Thanks. As a "real user" what are your thoughts on the metric appendix?
If the States continue to refuse to metricate, I don't think it will make much difference. However, it risks the loss of a great deal of background work if the nation and States ever change and adopt serious metrication plans. I hope it and the decision processes that went into it are safely archived somewhere. Do you agree it greatly lowers the quality of guidance for metric highway marking, and would make the task appreciably more difficult if anyone actually wanted to undertake it? ________________________________ From: Howard Ressel <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, June 14, 2010 9:08:11 AM Subject: [USMA:47784] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs permitted by US Federal law or regulation? Your a better person than I. I have not read the MUTCD from cover to cover and probably many of my co workers have not either and we use it every day. Maybe I just haven't had trouble falling asleep lately. -- "Go for a Metric America" Howard Ressel Project Design Engineer, Region 4 (585) 272-3372 >>> On 6/11/2010 at 2:49 PM, in message <[email protected]>, "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> wrote: > I mostly use Google, and sort the wheat from the chaff the hard way.. > However, in this case I was familiar with the documents and just needed links > to the latest edition. I won't pretend I have memorized them, but I have > read MUTCD and SHSM cover to cover (fairly dull and dry, if you want to > know). If I recall correctly, I started a thread previously on the 2009 > MUTCD but it didn't draw much interest; perhaps I didn't spell out the > significance well enough. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, June 11, 2010 12:28:55 PM > Subject: [USMA:47713] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs > permitted by US Federal law or regulation? > > > John, > > I continue to admire the thoroughness of your research on various questions > related to metrication. > > We can depend on you to dig out relevant, reliable, and often official > sources. What search engines do you use? > > Gene. > > ---- Original message ---- >>Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 03:28:00 -0700 (PDT) >>From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> >>Subject: [USMA:47695] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs > permitted by US Federal law or regulation? >>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >>Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> >> I am not sure if that currently is or will continue >> to be true. It has been true in the past. >> >> The Feds publish the Manual of Uniform Traffic >> Control Devices (MUTCD) and Standard Highway Signs & >> Markers (SHSM). In many cases, a choice is offered, >> and the States may choose which of the allowable >> choices they will use, and usually have their own >> laws uniformly applying that choice to the State. >> (The above are available online as pdf files). >> There is a process for the Feds to "bless" choices >> not in the book, but it is a PITA. It is used >> mostly to test new sign ideas. If they are good >> ideas, they make it into a later edition. >> >> Past editions came in metric and english versions >> (these refer to sign dimensions, both books allowed >> english or metric message content). The States have >> generally opposed highway metrication and the metric >> book and metric sign content was not much used. The >> 2009 MUTCD was issued with ALL metric content moved >> to an appendix. In my view, it would be VERY >> difficult to determine what in the appendix applies >> to what sign and to design metric highway marking >> from the poor direction given therein. (Easiest way >> would be to work from a past edition and check for >> changes). The companion SHSM is usually a year >> later and has not been issued yet. I suspect the >> next edition of MUTCD will remove the metric >> appendix and we will never see a new sign with >> either metric dimensions or content unless we drive >> to Canada or Mexico. >> >> It appears to be unconditional surrender of the FHWA >> to the "forces of evil" re metrication. Status of >> metric has gone from "fully approved by the Feds if >> the State chooses it", to "difficult and debatable", >> and will probably become "not a choice." If it goes >> to the latter, a State could still appeal for >> "special approval" but I see that in the set >> {snowball, hell}. >>...
