krbe states, most European are part of the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. The main reason is, as ROFLyoshi states, that we in Europe have many different languages and the US only one. That's also the reason why our signs look so simillar.

     

    Originally posted by: WolfGuy100

    You know, you do have interesting points, Maarten. However, recently, USDOT (US Dept. Of Transportation) is experimenting on making most of traffic signs to be symbolic so other foreigners would understand what it said instead of trying to read English. MUTCD (Manual Uniform of Traffic Control Devices which it covers signs, signals, marking, etc.) have some new traffic signs that are symbolic like no passing sign or falling rocks.quote>

    Nice to hear that 1.gif

    Originally posted by: TekindusT

    Well, here's a sign you can find on your way to Manhattan from JFK. From my European mentality, I don't feel confortable at all with this signage; but I'm not that silly to not to find the way to my destination.

    [... image ...]

    But yeah, for example, I guess that replacing these "Right lane" and "Left lane" signage by two arrows will be much more understandable...

    quote>

    Agreed. When I design signage, I try to prevent as much text as possible. By the way, here's a example of text vs. symbols:

    leftlaneendsmergeright1.png

    The text at the top (US style) says the same as the arrows at the bottom (European style). Now which one can be read quickly?

    Originally posted by: ROFLyoshi
    Australian signage is a lot like American signage, I think:

    ...

    Austraila's signs are more text based, but I find them easy to read as they clearly show which road the exit leads from, and its easily distinguishable from the destination sign. Opinion?

    quote>

    Well, actually it looks like a mash-up of the British, American and German Signage system. Compared to the US signs, I find these a bit easier to read, mainly because of the layout.

     


    OK, now let's talk about the next subject:

    Arrows: Up vs. Down

    One main feature of every directional signage set are arrows. They indicate the lane setup and show directions. Currently, there are four main setups:

    1.Most arrows pointing upwards. Used in Germany, Czech Republic, Austria and quite recently in the Netherlands too:

    preview.jpg

    Picture by mhkamp (wegenforum.nl).

    2. Most arrows pointing downwards. Also a quite common setup, used in i.e. France, Luxembourg and Spain:

    3215518695_93a189f3e9.jpg
    Frankrijk2005 411 by Chriszwolle, on Flickr

    3. Lane indication arrows point upwards, exit arrows point downwards: this is a quite rare setup, but some regions in Italy use this setup.

    5000211683_c266030622_o.jpg
    ch 880 by Chriszwolle, on Flickr

    4. Lane indication arrows point downwards, exit arrows point upwards: Very popular setup, used in the US, Canada, Belgium and until recently in the Netherlands:

    100_2024.JPG
    Picture by daviedoff (wegenforum.nl).

    Each of these setups has its advantages and drawbacks. Since setups #3 and #4 are quite simillar to setups #1 and #2, I'll only discuss the first two variants. 

    Arrows pointing upwards Arrows pointing upwards have some advantages compared to their downpointing counterparts. According to research held in the Netherlands, traffic flow improves about ten percent when the arrows on the signs are pointing up instead of down (that's why we switched to arrow pointing up). The effect can be explained psygologically: arrows pointing up "pull you forward" (figurly speaking) while arrows pointing down are "holding you back". They also give you some sort of diagram of what lane setups are coming. For instance, this sign indicates a taper:

    2ujial2.jpg

    Picture by Willem (wegenforum.nl).

    There are however some downsides. For instance, arrows pointing up usually take up more space than their downpointing counterparts. This means larger signs (expensive) and less room for text and such. Also, sometimes this setup makes everything more confusing when it's used to its extremes, like in Austia:

    A2_neg_9950_0050_DSCF46920_20100921.jpg

    Picture by marcel (wegenforum.nl).

    Why?! 46.gif

    Arrows pointing downwards

    The biggest advantage of pointing down arrows is that they are simple, and often quite small. This keeps the sign simple and it makes it easier to make a clean setup. Down pointing arrows work pretty well in simple interchange setups. However, complex interchange setups are harder to handle with these arrows. For instance take a taper indication, as shown in the previous section. There are five ways how down-pointing arrows can handle this (arranged from good to bad in my opinion):

    1. A single sign, with one arrow above the "taper"-lane with a solid (Denmark) or broken (Belgium) line above the arrow, seperating the targets from each direction (see sign in the back): 

    27e45kpaalborgfrederiksot5.jpg

    Picture by Wouter N14 (wegenforum.nl).

    2. Not at all (the Netherlands, until recently)

    3a28kphoevelakenoz6.jpg

    Picture by Wouter N14 (wegenforum.nl).

    3. Two seperate signs next to each other with two arrows above the same lane (US) (no picture)

    4. One big splitter sign above the Taper lane (Switzerland):

    DSCF0507.jpg

    Picture by IQ[] (wegenforum.nl).

