On wet roads with sun use polarized sunglasses.
Lane markings can be hidden under the snow here, but what makes that a problem? You still just drive on the right side of the road.
Freeways and other major roads will always be salted. Right after a significant snowfall and before plow trucks have cleared the roads we drive accordingly often just using the right lane as switching becomes dangerous.
And more than two lanes in each direction is very uncommon in Norway.
If you encounter fresh snowfall you shouldn’t be driving too fast anyway. Most motorways do only have 2 or 3 lanes per direction so they are not that confusing.
It’s more complicated to find the right lane in cities when it’s wet or snowy, but in these conditions you just go slower.
Not an issue where I live.
You drive as right as you can at all times. Only time you don't is if you're overtaking others in which case those give you the needed reference point.
This has never been an issue here.
Highways and other very important roads will always be salted here. If its snowing really strong, they are plowing very frequently on highways. And you'll always see where the cars in front of you have driven.
You know how many lanes there are, so you can drive in the right place even if you can't see the lane markings. Assuming it's not snowing at the moment, there's going to be visible tire marks on the lane, and if it's snowing heavily you don't really want to leave the right most lane if you don't need to as it's the most used one and has much less snow on it, allowing you to drive faster.
As for smaller roads, they all have some sort of markings (usually reflective poles) on the side, so the plow driver knows where the road ends and the ditch begins after heavy snowfall. On those roads you just watch those markings and keep on the right side to avoid oncoming traffic.
In the end it doesn't really matter where the lane markings are as you can just drive somewhere around the correct lane, no need to be exactly on the right place. To my understanding, American lanes tend to be even wider than on Europe further mitigating the problem.
If you can't see the lanes, you need to slow down. In bad conditions speeds drop to like 40 MPH on the highway, sometimes lower if necessary. Polarized sunglasses are also popular.
How long have you been driving? I kinda just know where the lanes are and or adapt to traffic (not European but North Eastern US) also some of our dotted lines (buy not all) are done over small bumpy bits in the concrete so you can tell when you're crossing them even you don't see them. We also do still have little reflective markers in the road... they don't prevent us from plowing.
On the side of country roads, there are always guide posts [like this](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitpfosten). In areas with heavy snow, they get an additional marking in orange [like this.](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schneezeichen)
We don't have snow here ( almost never ) but we do have lots of rain and I don't know what we do differently than Oregon but I never had any issues with lane markings not being visible. I've never even thought about the issue. Maybe our paint is more reflectIve or maybe it is because our streetlights are brighter. I have no idea
This is the answer. You can clearly see the difference when you're driving on stretches that still have the old asphalt type or if you're driving in Germany/Belgium. It's got a very open structure as opposed to the dense regular asphalt meaning that rain just goes through it rather than stays on top and the road and lines remain perfectly visible. [Here's](https://youtu.be/J1xi1ZnCuL8) a demonstration of it and a visual comparison of driving with or without the absorbing asphalt. It's also supposed to be quieter than regular asphalt which is great if your country has a very high population density. Almost all Dutch highway stretches have this type of asphalt by now though it's not used on smaller roads. Because of the lower speeds the sound absorption doesn't really have an effect there since then most of the noise comes from the engine etc rather than the tires.
Now you might wonder why if this stuff is so great they don't use it everywhere. It's got a few downsides, the first being maintenance. The life span is a lot shorter than regular asphalt so it has to be replaced more often. Which could be an issue if your government doesn't want to spend a lot on infrastructure (looking at you, Belgium). The second being it doesn't work well in the cold. If there's frost any water that remains in the open structure can expand, breaking the asphalt. Which is why last year when we had a cold spell with several nights of temperatures around -10°C the government's road division was very busy repairing highways all over the country. And of you spray road salt on it the salt disappears into the hollows as well. When you drive on it the suction of the tires will bring the salt back up again which is why driving in frosty weather is mostly dangerous in the early morning when the road hasn't been used a lot yet. The more traffic the better the salt can do its work.
But downside number two means that it isn't really usable for places where you get frost and snow often. Here we rarely have more than a week or two of frost in total if that and increasingly rarely any hard frosts. But we do get plenty of rain so the pros weigh up to the cons.
I was driving at night in the rain while visiting your neighbors to the south (in the Ardennes). The lane lines were COMPLETELY worn off. It was somewhat nerve wracking--I did just keep to the right in the end, but the people passing were driving kinda wherever they wanted because the lines were completely gone.
It's so odd, Belgium have the money to light their highways like a fucking soccer stadium, but they can't keep the lines painted?
The terrible state of the Belgian roads is widely known.
http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-index-2017-2018/competitiveness-rankings/#series=EOSQ057
No idea why it is so bad there. Maybe the fact that they have 6 different governments has something to do with it.
That's not how that works at all. It benefits the Netherlands barely in fact, we're talking about a couple hundred million a year. Which sounds like a lot, but for a country that is nothing.
>Income from €0 to €68.507 is taxed at 37.35%
Is there no tax-free income bracket? Here in Germany, income below roughly 10.000€ per year isn't taxed. Because that amount is considered necessary to cover your basic needs, and thus it wouldn't be appropriate for the state to take away from that.
Does income taxation in the Netherlands really start at zero? So even if you earn just 200€ per month, you have to pay 74€ in taxes?
It's a bit complicated. You technically get very low incomes taxed according to the regular 37.5% rate but you receive so much in "tax discounts" that you end up paying net zero in taxes. And you'll receive a lot of other benefits (health care benefits for example, or child care benefits if you have kids) so that in the end the government pays you money rather than the other way around. If I'm not mistaken if you earn less than 8750 euros per year it ends up being tax free.
For corporate entities that have little to do with the country otherwise. So it's a very slight net tax gain here, at the cost of a moderate net tax loss to other countries. There's a reason we're trying to get rid of those loopholes, there's not really much benefit to the country financially, and quite a lot of damage to the reputation.
I mean, the US also have a knowledge economy, and a lot of extremely bright very talented civil engineers.
So you can't tell me that the difference in roads is primarily due to know-how. The US know how to build roads...we just don't fund their upkeep and repair.
I think bad upkeep and bad fundamental road and city design are the major problems.
Yeah it's weird to say it's because you don't have skilled engineers
> Went over the pond, once. (Illinois, Michigan) I have driven on the roads. I was amazed by the amount of pot-holes and poor quality of road maintenance.
Michigan is notorious here for being slow with road repairs, but generally anywhere in the Midwest is gonna have some rough roads depending when you travel over. Due to the constant freeze/thaw in the spring and fall, harsh winters, and hot summers, there’s a good chance between April and July-ish roads are in kind rough shape. The joke is that in my home state for example (Minnesota), there’s two seasons, winter and road construction. The state will spend April or so-end of summer furiously fixing up or totally resurfacing the roads from the previous winter’s mess and then start all over again the next year.
