Talk:Lane

Info on lengths of dashes on Lane Markings

e.g. Certain sections on M4 in London have long dashes (segments) and others have small. You can see in google maps. May be there is a meaning to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.61.7.39 (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Country lane

In Britain a "lane" is also a small country road (normally without any lane markings!) and often below the level of the surrounding fields. Such lanes have to have banks on each side. "There'll always be an England/While there's a country lane." (Melody - and text Ross Parker & Hugh Charles) -- Philip Baird Shearer 12:02, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lane departure

Can you tell me the technical information on the following term? What is Lane departure warning system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.18.49.67 (talk) 08:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Good point

You're right. Lane also carries that alternate meaning in the U.S. as well, and I presume it is the same in the other dialects of English. I am adding a mention of that in the article. --Coolcaesar 00:32, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Who describes the median or central reservation as a lane?

My understanding is that the central lane in that situation is called a turning lane or two-way lane. I've never heard it called the median. Usually the term median is applied only to a middle lane that is bounded by double yellow lines on both sides to indicate that it should not be entered at any time. Can someone explain where the term median is in use to describe a turning lane? We may have a dialect difference here which needs to be noted in the article. If no one defends those recent edits I'll be taking them out eventualy. --Coolcaesar 01:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Turn lanes aren't medians...

But the small section of curbing sometimes installed between the turn lane and the oncoming traffic lane may be referred to as a median. Any area in a middle position between lanes of traffic can properly be referred to as a median; ordinary usage is to reserve the term for a paved or planted area that exists specifically to separate lanes of traffic, auxilliary barriers notwithstanding. --192.48.171.17 02:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Inside/outside (USA...)

I'm pleased to see that we've avoided the terms "inside lane" and "outside lane" in this article, and hope that state of affairs continues, as it could cause a lot of confusion. As an example: here (Britain) the outside lane is the fast lane, as it's the outside of that carriageway - so on a motorway, the one nearest the central reservation. In the US, that's the inside lane as it's on the inside of the road as a whole - so pretty much the opposite to UK usage. Best to avoid the terms altogether. 86.143.53.185 14:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Emergency lane

I think that a comment should be added to the emergency lanes section about how some European countries, for instance Germany, have dymamic traffic control systems that open up the emergency lane to through traffic in certain situations. Anyone willing to reasearch this a little? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin1a (talk • contribs) 21:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

New 'country lane' article

I propose to create a new article for 'country lane' which will describe the narrow and rural road, leaving this article to deal with traffic lanes within the carriageway. PeterEastern (talk) 06:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Traffic flow information is of questionable accuracy

The cited reference is vague and it admits it is non-authoritative. "Typical capacity of a freeway lane is about 2,000 vehicles per hour." Washington State Department of Transportation cites 7,900 cars/hour as the maximum for the two northbound lanes of the I-5 highway (60 mile per hour speeds allowed) bridge North of Mount Vernon, WA (the one that just collapsed.) Mathematical calculations of "recommended" spacing of one car length per 10mph of speed gives 2,500 cars per lane and 7.900 cars per lane assuming typical one car length spacing. Shjacks45 (talk) 01:45, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

If we discuss lane width then lane height should be included

The US Highway System and US Interstate Highway System standards play a big role in highway design (and was influenced by the German Autobahn. Specific requirements in US Interstate system funding was the requirement that Military equipment specifically Ballistic missile transportation could be accomplished. Minimum clearance height was required to be 14 feet 6 inches. (This of course influences the maximum sized load that Trucks can be built for, therefore influencing vehicle manufacture worldwide, influencing highway construction in such as Canada and Britain.) Reference: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/337A7006-8808-4790-85EA-167C8AC39F2E/0/OverheightLoads.pdf Shjacks45 (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

List of different kinds of lane -- irrelevant content?

This article is supposed to be about 'Lane (highway)' but there is a long list of different kinds of lane. Shouldn't the list be pruned of non-relevant lanes? Perhaps it should be moved to the end of the article? The article should also be re-named but I know that is unlikely. Rwood128 (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

or at least categorized? I'll give that a try. --Triskele Jim 16:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

It reads much better! Rwood128 (talk) 21:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Consistency in Units and Spellings

Obviously, anything transportation related is going to be location specific. However, this article seems like a hodgepodge of information from different countries without a consistent style or voice. I'm planning on cleaning this article up in terms of using consistent spellings (US vs UK) and in terms of being consistent in terms of which units are prominent (SI vs US Customary). I'm also planning on making sure sources are peer reviewed, and if they're not, finding peer reviewed sources, since they exist.

Does anyone have strong feelings on which spellings should be used and which units should be prominent? Based on the introduction as it stands now, it looks like US English is used and US Customary Units are prominently displayed, so my preference is to use that throughout the article. Does anyone object? --Wikiaccount0307 (talk) 16:12, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Fine with me, although it's U.S. English or American English. Most American style guides (Chicago is the outlier) prefer U.S. with the periods. --Coolcaesar (talk) 18:22, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm kind of unsure how to approach units now that I'm reading the article a little bit more carefully. For instance, it doesn't make sense to use U.S. customary units when describing Germany's design standards, but it equally doesn't make sense to use SI units prominently with U.S. design standards. The Style Guide doesn't really answer my question, since it seems to say that scientific articles should use SI, but it also says "UK engineering-related articles, including those on bridges and tunnels, generally use the system of units that the topic was drawn up in". It seems like the best approach would be to display the unit in which the design standard was written or that the literature article uses, and if that unit is not SI, to provide a conversion in parentheses. Or, to be more consistent, we could just do it all in SI and if it's U.S. related, provide a USCS conversion in parentheses. What are your thoughts? --Wikiaccount0307 (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

SI. 95% of the world's population uses SI. So SI *must* be prominent (that means Imperial/USC [identical in the units needed] should be there, but in parentheses).

en.wikipedia.org is read all over the world is why. jae (talk) 21:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)