    5. Two seperate signs stacked upon each other with two arrows above the same lane (UK):

    Afbeelding

    So Up vs. Down: which one is the best? To me, it's undecided. They both have their strong points and weaknesses, but I do prefer pointing up arrows for my signage systems, although I have some systems with arrows pointing down that look really nice...


    I couldn't finish this post, so I'll finish it later. See you next time for part 2! EDIT: Seems that I could finish this post anyway. I hope you find this post interesting and helpful. See you next time! 2.gif

    Best,

    Maarten

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    It's hard to say which one is the best, but I like the ones where the lane indication arrows points downwards, and the exit arrows points upwards. That combination looks good, and it seems like the most logical one in my opinion.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Just because my cultural heritage (I live a few kilometers far the highway on the second pic), I feel more natural the arrows pointing downwards (even made some signs featuring them). I think they're more intended to say "if you want to go to [name here] just take this lane and sooner or later you will arrive there"; while the longer ones (and sometimes even showing curves) I think they can be more useful on dense environments, for example, ring roads or highways flowing through a metropolitan area, as they show clearly the way you have to take.

    I guess that's just a matter of tastes, though.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Personally I prefer arrows up, since it's what I'm used to.

    213875067_e6ac7ca742.jpg

    One thing I think is quite unique though, is how the Swedish exit signs (only at the exit, not beforehand) have a diagonal slope to the right, like this:

    avfart0.png

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Up because I'm used to it. Using down arrows would be needed for signs with lots of text, which isn't good. Also I find the arrow to be an integral part of the sign, so why not make it big?

    And as Frdm920 said, thats nothing. So I give you...

    Stuart_Highway_Mileage_Sign.jpg

    Yes, 1222km.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Want more ridiculously long distance highway signs?

    sealn.jpg

    Considering that Spain is roughly 14 times smaller than Australia this sign can be quite ridiculous. it is indicating a city you'll need more or less 13 hours by car to reach. Explanation? 

    A very large number of Moroccan inmigrants to back to Morocco in vacation, and the cheapest way to do this is going by car and taking the ferry in Algeciras (a city near this sign). Then, when they go back home in Europe's major cities, they need some orientation. Once you've covered the 1048 km to Barcelona, you find lots of signs indicating France and so on.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    http://www.ricomerkert.de/norway/hurtigruten/day8/14_signpost.jpg 

    This signpost is found in Kirkenes, Norway, where I was stationed when I was in the army. Beeing from Bergen, it wasn't exactly fun to get a constant reminder that I was 2626 km away from home..

    It's not actually a road sign, even though the distances are correct. It's more like a tourist attraction.. or a morale killer..

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    personally i think the european directions to cities is favourable to to the US directions to routes... as if you get lost? surely you are more likely to know which towns you want than which routes.

    and the UK have route designations too all motorways begin with an M, M20, M1, M42 etc

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • I couldn't finish this post, so I'll finish it laterI couldn't finish this post, so I'll finish it later I was coming to that point this time, mightygoose 2.gif


    Routeshields and Routenumbering

    Routeshields help you to find your way to your destination. They are linked to a certain route, helping you to navigate through the countries. Now there are various routeshields around, so let me show a composition of some routeshields from freeways all over the world:

    routeshields1.png

    NOTE: the British routeshield is just flat text.

    But what's the system behind these routeshields. Well, every country has it's own system and own classification of routes. First the classification of routes. There are a two main systems noticeable:

    • Classification by road type (freeway, primary route, etc.). Most European countries use this system.
    • Classification by road owner (Interstate, State Route, etc.). The US and Canada use this system, but also Spain uses this (in a extreme form).
    Let's take a closer look at these two systems:

    Classification by road type This type of classification is quite common in Europe. The route number and route shield colour (and prefix when available) shows the road type of the specified route. Most European have at least these two classifications in their systems:

    • Freeways (common prefixes: A or M): Roads with at least 2x2 lanes, emergency lanes (outer shoulder lanes), a median with a barrier and no at-grade crossings.
    • National routes (common prefixes: B or N): mostly any important route without a freeway status.
    However, some countries have extra road classes. A few examples:
    • Belgium and Denmark have ring routes (numbered as R# (B) or O# (DK)). These routes loop around a city. These routes can be either a freeway or not.
    • A lot of larger European countries have local routes, like the Routes Département (D#) in France and the Landstrasse (L#) and Kreisstrasse (K#) in Germany. Sometimes these routes are placed on signs (in France: always), sometimes not.
    • Austria has Schnellstassen (S#). These routes can almost be classified as a freeway (they mostly miss emergency lanes or they have a 2+1 or a 1x2  lane setup), but the should not be confused for freeways.
    • The Netherlands has city routes (s###) in its largest cities. These are the main connections in the largest cities.