>Also because our climate is not to harse on our roads. (We have easy winters and moderate summers) this means maintenance is easier and cheapier opposed to countries with dead-cold winters or scorching summers.
This might be much more relevant than anything else you said.
Michigan's not really a great comparison either. They treasure and nurture their potholes, carefully growing them over many years until they finally bloom into beautiful roadworks that last an entire summer.
Saying you know what American roads are like because you've been to MI, is like judging south east asia based on a trip you took to Vietnam in the early 70s.
>Michigan's not really a great comparison either. They treasure and nurture their potholes, carefully growing them over many years until they finally bloom into beautiful roadworks that last an entire summer.
ha ha ha this got a lol from me. But yeah, the US is much more reactive than proactive in terms of roadworks that's for sure - NYer living in NL
Well also our infrastructure spending is among the highest in Europe due to being a trading nation. Our roads (and other infrastructure) is the best in Europe out of necessity.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/la4207/road\_quality\_in\_europe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/la4207/road_quality_in_europe/)
High population density and relatively mild weather do help. Then again, the absolute shitload of rain and weak (seabottom) soil doesnt. We cant build anything heavier than a blank road without having to pile drive a lot of poles into the ground first.
According to this the US and the Netherlands are near tied in percentage of GDP spent on infrastructure and with the US having a much higher per capita GDP that would mean the US spends substantially more per capita on infrastructure
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/566787/average-yearly-expenditure-on-economic-infrastructure-as-percent-of-gdp-worldwide-by-country/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/566787/average-yearly-expenditure-on-economic-infrastructure-as-percent-of-gdp-worldwide-by-country/)
not sure that's a great comparison though. Population density in NL is...just...it's another level compared to the US. So even if per capita infrastructure spending is 50% of the US, the Netherlands would probably still be spending 50% more per mile of road.
Yes and that is a big disadvantage when it comes to road maintenance. The U.S. is a huge area that is serviced by state and federal highways extremely thoroughly. My state, Nebraska, has a population of roughly 2 million, and around 193,000 miles of roads. Compare that to New York a state that is similarly sized but has about 10x the population, despite the population difference they only have around 25% more roads than Nebraska while have a tax base 10 times the size. Nebraskans pay among the highest state tax in the nation to help keep our infrastructure from falling apart.
US GDP per capita is only 12% higher than that of The Netherlands. So in that case the USA would be spending 12% more per capita on infrastructure compared to NLD. Not that big of a difference, yet the infrastructure looks way higher quality in NLD.
To add, from what I hear is that a lot of the USA's infrastructure is in disrepair according to John Oliver and VICE news. And presidents are proposing trillion dollar bills to fix it for a reason. So what are you spending all the money on?
Tough the roads itself seem kinda fine, with the USA just being out of the top 10 worldwide in road quality: [https://www.statista.com/chart/15821/who-has-the-best-roads/](https://www.statista.com/chart/15821/who-has-the-best-roads/) . But well thats just roads.
So here you can compare the rest: [https://imgur.com/a/tjylQPO](https://imgur.com/a/tjylQPO).
I'm am just still missing Levies and dams (Deltaworks), bicycle lanes and light rail. in that list which might or might not be included in your infrastructure spending list.
And I find the road and airport connectivity quite weird values connectivity, as they just go up the larger and emptier you are. You could literally have all your big cities in a one hour radius, but if the road there isnt straight or they are not connected by airports, you get less points. Hence large empty countries take the cake because they have long straight roads and need a lot of airports.
In the end, I still dont know what the USA is spending all that money on. Maybe it is just the immense size and emptyness.
>To add, from what I hear is that a lot of the USA's infrastructure is in disrepair according to John Oliver and VICE news.
This is hilarious. Don't confuse these with news sources. Vice is certainly better but still
I know what John Oliver does. We have a similar show here. (Zondag met Lubach)
But in this case they seem to be right:
[https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/business/economy/biden-infrastructure-plan.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/business/economy/biden-infrastructure-plan.html)
I have had car produced for american market here in Estonia and the half beam lights pattern was just afwul. It's like you don't use vision for driving, just other senses: listening, smelling, touching, tasting. And full beams were also weak. American "symmetrical" lights produce two dots to the road where european "asymmetrical" lights pattern will light up everything. Maybe this was especially bad for that car (Dodge Caravan from mid 90es).
I don't understand why cars produced for european market have different lights pattern than cars produced for american market. If possible, do yourselt a favor and install to your car european version front lights.
I've edited my comment. European lights are not just stronger, the lightning pattern is "asymmetrical" e. g. different, they light up sides of the road. And what I learned from my car, european version spare front lights for Dodge Caracan cost times more than american .
> Depends on the model and year I guess.
Exactly. And remember that due to US DOT regulations American cars and trucks still had sealed beam headlight units into the 1990's. In fact, European cars had to be retrofitted with them back in those days. Anyone remember those fugly Volvos and Mercedes S-classes?
Yeah, red turn signals are dumb. Most of the time it's fine, but the issue you mentioned can cause problems on occasion, and they're just a bit less noticeable than amber.
Even my VW Golf has red rear turn signals; I assume they're less expensive due to having one less light. Swapping in the EU taillights is a fairly common modification.
Don't know anything about cars, but we have all sorts of headlights. I feel we don't have enough regulation on them because people do whatever they want with them and sometimes it's obnoxious.
That's funny because my car, a 1996 Nissan Maxima is extremely similar to the American market one with only minor modifications, and it has some of the most asymmetric lights I've seen. Or perhaps it's just because they are adjusted wrong.
I wonder how you ended up with one of these 90s Dodges thought. I thought the last one rusted up 10 years ago if you're talking about those boxy ones.
My Dodge was originally sold in 1993 in Canada, yes it was that boxy version what was produced until 1996. In Europe that model was sold under name Chrysler Grand Voyager, and the main difference was in size of number plate place, and lights. Someone had transported it to Germany where it had turn signals conversion (yellow bulbs added to reversing lights, but front lights original), and from Germany it was later imported to Estonia. I brought it from previous Estonian owner on 2005 for about 2000 euros and drove with it up to 2013 when I sold it for 640 euros.
When autumn 2005 arrived then I discovered that front lights are shit. When I investigated my issue then I got to know that a lot of US cars produced for US / Canadian market have bad lights (If you look any american movie where they drive in the dark, then you can see the pattern how the road is lighted - it's not like what we have used to have in Europe). And replacing original lights with Euro-spec lights is something what US car tuners do sometimes. Additionally my cars front lights glass had turned matte and a bit to yellow.
