$50,000 for a birdsong?

[ChrisGreaves]

Today's Toronto Star reports that it "would cost about $50,000 per crosswalk to replace the signals" in crosswalks - basically changing them from a "chirp".
Has anyone here any idea why what ought to be a screw-in part, even with labour, costs more than a luxury car?

I figure there is a team of guys in a truck, one to drive, one to hold the screwdriver so he can hand it to the guy who turns the screwdriver anti-clockwise, two more guys to deal with the clockwise screwdriver etc. etc. plus pensions and benefits, but still and all, I could build a small cottage for $50,000, right?

I should add that for over 25 years our 1,400+ traffic signal intersections have been computer controlled with software downloaded from a central site; signals are programmed for different sequences throughout the day, so we aren't using clockwork timers etc.

[HansV]

They just got the mice inside the signals to chirp (see And your mouse can sing...), now they'll have to start a whole new genetic manipulation program to teach them the 'Canadian melody'. That's not chirp cheap, you know.

[ChrisGreaves]

They just got the mice inside the signals to chirp That's not chirp cheap, you know.

So that old wives tale about "Three Blind Mice" has some merits? I mean, and all, these audible signals are for the blind, right?
I've often wondered whether replacing the chirp/cheep/cheap chaps with a human voice saying [gently] Walk and [harshly] DON'T walk might not be more effective.
Regardless of one's native tongue, humans seem to have an innate response to the quality of spoken words rather than the literal meaning.

Even cats purr when I murmur softly something in the manner of a death-threat.

That's not chirp cheap, you know.

"Cheep", surely?

[StuartR]

...
I've often wondered whether replacing the chirp/cheep/cheap chaps with a human voice saying [gently] Walk and [harshly] DON'T walk might not be more effective.
...

There is a person who lives somewhere near me and regularly crosses the main road at the traffic lights. They use a white stick and appear not to be able to see. They also hold on to the traffic light box and are clearly feeling for the vibration of the walk indicator, so I assume that they can't hear either. I think that replacing the warbling tone with spoken words would cause them a significant problem.

[ChrisGreaves]

... so I assume that they can't hear either. I think that replacing the warbling tone with spoken words would cause them a significant problem.

OK, Stuart, you've lost me here.
I can see (ouch!) that a blind-deaf person might use tactile sensations to determine a crossing window, but if they are deaf what's the difference between a warble and a word?
My thoughts on audible signals are that bird-chirps or warbles are meaningless to some humans, but we are born with a language ability, and in particular seem to be able to distinguish between a praising tone and an admonishing tone, regardless of the language.
Just think of you last run-in with [grin] the border patrol, immigration, waiter in foreign cafe, hotel reception disk in foreign country, counter-revolutionary in a foreign civil war etc.

All of this is besides my initial amazement at $50,000 to replace a chirp in each installation.

[StuartR]

...what's the difference between a warble and a word?...

My assumption is that a warble creates a more recognizable vibration.