    Classification by road owner This classification system is determined who owns the road (nation, state, etc.) rather than it's layout. This is common in the US and Canada. For instance, the US has the following classifications:

    • Interstate Routes: Main routes in the US, commonly freeway, owned by the nation.
    • US Routes: Secondary routes in the US, also owned by the nation.
    • State Routes: Tertiary routes in the US, owned by their corresponding state.
    These classifications says nothing about the road layout (except for the Interstates, which are commonly freeways). For instance, a State Route can be a two lane road or a ten lane urban freeway and of course anything in between.

    Spain also uses this system, but it has been taken to its extreme and it's quite confusing. In fact, there are so many prefixes (at least a dozen) that I can hardly discover a classification. Fortunately, TekindusT helped me out a bit:

    Originally posted by: TekindusT

    As you state on the highways thread, the first level highways can be labelled A-# (they're not tollroads) or AP-# (if they have tolls, the "P" is for "Peaje"). These freeways are owned by the central goverment or a private company.

    Furthermore, there exist highways owned by some Autonomous Communities (you would call them "states"), which follow different labelling patterns. The case I know best, Catalonia, makes it's freeways labelling them as C-#. Madrid's state freeways are called M-# and Andalusian state freeways begin with A-#; and so on. This last case can be confusing, because at first sight, you cannot distinguish between the first kind of highways or this special kind. This is why in Andalusia's case, the colour in the label is quite important and blue is avoided in the cases I know best.

    That's not the end, though. There's more info (surprisingly) on the English Wikipedia here [link].

    quote>

    Although these two systems seem to be completely seprate, they can be combined at some point. For instance, the A-# and the AP-# routes in Spain are all freeways (owned by the nation) and all local routes in France and Germany are owned by their corresponding local governments.


    Road Numbering systems

    Now that we can classify the routes, it's time to create a numbering system. There are multiple methods to do this and these can be used in combination. Here are a few:

    Grid-based numbering system This system is used in the US as well as for the international European routes (E#) and at some point Germany has this system too. The system goes like this:

    • All even numbers go East-West, the odd numbers go North-South.
    • The primary routesare two-digit (and sometimes one) numbers ending with 0 (East-West) or 5 (North-South). The lowest numbers start in the West, and in the North (European routes) or South (US Interstates)
    • The two-digit numbers that don't end with 0 or 5 are secondary routes.
    • All three digit numbers are tertiary routes and often link two primary or secondary routes with each other or are auxilary routes (this happens more often with US Interstates than European routes. Example:
    500px-FHWA_Auxiliary_Route_Numbering_Dia
    Picture from Wikipedia.org

    Here below is a schematic overview of the Eisenhower Interstate System as used in the US.

    fullinterstatemap-web.jpg

     

    Picture from StrangeMaps

    Region-based route numbering
    In some countries you can see at the starting number of the two- and three-digit numbers in what region of the country they are. This can be helpfull to find your way and determine your location. One of the countries you can see this very clearly in particular is the UK, as neongamer describes over at SC4devotion.com:

    Originally posted by: neongamer (@ SC4Devotion.com)

    In England, the national system is broken up into a number of corridors, broken up by the numbered primary roads:

    azones.gif

    So, say a road began in the '5' zone, it would have be 'A5406', or 'B5503'. If a road crosses zones, then it's number is derived from the zone furthest anticlockwise. So, if A road starts in Cornwall (3) and continues to '1' through '4' and '6', it would be the A3XX (Substitute XX for the number, it just starts with 3). 

    Motorways, on the other hand, use their own numbering systems.

    The principle is the same, however the motorway placements are different:

    t_mzone.gif

    You may have noticed that Wales has become part of zone 5. This creates a headache as the M4 is in Wales, but is still called the M4. Crazy world, eh?

    Look here for more:

    http://www.cbrd.co.uk/indepth/roadnumbers/allpurpose.shtml - A and B Roads

    http://www.cbrd.co.uk/indepth/roadnumbers/motorways.shtml - Motorways

    quote>

    The Netherlands, Germany and Belgium use this system too. For example, this is the system in Belgium for the N-roads, as CasperVg describes over at SC4Devotion.com:

    Originally posted by: CasperVg (@ SC4Devotion.com)

    N1-N9: One numbered N-roads that go from Brussels to all corners of the corners.

    N10-N90: Two numbered N-roads, ending in a 0, are connections between capitals of provinces.

    N11-N99: and N100-N999: Other two numbered N-roads and threenumbered N-roads use a regional system, with the first number to indicate the province.