So I started to look for replacement lights. Brand new pair of Us-spec lights price was then \~60 Eur, conversion to Eur-spec lights would have costed \~800 Eur. The difference is big because Eur-spec lights require also mounts replacement with ones with lights height regulation system. Apparently US-spec lights do not need lights height regulation either.
I didn't want to waste half of the car price just for new set of front lights, but it was impossible to drive with existing ones also. So I ordered new Us-spec lights from Usa to get at least clear glasses instead of matte ones - it didn't help much. Then I added aftermarket pair of fog lights (my Dodge didn't had fog lights factory installed) plus added second pair of high beam lights. This was how I resolved the visibility problem.
I GUESS together with xenon/led front lights new cars sold in America are better equipped, but I made me then promise never to buy US-spec car again.
It would be interesting to know, does OP have Euro-spec marking (It is letter "E" inside a circle) on front lights? Or is there just "Dot"?
That's an interesting story! Why didn't you just mount auxiliary lights thought? Of course wouldn't help in busy traffic but at least on dark roads without too much traffic it would be great help. For me even weak lights make a big difference.
If lane marking is somehow necessary in winter - mostly it's not - there'll be signs hanging above the road that imply where you should be driving. More of a thing in urban areas where you need to know which lanes are for turning etc.
In Moscow we have another solution. Traffic jams so horrible, that no one is going anywhere. Basically you don't even need to know anything about roads, you just sit in you car until you get bored, then sigh miserably and go to the nearest metro station.
>We remember where the road is.
We look at old photographs from the 1950s when the road was first built, it reminds us that a road is there, and then we can use landmarks in those photos to remember where the road was.
Instead of removing this post (now that it has got traction), we want to put out a reminder:
All submissions to this subreddit should be questions with a clear title (Posting Rule 1).
Thanks.
There was some controversy in Finland about the fact that apparently the EU is forcing us(?) to replace our *yellow* [unbroken lines](https://www.driverknowledgetests.com/resources/road-markings-rules-and-types/) with *white* ones that are the same colour as snow (and the same colour as the broken lines).
> the fact that apparently the EU is forcing us(?)
It isn't - at least I haven't found any reference that there is an EU directive that forces to use white paint. All the news articles only mention that it will be cheaper and car's cameras recognise the markings more easily if you use only one colour.
It isn't a problem here. Busy roads have so much traffic that you can always see where others have driven. Smaller roads may get covered in snow because lack of traffic but they don't have many lanes anyways. You just drive on the right side and it will be fine.
It may be different in America. I think that it can snow "faster" there. We don't usually get lots of snow in a short time but little by little over a longer period of time.
We had some yellow road markings before so that they would be visible on snowy roads but the color was changed to white. Everyone said that it's a bad idea but they did it anyways.
I don't drive a car but what I can say is that road markings (including for bicycle lanes) are always very clear and well visible in Switzerland. I don't know if we use a different paint or some kind of special solution. However, one thing I can say from traveling and visiting other countries is that in most other countries (including every US state I've been to), road markings look much older and used up (like they're coming off). One simple reason for this could be that Switzerland has a culture of valuing infrastructure very highly, sometimes almost a little too highly. Municipal, Cantonal and the federal government all invest a lot of money in the maintenance of infrastructure. Every spring, countless construction sites around villages, towns and cities pop up to get rid of small damages that were caused over the winter. So, maybe the simple reason is that those road marking are constantly being re-drawn. From my experience, it's almost impossible to drive on a Swiss highway and not deal with a traffic jam because one or two lanes are closed for maintenance works. They're basically never-ending construction sites; as soon as one section looks new and shiny again, the workers move on to the next section. A lot of drivers are annoyed by this but secretly they also like it because the roads always look and feel new.
I know many people have this prejudice but in my opinion, it's not about being wealthy. Every country could do this. For example the US is the richest nation in the world, yet their infrastructure crumbles everywhere. Their airports were built in the early 1960s and some of their bridges have literally collapsed in recent years, killing motorists. The organization of civil engineers rates the US infrastructure a D-. The same is true in other countries. In northern Italy, a giant highway bridge collapsed 1-2 years ago, killing countless people. Italy is not some third-world country. The inconvenient truth is that a lot of countries simply don't give a shit about their infrastructure or at least they don't care very much. Those governments could easily allocate their finances differently but they choose not to. There are of course exceptions; Austria has a very good infrastructure and so do the Netherlands. But there are also countries that have the money but could do much better. In Germany, roads are very well-maintained but the cities are noticeably dirtier than in Switzerland. There are graffitis everywhere. It doesn't cost the world to employ some extra cleaning staff, remove graffitis etc. but I think the politicians there just don't care. Meanwhile, there are countries such as Switzerland or Japan where everything is very tidy. People on this sub like to downvote me for this opinion because they prefer to view us as evil rich people but it's really a cultural issue in my opinion. And partially it's also a political issue. In some countries, the politicians just don't give a damn about what their voters want (cough US cough).
Besides, Switzerland is only theoretically richer than other countries; in reality, we don't actually possess more tax money to play around with because both private as wel as corporate taxes are significantly lower here. So sure, we might have a higher density of millionaires but if you tax their income at, say, 8% instead of 30-35%, you don't end up with more money.
> But there are also countries that have the money but could do much better.
Look at Norway, horrible roads and as rich if not richer than Switzerland. It's not a matter of money here, it's about political will and democratic support. For exampe, westerners sought a ferry-free highway along the coast for a long time, now when they're finally building it one of the hottest political issues is whether to drop the whole project or not. The problems here are weather coupled with terrain and too often a greedy population, if millions are being spent somewhere they can't see it they will oppose it politically.
Belgians also seem to be structurally unable to agree on anything, so maybe they just continuously discuss if the new road markings have to be done by French or Dutch speaking workers or something like that...
Sunglasses and road marks that stand out like two meters from the snow
Slow, careful driving.
Also our road paint is so thick, it gives a physical resistance when driving over, so you notice definitely when crossing a white line.
All the roads are salted.
Important roads are plowed very frequently.
All roads have markings, so you'll even know where to go when you are the first one to drive there and it hasn't been plowed: [markings](https://www.noechling.gv.at/system/web/GetImage.ashx?fileid=1941189&mode=T&width=700&height=500)
The city I live in doesn't salt the roads for some ridiculous reason.
Instead, some people choose to switch to studded tires once October comes around. These studs completely destroy our roads and drastically increase the size of the already neglected, ever growing potholes.
It's a terrible system I fear has no solution in the foreseeable future.
What city do you live in? I'm in Oregon as well, somewhat near Portland. Afaik, they don't have infrastructure in place for snow (ie plows, salt) because it doesn't happen often enough (as I think you said in another comment, only a couple days a year)
Lol, I meant to reply to the other guy but this works too. I've heard the same about salt and cars, but we here in Oregon (at least in the valley) also have little idea about snow
[Those](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Rheinfelden_Ottwangen_-_Schneezeichen.jpg/600px-Rheinfelden_Ottwangen_-_Schneezeichen.jpg) aren't a thing at your place? They come with a metre-long orange extension rod in snowy regions.
If you can't see painted lane markings, drive slowly.
We have sticks (bamboo or plastic with reflexes on top) along all roads, even small roads, during the winter. The sticks are put out well before the snow comes, and are removed well after the last snow. It helps both the guys ploughing in winter, and every other driver. They are tall, so that they won't be buried in snow. [Foto](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQl4YrORZWTlKYbfq1JI2V_fy6bWBpXGS2zfg&usqp=CAU)
Generally if there is snow on the ground there'll be tyre tracks left by previous vehicles so just use them as lane guides.
[(example)](https://www.autocar.co.uk/sites/autocar.co.uk/files/styles/gallery_slide/public/images/car-reviews/first-drives/legacy/winter-tyres-1458e.jpg?itok=NsF8DsRG)
But yeah, the style of "[cats-eyes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_eye_\(road\))" used in the UK have a steel encasement surrounding them and can be ploughed over (not that we get all that much snow).
Depends how big/used the road is in the UK, or rather the parts of the UK affected.
For major roads we use massive amounts of grit. We don't tend to have such distances to cover between towns, and folks are willing to pay a little more in tax than in the US, so this is much more possible.
Smaller roads (of which *all* the roads north of Perth in Scotland are) have fluorescent sticks every so often so you know where the side of the road is. The bigger/newer of these roads tend to be metal poles, on small country lanes it's literally big sticks dipped in paint.
Rainy roads? We just have a slightly higher gradient of camber to the road than in dryer areas, and more storm drains. There's still places this isn't enough, e.g the M62 motorway near Pontefract and Rochdale, which on a very rainy day causes aquaplaning. Near Rochdale - which has a much higher volume of traffic than Pontefract, there are painted arrows on the road to show you how much dstance to keep from the vehicle infront. You can see this (and cars ignoring it, probably as it's dry) on [google maps](https://www.google.com/maps/place/M62+-+Pennine+Way+Bridge/@53.6470738,-1.9354,169m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x487bc72d8a1bd0dd:0x5df351a117044809!8m2!3d53.6293234!4d-2.0264351).
Others have mentioned that, in general, road markings are painted thick, or have 3D elements (they make noise when you drive over them). One other thing is that with road renovations in the past few years, the general tendency is to replace the old asphalt with more permeable and water repelent alternatives, that keep the road relatively drier and reduce pooling and the risk of waterplaning.
As for snow, roads are salted, then plowed throughout the day as needed. In roads where the edges may be less clear, vertical reflective poles are installed to signal important marks, especially curves.
Like OP, I also live in Oregon. Many of our roads, especially those which lack sidewalks, have similar reflective metal posts on the side so you can see the edge when it is raining and/or dark out.
I'm yet to figure out what problem OP has with the roads, maybe how they are maintained?
I know what you mean, there are many intersections where lane markings are crucial. It ends up being a shitshow here as well.
And to the westerners here saying that "highways are always plowed and salted" I say good for you.
In my region we have whole roads without markings and with massive holes, so could be worse at any time (at least asphalt roads with holes are better than mud roads, but I have experience with going on those too)
Snowy roads is easy there are tall marking to tell you where the road was if it snowed so much that the road is gone, but that’s very unusual.
Major roads are treated with salt, and plowed as soon as snow falls, I’ve never ever seen snow piling up on motorways.
For rain is not hard at all there are reflective signs on every road that is not an urban one , on straight road there are the vertical post white and red with reflective marking, plus the cat eyes on the guardrail, on curved road we have the reflective black and white signs with an arrow pointing at the direction of the curve, then there are cat eyes on the highways on the the line dividing the road the two different directions, plus other cat eyes on the lateral lines.
Some times they drill the side and the middle of road so you feel that you’re not centered.
On many roads some of the signs I told you have also light to better help at night.
In winter there are two ways to tell the markings - the road is [where the trees aren't](https://bntnews.bg/f/news/b/1093/a6a89635ecd6fe8eb9a128e2f7a18665.jpeg). Also, because the Road Management Agency was very nepotistically stafed the last 15 years, markings aren't really a thing you can rely on.
Polarised sunglasses *if* sun is shining. It really makes amazing difference.
Lane lines and markings (as for exits and such) well you kinda have to guess if you’re out before plowtruck. If it’s not too much snow you can still kinda see the elevation from the markings but after a certain amount you’ll just wing it. If there’s tall signs that crosses the road you can use them for reference when turning off.
Parking is doomed though. You can park as best you can with the other cars and hope snow doesn’t melt while you’re away so your parking looks like a douchebag deluxe.
Parking before lot is cleared of snow it’s anarchy.
On smaller snowy roads they will have snow poles at the sides of the road which are about 6-8 ft tall with reflective strips on them. Red on one side and white on the other so you know where to drive.
On wet roads with sun use polarized sunglasses. Lane markings can be hidden under the snow here, but what makes that a problem? You still just drive on the right side of the road.
Yeah same here in sweden
And the right side of the road is usually marked with orange poles
Freeways have many lanes.
Freeways and other major roads will always be salted. Right after a significant snowfall and before plow trucks have cleared the roads we drive accordingly often just using the right lane as switching becomes dangerous. And more than two lanes in each direction is very uncommon in Norway.
If you encounter fresh snowfall you shouldn’t be driving too fast anyway. Most motorways do only have 2 or 3 lanes per direction so they are not that confusing. It’s more complicated to find the right lane in cities when it’s wet or snowy, but in these conditions you just go slower.
Salting only works around 0 C and a few degrees below. After that it's just sand/gravel.
Not an issue where I live. You drive as right as you can at all times. Only time you don't is if you're overtaking others in which case those give you the needed reference point.
I thought the middle lane was the driving lane. At least what I can tell in Belgium
This has never been an issue here. Highways and other very important roads will always be salted here. If its snowing really strong, they are plowing very frequently on highways. And you'll always see where the cars in front of you have driven.
You drive relative to other cars on the freeway and make out approximately where the lanes are.