    Number           Province

    N1x - N1xx       Anvers / Antwerp

    N2x - N2xx       Brabant

    N3x - N3xx       Flandre occidentale / West-Vlaanderen

    N4x - N4xx       Flandre orientale / Oost-Vlaanderen

    N5x - N5xx       Hainaut / Henegouwen

    N6x - N6xx       Liège / Luik

    N7x - N7xx       Limbourg / Limburg

    N8x - N8xx       Luxembourg / Luxemburg

    N9x - N9xx       Namur / Namen

    quote>

    Radial route numbering
    In some countries you see that the one-digit route numbers all start in the same city. This can be seen in the Netherlands (Amsterdam), Belgium (Brussels) and France (Paris). For example, in the Netherlands you have the following routes from Amsterdam:
    •  A 1    Amsterdam - Amersfoort - Enschede - German Border.
    •  A 2    Amsterdam - Utrecht - 's-Hertogenbosch - Eindhoven - Maastrich - Belgian Border (A25/E25).
    •  A 3    (Cancelled) Amsterdam - Gouda - Rotterdam - Dordrecht. Only a stretch of N3 of 8 km long exists in Dordrecht. The section between Gouda and Rotterdam is numbered as A 20.
    •  A 4    Amsterdam - The Hauge - Rotterdam - Bergen op Zoom - Belgian Border (A12). This route is notorious for its bottleneck at Leiden and its three missing links: Delft - Schiedam (discussed for about 50 (!) years), Spijkernisse - A 29 and Dinteloord - Bergen op Zoom
    •  A 5    Amsterdam West Outer Ring (Amsterdam - Schiphol Airport). Not complete yet, but it's currently under construction. Previously this number was assigned to the route Amsterdam - Haarlem, but that route has been renumbered to A 200.
    •  A 6    Amsterdam - Lelystad - Kampen - Joure (A 7).
    •  A 7    Amsterdam - Afsluitdijk - Sneek - Groningen - German Border.
    •  A 8    Amsterdam - Zaanstad
    •  A 9    Amsterdam (South Outer Ring) - Haarlem - Alkmaar
    •  A 10   Amsterdam City Ring.
    Integrated route numbering

    In a very few countries this systems is used. Integrated route numbering means that one number is signed to one route only, independent from its classification. This system is used in the Netherlands. For instance, the A 9 is a freeway between Amsterdam and Alkmaar, but continues as a the N 9 (a provincial road) to Den Helder.  While this is a quite handy method in small countries, or countries with a few numbered routes, when it comes to bigger countries, you must use 4-digit numbers or less numbered routes, which may not be desireable...


    Well, that's it for today! 2.gif

    Best,

    Maarten

     

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Having travelled around a bit, I must say I am definitely more at home with town-based signs. Of course, the fact I am from Australia does prejudice me a bit.

    I agree with the statement made before that Australian signage is a mix of US and European styles. It is much like our country in that respect.

    And bah, all those distances are puny!

    west_of_pine_mtn_rd%28sr38%29exit.jpg

    Yep. 3,423km means you're not getting to Darwin today. Or tomorrow. Or probably even the day after that. Might want to leave a week free, in fact. Do I win? 3.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    @ Maarten if that's the simplified version I hate to see the non-simplified

    @ Astro well Perth to Darwin is 4,403 km worth of driving. Unfortunately I can't currently find a road sign so for now you win 3.gif

    Edit

    @ Yoshi, you stole my sign which I was going to use but didn't because it was short 3.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Originally posted by: astronelson

    Having travelled around a bit, I must say I am definitely more at home with town-based signs. Of course, the fact I am from Australia does prejudice me a bit.

    I agree with the statement made before that Australian signage is a mix of US and European styles. It is much like our country in that respect.

    And bah, all those distances are puny!

    Yep. 3,423km means you're not getting to Darwin today. Or tomorrow. Or probably even the day after that. Might want to leave a week free, in fact. Do I win? 

    quote>

    Greatnorthernhwy2.png

    Damn! Only 300km short!

    Keep in mind this stretches only a third of the country.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    LOL, you Australians definately win (the Argentinian one isn't a highway sign...)! As for the design, I totally agree it looks like a crossover of U.S. and European systems; but taking the best of both systems...

    Share this post


    Link to post
    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 to join our friendly community. It's easy!  

    Register a New Account

    Sign In  

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

    Sign in to follow this  

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×

    Help Keep Simtropolis Online, Open & Free!

    stexcollection-header.png

    Would you be able to help us catch up after a bit of a shortfall?

    We had a small shortfall last month. Your donation today would help us catch up for this month.

    Make a Donation, Get a Gift!

    We need to continue to raise enough money each month to pay for expenses which includes hardware, bandwidth, software licenses, support licenses and other necessary 3rd party costs.

    By way of a "Thank You" gift, we'd like to send you our STEX Collector's DVD. It's some of the best buildings, lots, maps and mods collected for you over the years. Check out the STEX Collections for more info.

    Each donation helps keep Simtropolis online, open and free!

    Thank you for reading and enjoy the site!

    More About STEX Collections