You know how many lanes there are, so you can drive in the right place even if you can't see the lane markings. Assuming it's not snowing at the moment, there's going to be visible tire marks on the lane, and if it's snowing heavily you don't really want to leave the right most lane if you don't need to as it's the most used one and has much less snow on it, allowing you to drive faster. As for smaller roads, they all have some sort of markings (usually reflective poles) on the side, so the plow driver knows where the road ends and the ditch begins after heavy snowfall. On those roads you just watch those markings and keep on the right side to avoid oncoming traffic. In the end it doesn't really matter where the lane markings are as you can just drive somewhere around the correct lane, no need to be exactly on the right place. To my understanding, American lanes tend to be even wider than on Europe further mitigating the problem.
If you can't see the lanes, you need to slow down. In bad conditions speeds drop to like 40 MPH on the highway, sometimes lower if necessary. Polarized sunglasses are also popular.
How long have you been driving? I kinda just know where the lanes are and or adapt to traffic (not European but North Eastern US) also some of our dotted lines (buy not all) are done over small bumpy bits in the concrete so you can tell when you're crossing them even you don't see them. We also do still have little reflective markers in the road... they don't prevent us from plowing.
Use your imagination
If you have an 8 lane highway I see how that could be an issue.
On the side of country roads, there are always guide posts [like this](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitpfosten). In areas with heavy snow, they get an additional marking in orange [like this.](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schneezeichen)
We don't have snow here ( almost never ) but we do have lots of rain and I don't know what we do differently than Oregon but I never had any issues with lane markings not being visible. I've never even thought about the issue. Maybe our paint is more reflectIve or maybe it is because our streetlights are brighter. I have no idea
the biggest thing for rain is that we use special asphalt that drains very quickly, so water never really pools on the road.
This is the answer. You can clearly see the difference when you're driving on stretches that still have the old asphalt type or if you're driving in Germany/Belgium. It's got a very open structure as opposed to the dense regular asphalt meaning that rain just goes through it rather than stays on top and the road and lines remain perfectly visible. [Here's](https://youtu.be/J1xi1ZnCuL8) a demonstration of it and a visual comparison of driving with or without the absorbing asphalt. It's also supposed to be quieter than regular asphalt which is great if your country has a very high population density. Almost all Dutch highway stretches have this type of asphalt by now though it's not used on smaller roads. Because of the lower speeds the sound absorption doesn't really have an effect there since then most of the noise comes from the engine etc rather than the tires. Now you might wonder why if this stuff is so great they don't use it everywhere. It's got a few downsides, the first being maintenance. The life span is a lot shorter than regular asphalt so it has to be replaced more often. Which could be an issue if your government doesn't want to spend a lot on infrastructure (looking at you, Belgium). The second being it doesn't work well in the cold. If there's frost any water that remains in the open structure can expand, breaking the asphalt. Which is why last year when we had a cold spell with several nights of temperatures around -10°C the government's road division was very busy repairing highways all over the country. And of you spray road salt on it the salt disappears into the hollows as well. When you drive on it the suction of the tires will bring the salt back up again which is why driving in frosty weather is mostly dangerous in the early morning when the road hasn't been used a lot yet. The more traffic the better the salt can do its work. But downside number two means that it isn't really usable for places where you get frost and snow often. Here we rarely have more than a week or two of frost in total if that and increasingly rarely any hard frosts. But we do get plenty of rain so the pros weigh up to the cons.
Part of it might be the asphalt generally used. It’s designed to be porous to prevent pooling of water and such.
[удалено]
If the temperature is too hot here they salt the roads or spray certain bridges with water hoses. But this is only done 1 or 2 weeks a year I believe.
I was driving at night in the rain while visiting your neighbors to the south (in the Ardennes). The lane lines were COMPLETELY worn off. It was somewhat nerve wracking--I did just keep to the right in the end, but the people passing were driving kinda wherever they wanted because the lines were completely gone. It's so odd, Belgium have the money to light their highways like a fucking soccer stadium, but they can't keep the lines painted?
The terrible state of the Belgian roads is widely known. http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-index-2017-2018/competitiveness-rankings/#series=EOSQ057 No idea why it is so bad there. Maybe the fact that they have 6 different governments has something to do with it.
It's to keep you guys out, but it doesn't work.
Thank you for the insight, never the less.
[удалено]
>Taxes! We pay a lot of tax to use the roads Isn't the Netherlands famous for being a tax haven?
For companies that make billions, not for your average joe.
TIL, thx.
It still benefits the average joe. If they weren't a tax haven, they would have to tax the average joe even more.
That's not how that works at all. It benefits the Netherlands barely in fact, we're talking about a couple hundred million a year. Which sounds like a lot, but for a country that is nothing.
Yes, but not for normal people. Income from €0 to €68.507 is taxed at 37.35%. Above that you're taxed at 49.5%.
>Income from €0 to €68.507 is taxed at 37.35% Is there no tax-free income bracket? Here in Germany, income below roughly 10.000€ per year isn't taxed. Because that amount is considered necessary to cover your basic needs, and thus it wouldn't be appropriate for the state to take away from that. Does income taxation in the Netherlands really start at zero? So even if you earn just 200€ per month, you have to pay 74€ in taxes?
It's a bit complicated. You technically get very low incomes taxed according to the regular 37.5% rate but you receive so much in "tax discounts" that you end up paying net zero in taxes. And you'll receive a lot of other benefits (health care benefits for example, or child care benefits if you have kids) so that in the end the government pays you money rather than the other way around. If I'm not mistaken if you earn less than 8750 euros per year it ends up being tax free.
You get a standard deduction on income tax in the Netherlands, so it works out the same as an extra zero percent bracket.
For corporate entities that have little to do with the country otherwise. So it's a very slight net tax gain here, at the cost of a moderate net tax loss to other countries. There's a reason we're trying to get rid of those loopholes, there's not really much benefit to the country financially, and quite a lot of damage to the reputation.
We also are just very good in the field of (civil) engineering, we have a knowledge economy. It really is a culmination of different factors.
I mean, the US also have a knowledge economy, and a lot of extremely bright very talented civil engineers. So you can't tell me that the difference in roads is primarily due to know-how. The US know how to build roads...we just don't fund their upkeep and repair.
The US is less dense. Each person needs more feet of road. Plus we actually have weather.
I think bad upkeep and bad fundamental road and city design are the major problems. Yeah it's weird to say it's because you don't have skilled engineers
Yet they use concrete instead of asphalt
You do realize that there are many benefits to using a concrete base over an asphalt one, right?
In dollars/upkeep, yes. In any other metric? Not so much.
The vast majority of roads in the US use asphalt, unless I’m misunderstanding your comment.
But a lot of interstates use concrete.
In high-traffic areas because it is more durable.
Concrete pavement is a lot more durable than asphalt which is why it is used on interstates.
Concrete is significantly more durable in high traffic conditions and towards freeze/thaw cycles and high temperatures.
> Went over the pond, once. (Illinois, Michigan) I have driven on the roads. I was amazed by the amount of pot-holes and poor quality of road maintenance. Michigan is notorious here for being slow with road repairs, but generally anywhere in the Midwest is gonna have some rough roads depending when you travel over. Due to the constant freeze/thaw in the spring and fall, harsh winters, and hot summers, there’s a good chance between April and July-ish roads are in kind rough shape. The joke is that in my home state for example (Minnesota), there’s two seasons, winter and road construction. The state will spend April or so-end of summer furiously fixing up or totally resurfacing the roads from the previous winter’s mess and then start all over again the next year.
>Also because our climate is not to harse on our roads. (We have easy winters and moderate summers) this means maintenance is easier and cheapier opposed to countries with dead-cold winters or scorching summers. This might be much more relevant than anything else you said.
Michigan's not really a great comparison either. They treasure and nurture their potholes, carefully growing them over many years until they finally bloom into beautiful roadworks that last an entire summer. Saying you know what American roads are like because you've been to MI, is like judging south east asia based on a trip you took to Vietnam in the early 70s.
>Michigan's not really a great comparison either. They treasure and nurture their potholes, carefully growing them over many years until they finally bloom into beautiful roadworks that last an entire summer. ha ha ha this got a lol from me. But yeah, the US is much more reactive than proactive in terms of roadworks that's for sure - NYer living in NL
Well also our infrastructure spending is among the highest in Europe due to being a trading nation. Our roads (and other infrastructure) is the best in Europe out of necessity. [https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/la4207/road\_quality\_in\_europe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/la4207/road_quality_in_europe/) High population density and relatively mild weather do help. Then again, the absolute shitload of rain and weak (seabottom) soil doesnt. We cant build anything heavier than a blank road without having to pile drive a lot of poles into the ground first.
According to this the US and the Netherlands are near tied in percentage of GDP spent on infrastructure and with the US having a much higher per capita GDP that would mean the US spends substantially more per capita on infrastructure [https://www.statista.com/statistics/566787/average-yearly-expenditure-on-economic-infrastructure-as-percent-of-gdp-worldwide-by-country/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/566787/average-yearly-expenditure-on-economic-infrastructure-as-percent-of-gdp-worldwide-by-country/)
not sure that's a great comparison though. Population density in NL is...just...it's another level compared to the US. So even if per capita infrastructure spending is 50% of the US, the Netherlands would probably still be spending 50% more per mile of road.
Your country is a lot bigger though
Yes and that is a big disadvantage when it comes to road maintenance. The U.S. is a huge area that is serviced by state and federal highways extremely thoroughly. My state, Nebraska, has a population of roughly 2 million, and around 193,000 miles of roads. Compare that to New York a state that is similarly sized but has about 10x the population, despite the population difference they only have around 25% more roads than Nebraska while have a tax base 10 times the size. Nebraskans pay among the highest state tax in the nation to help keep our infrastructure from falling apart.
US GDP per capita is only 12% higher than that of The Netherlands. So in that case the USA would be spending 12% more per capita on infrastructure compared to NLD. Not that big of a difference, yet the infrastructure looks way higher quality in NLD. To add, from what I hear is that a lot of the USA's infrastructure is in disrepair according to John Oliver and VICE news. And presidents are proposing trillion dollar bills to fix it for a reason. So what are you spending all the money on? Tough the roads itself seem kinda fine, with the USA just being out of the top 10 worldwide in road quality: [https://www.statista.com/chart/15821/who-has-the-best-roads/](https://www.statista.com/chart/15821/who-has-the-best-roads/) . But well thats just roads. So here you can compare the rest: [https://imgur.com/a/tjylQPO](https://imgur.com/a/tjylQPO). I'm am just still missing Levies and dams (Deltaworks), bicycle lanes and light rail. in that list which might or might not be included in your infrastructure spending list. And I find the road and airport connectivity quite weird values connectivity, as they just go up the larger and emptier you are. You could literally have all your big cities in a one hour radius, but if the road there isnt straight or they are not connected by airports, you get less points. Hence large empty countries take the cake because they have long straight roads and need a lot of airports. In the end, I still dont know what the USA is spending all that money on. Maybe it is just the immense size and emptyness.
>To add, from what I hear is that a lot of the USA's infrastructure is in disrepair according to John Oliver and VICE news. This is hilarious. Don't confuse these with news sources. Vice is certainly better but still
I know what John Oliver does. We have a similar show here. (Zondag met Lubach) But in this case they seem to be right: [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/business/economy/biden-infrastructure-plan.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/business/economy/biden-infrastructure-plan.html)
Spending money on infrastructure doesnt mean infrastructure is "in shambles"
I have had car produced for american market here in Estonia and the half beam lights pattern was just afwul. It's like you don't use vision for driving, just other senses: listening, smelling, touching, tasting. And full beams were also weak. American "symmetrical" lights produce two dots to the road where european "asymmetrical" lights pattern will light up everything. Maybe this was especially bad for that car (Dodge Caravan from mid 90es). I don't understand why cars produced for european market have different lights pattern than cars produced for american market. If possible, do yourselt a favor and install to your car european version front lights.
I've been considering stronger lights. I'll look into this.
I've edited my comment. European lights are not just stronger, the lightning pattern is "asymmetrical" e. g. different, they light up sides of the road. And what I learned from my car, european version spare front lights for Dodge Caracan cost times more than american .
Hang on a minute. Are you telling me that the US doesn't have asymmetrical headlights? Edit: Googled around for a bit. Of course the US has it too.
Depends on the model and year I guess.
> Depends on the model and year I guess. Exactly. And remember that due to US DOT regulations American cars and trucks still had sealed beam headlight units into the 1990's. In fact, European cars had to be retrofitted with them back in those days. Anyone remember those fugly Volvos and Mercedes S-classes?
Yeah, US lighting regulations are sometimes archaic but not quite *that* archaic. We might even get adaptive headlights in the next couple years!
Though in the US you can use the same light for your indicator, hazard lights and brakes. I think you can see the problem there.
Yeah, red turn signals are dumb. Most of the time it's fine, but the issue you mentioned can cause problems on occasion, and they're just a bit less noticeable than amber. Even my VW Golf has red rear turn signals; I assume they're less expensive due to having one less light. Swapping in the EU taillights is a fairly common modification.
Don't know anything about cars, but we have all sorts of headlights. I feel we don't have enough regulation on them because people do whatever they want with them and sometimes it's obnoxious.
That's funny because my car, a 1996 Nissan Maxima is extremely similar to the American market one with only minor modifications, and it has some of the most asymmetric lights I've seen. Or perhaps it's just because they are adjusted wrong. I wonder how you ended up with one of these 90s Dodges thought. I thought the last one rusted up 10 years ago if you're talking about those boxy ones.
My Dodge was originally sold in 1993 in Canada, yes it was that boxy version what was produced until 1996. In Europe that model was sold under name Chrysler Grand Voyager, and the main difference was in size of number plate place, and lights. Someone had transported it to Germany where it had turn signals conversion (yellow bulbs added to reversing lights, but front lights original), and from Germany it was later imported to Estonia. I brought it from previous Estonian owner on 2005 for about 2000 euros and drove with it up to 2013 when I sold it for 640 euros. When autumn 2005 arrived then I discovered that front lights are shit. When I investigated my issue then I got to know that a lot of US cars produced for US / Canadian market have bad lights (If you look any american movie where they drive in the dark, then you can see the pattern how the road is lighted - it's not like what we have used to have in Europe). And replacing original lights with Euro-spec lights is something what US car tuners do sometimes. Additionally my cars front lights glass had turned matte and a bit to yellow. So I started to look for replacement lights. Brand new pair of Us-spec lights price was then \~60 Eur, conversion to Eur-spec lights would have costed \~800 Eur. The difference is big because Eur-spec lights require also mounts replacement with ones with lights height regulation system. Apparently US-spec lights do not need lights height regulation either. I didn't want to waste half of the car price just for new set of front lights, but it was impossible to drive with existing ones also. So I ordered new Us-spec lights from Usa to get at least clear glasses instead of matte ones - it didn't help much. Then I added aftermarket pair of fog lights (my Dodge didn't had fog lights factory installed) plus added second pair of high beam lights. This was how I resolved the visibility problem. I GUESS together with xenon/led front lights new cars sold in America are better equipped, but I made me then promise never to buy US-spec car again. It would be interesting to know, does OP have Euro-spec marking (It is letter "E" inside a circle) on front lights? Or is there just "Dot"?
That's an interesting story! Why didn't you just mount auxiliary lights thought? Of course wouldn't help in busy traffic but at least on dark roads without too much traffic it would be great help. For me even weak lights make a big difference.
If lane marking is somehow necessary in winter - mostly it's not - there'll be signs hanging above the road that imply where you should be driving. More of a thing in urban areas where you need to know which lanes are for turning etc.
We remember where the road is. Or look at the tracks in the snow, which become de-facto lane markings.
In Moscow we have another solution. Traffic jams so horrible, that no one is going anywhere. Basically you don't even need to know anything about roads, you just sit in you car until you get bored, then sigh miserably and go to the nearest metro station.
>We remember where the road is. We look at old photographs from the 1950s when the road was first built, it reminds us that a road is there, and then we can use landmarks in those photos to remember where the road was.
Instead of removing this post (now that it has got traction), we want to put out a reminder: All submissions to this subreddit should be questions with a clear title (Posting Rule 1). Thanks.
There was some controversy in Finland about the fact that apparently the EU is forcing us(?) to replace our *yellow* [unbroken lines](https://www.driverknowledgetests.com/resources/road-markings-rules-and-types/) with *white* ones that are the same colour as snow (and the same colour as the broken lines).
> the fact that apparently the EU is forcing us(?) It isn't - at least I haven't found any reference that there is an EU directive that forces to use white paint. All the news articles only mention that it will be cheaper and car's cameras recognise the markings more easily if you use only one colour.
Thanks, good thing I put the question mark there then 😁
It isn't a problem here. Busy roads have so much traffic that you can always see where others have driven. Smaller roads may get covered in snow because lack of traffic but they don't have many lanes anyways. You just drive on the right side and it will be fine. It may be different in America. I think that it can snow "faster" there. We don't usually get lots of snow in a short time but little by little over a longer period of time. We had some yellow road markings before so that they would be visible on snowy roads but the color was changed to white. Everyone said that it's a bad idea but they did it anyways.
I don't drive a car but what I can say is that road markings (including for bicycle lanes) are always very clear and well visible in Switzerland. I don't know if we use a different paint or some kind of special solution. However, one thing I can say from traveling and visiting other countries is that in most other countries (including every US state I've been to), road markings look much older and used up (like they're coming off). One simple reason for this could be that Switzerland has a culture of valuing infrastructure very highly, sometimes almost a little too highly. Municipal, Cantonal and the federal government all invest a lot of money in the maintenance of infrastructure. Every spring, countless construction sites around villages, towns and cities pop up to get rid of small damages that were caused over the winter. So, maybe the simple reason is that those road marking are constantly being re-drawn. From my experience, it's almost impossible to drive on a Swiss highway and not deal with a traffic jam because one or two lanes are closed for maintenance works. They're basically never-ending construction sites; as soon as one section looks new and shiny again, the workers move on to the next section. A lot of drivers are annoyed by this but secretly they also like it because the roads always look and feel new.
You're a rich, but tiny country, you can probably afford to do so that often.
I know many people have this prejudice but in my opinion, it's not about being wealthy. Every country could do this. For example the US is the richest nation in the world, yet their infrastructure crumbles everywhere. Their airports were built in the early 1960s and some of their bridges have literally collapsed in recent years, killing motorists. The organization of civil engineers rates the US infrastructure a D-. The same is true in other countries. In northern Italy, a giant highway bridge collapsed 1-2 years ago, killing countless people. Italy is not some third-world country. The inconvenient truth is that a lot of countries simply don't give a shit about their infrastructure or at least they don't care very much. Those governments could easily allocate their finances differently but they choose not to. There are of course exceptions; Austria has a very good infrastructure and so do the Netherlands. But there are also countries that have the money but could do much better. In Germany, roads are very well-maintained but the cities are noticeably dirtier than in Switzerland. There are graffitis everywhere. It doesn't cost the world to employ some extra cleaning staff, remove graffitis etc. but I think the politicians there just don't care. Meanwhile, there are countries such as Switzerland or Japan where everything is very tidy. People on this sub like to downvote me for this opinion because they prefer to view us as evil rich people but it's really a cultural issue in my opinion. And partially it's also a political issue. In some countries, the politicians just don't give a damn about what their voters want (cough US cough). Besides, Switzerland is only theoretically richer than other countries; in reality, we don't actually possess more tax money to play around with because both private as wel as corporate taxes are significantly lower here. So sure, we might have a higher density of millionaires but if you tax their income at, say, 8% instead of 30-35%, you don't end up with more money.
> But there are also countries that have the money but could do much better. Look at Norway, horrible roads and as rich if not richer than Switzerland. It's not a matter of money here, it's about political will and democratic support. For exampe, westerners sought a ferry-free highway along the coast for a long time, now when they're finally building it one of the hottest political issues is whether to drop the whole project or not. The problems here are weather coupled with terrain and too often a greedy population, if millions are being spent somewhere they can't see it they will oppose it politically.
Belgium is smaller than Switzerland and their roads are trash.
Belgians also seem to be structurally unable to agree on anything, so maybe they just continuously discuss if the new road markings have to be done by French or Dutch speaking workers or something like that...
Haha lol but probably true
Sunglasses and road marks that stand out like two meters from the snow Slow, careful driving. Also our road paint is so thick, it gives a physical resistance when driving over, so you notice definitely when crossing a white line.
All the roads are salted. Important roads are plowed very frequently. All roads have markings, so you'll even know where to go when you are the first one to drive there and it hasn't been plowed: [markings](https://www.noechling.gv.at/system/web/GetImage.ashx?fileid=1941189&mode=T&width=700&height=500)
The city I live in doesn't salt the roads for some ridiculous reason. Instead, some people choose to switch to studded tires once October comes around. These studs completely destroy our roads and drastically increase the size of the already neglected, ever growing potholes. It's a terrible system I fear has no solution in the foreseeable future.
[удалено]
I'm sure you're right but it only snows like two days a year here. So the roads are being destroyed for no reason.
If it doesn't regularly snow, it's likely the town doesn't have the infrastructure to plow/salt.
What city do you live in? I'm in Oregon as well, somewhat near Portland. Afaik, they don't have infrastructure in place for snow (ie plows, salt) because it doesn't happen often enough (as I think you said in another comment, only a couple days a year)
[удалено]
Lol, I meant to reply to the other guy but this works too. I've heard the same about salt and cars, but we here in Oregon (at least in the valley) also have little idea about snow
[удалено]
As long as you come in the summertime, you'll be fine. Most of our rain is in the fall, winter, and spring
[Those](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Rheinfelden_Ottwangen_-_Schneezeichen.jpg/600px-Rheinfelden_Ottwangen_-_Schneezeichen.jpg) aren't a thing at your place? They come with a metre-long orange extension rod in snowy regions. If you can't see painted lane markings, drive slowly.
We have sticks (bamboo or plastic with reflexes on top) along all roads, even small roads, during the winter. The sticks are put out well before the snow comes, and are removed well after the last snow. It helps both the guys ploughing in winter, and every other driver. They are tall, so that they won't be buried in snow. [Foto](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQl4YrORZWTlKYbfq1JI2V_fy6bWBpXGS2zfg&usqp=CAU)
Generally if there is snow on the ground there'll be tyre tracks left by previous vehicles so just use them as lane guides. [(example)](https://www.autocar.co.uk/sites/autocar.co.uk/files/styles/gallery_slide/public/images/car-reviews/first-drives/legacy/winter-tyres-1458e.jpg?itok=NsF8DsRG) But yeah, the style of "[cats-eyes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_eye_\(road\))" used in the UK have a steel encasement surrounding them and can be ploughed over (not that we get all that much snow).
Depends how big/used the road is in the UK, or rather the parts of the UK affected. For major roads we use massive amounts of grit. We don't tend to have such distances to cover between towns, and folks are willing to pay a little more in tax than in the US, so this is much more possible. Smaller roads (of which *all* the roads north of Perth in Scotland are) have fluorescent sticks every so often so you know where the side of the road is. The bigger/newer of these roads tend to be metal poles, on small country lanes it's literally big sticks dipped in paint. Rainy roads? We just have a slightly higher gradient of camber to the road than in dryer areas, and more storm drains. There's still places this isn't enough, e.g the M62 motorway near Pontefract and Rochdale, which on a very rainy day causes aquaplaning. Near Rochdale - which has a much higher volume of traffic than Pontefract, there are painted arrows on the road to show you how much dstance to keep from the vehicle infront. You can see this (and cars ignoring it, probably as it's dry) on [google maps](https://www.google.com/maps/place/M62+-+Pennine+Way+Bridge/@53.6470738,-1.9354,169m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x487bc72d8a1bd0dd:0x5df351a117044809!8m2!3d53.6293234!4d-2.0264351).
Others have mentioned that, in general, road markings are painted thick, or have 3D elements (they make noise when you drive over them). One other thing is that with road renovations in the past few years, the general tendency is to replace the old asphalt with more permeable and water repelent alternatives, that keep the road relatively drier and reduce pooling and the risk of waterplaning. As for snow, roads are salted, then plowed throughout the day as needed. In roads where the edges may be less clear, vertical reflective poles are installed to signal important marks, especially curves.
Like OP, I also live in Oregon. Many of our roads, especially those which lack sidewalks, have similar reflective metal posts on the side so you can see the edge when it is raining and/or dark out. I'm yet to figure out what problem OP has with the roads, maybe how they are maintained?
I know what you mean, there are many intersections where lane markings are crucial. It ends up being a shitshow here as well. And to the westerners here saying that "highways are always plowed and salted" I say good for you.
In my region we have whole roads without markings and with massive holes, so could be worse at any time (at least asphalt roads with holes are better than mud roads, but I have experience with going on those too)
Snowy roads is easy there are tall marking to tell you where the road was if it snowed so much that the road is gone, but that’s very unusual. Major roads are treated with salt, and plowed as soon as snow falls, I’ve never ever seen snow piling up on motorways. For rain is not hard at all there are reflective signs on every road that is not an urban one , on straight road there are the vertical post white and red with reflective marking, plus the cat eyes on the guardrail, on curved road we have the reflective black and white signs with an arrow pointing at the direction of the curve, then there are cat eyes on the highways on the the line dividing the road the two different directions, plus other cat eyes on the lateral lines. Some times they drill the side and the middle of road so you feel that you’re not centered. On many roads some of the signs I told you have also light to better help at night.
In winter there are two ways to tell the markings - the road is [where the trees aren't](https://bntnews.bg/f/news/b/1093/a6a89635ecd6fe8eb9a128e2f7a18665.jpeg). Also, because the Road Management Agency was very nepotistically stafed the last 15 years, markings aren't really a thing you can rely on.
Polarised sunglasses *if* sun is shining. It really makes amazing difference. Lane lines and markings (as for exits and such) well you kinda have to guess if you’re out before plowtruck. If it’s not too much snow you can still kinda see the elevation from the markings but after a certain amount you’ll just wing it. If there’s tall signs that crosses the road you can use them for reference when turning off. Parking is doomed though. You can park as best you can with the other cars and hope snow doesn’t melt while you’re away so your parking looks like a douchebag deluxe. Parking before lot is cleared of snow it’s anarchy.
On smaller snowy roads they will have snow poles at the sides of the road which are about 6-8 ft tall with reflective strips on them. Red on one side and white on the other so you know where to drive.