Motorway redesignation Phase #2 released

marmurr1916

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

I drive on alot of motorways in the rep, its mostly cable.

At present.

As I've pointed out, the newer sections (for example, the M8) and sections under construction will have concrete barriers.


By the time the entire network is complete, most motorways will have concrete barriers.

cherrypicker555

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

cherrypicker.

You're insistence that 6 lane motorways are somehow better than 4 lane motorways proves to me you don't know what you are talking about. That or you are just trying to wind people up.

One has more capacity than the other. Nothing more, nothing less.

If anything, 6 lane motorways allow drivers to cross two lanes of traffic in one go, something you can't do on a 4 lane motorway.

I am a road safety expert, crossing two lanes at once is prohibited.

BluntGuy

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

I am a road safety expert, crossing two lanes at once is prohibited.

Somebody tell that to the drivers on the M50. The amount of times I've seen people deciding to jump across lanes (once from the auxillary right into the inner lane), is staggering.

AugustusMaximus

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

I am a road safety expert, crossing two lanes at once is prohibited.

If you are one, explain why you keep highlighting the pros of 6 lane motorways over 4.

I never said switching 2 lanes at once wasn't illegal. Doesn't stop people from doing it.

cherrypicker555

BluntGuy wrote: »

Somebody tell that to the drivers on the M50. The amount of times I've seen people deciding to jump across lanes (once from the auxillary right into the inner lane), is staggering.

But yet 6 lane UK motorways have a better safety record then the Republics 4 lane new ones, and are much busier,how do you explain that ?

Considering L drivers are prohibited from driving on both.

cherrypicker555

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

If you are one, explain why you keep highlighting the pros of 6 lane motorways over 4.

I never said switching 2 lanes at once wasn't illegal. Doesn't stop people from doing it.

Obviously more capacity is desirable.

I highlighted the main safety differences between motorways in the UK and rep.I never said 6 lanes was safer by being 6 lanes.

mysterious

Irish motorways are in fact different to the Uk's model

regardless of how many lanes. UK have lane widths of 3.75m
Ireland lane widths are 3.5m (european standard)

This would also explain why Uks motorway could be deemed safer. Not to mention the fact the alot of Irish people still don't know how to drive on motorways.

It's still really appalling here. No matter what the spec of the motorways are. Blunt our motorways are ok, there is nothing special about them.

Irish and Proud

mysterious wrote: »

Irish motorways are in fact different to the Uk's model

regardless of how many lanes. UK have lane widths of 3.75m
Ireland lane widths are 3.5m (european standard)

UK lane widths: 3.65m (= 12' afaik)

Irish lane widths...

Wide Motorway: 3.75m (M1, M4 etc)
Standard M'way: 3.50m (M6, M8 etc)

Regards!

BluntGuy

Well either way...

The main point here is that there is no major difference in safety between 6-lane and 4-lane motorways based purely on the number of lanes.

We simply use 4-lane motorway (AADT - 50,000) because that is enough capacity for us. That said, I would've prefered wide median for some of our new road-building schemes to allow for upgrade to three-lanes in each direction.

Extra capacity is desirable, but it is unneeded. Six-lane stretches are only needed near the terminal cities of these motorways.

I guess if you come from the UK, it may take a while to get used to there being only two lanes in each direction.

AugustusMaximus

BluntGuy wrote: »

Well either way...

The main point here is that there is no major difference in safety between 6-lane and 4-lane motorways based purely on the number of lanes.

We simply use 4-lane motorway (AADT - 50,000) because that is enough capacity for us. That said, I would've prefered wide median for some of our new road-building schemes to allow for upgrade to three-lanes in each direction.

Extra capacity is desirable, but it is unneeded. Six-lane stretches are only needed near the terminal cities of these motorways.

I guess if you come from the UK, it may take a while to get used to there being only two lanes in each direction.

Considering that the M1 and M6 are the only motorways going North-South in the UK, you'd expect them to be 6 lanes plus ?

Wasn't someone here banging on about the problems the UK face due to having minor motorways feeding onto major ones instead of a grid style system as used in Germany ?

BluntGuy

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

Considering that the M1 and M6 are the only motorways going North-South in the UK, you'd expect them to be 6 lanes plus ?

Wasn't someone here banging on about the problems the UK face due to having minor motorways feeding onto major ones instead of a grid style system as used in Germany ?

I am all for a wide network of D2Ms rather than a smaller network of D3Ms. I think it's much more effective and I'm glad it's the approach we took.

But, in some places, even in Ireland, traffic volume will demand that D3M is used (albeit for short stretches). A good example is N2 Ashborne bypass. That was a well-thought out scheme. 2.4 km of D3M near the busy terminus at the M50 and the 13 km of D2M. Brilliant stuff. Not over-done, not under-done, just about right.

Still, I'd hate it if we ever had to go to the ridiculousness of upgrading of motorways to four or five lanes. Luckily with our system, I doubt that'll ever happen.

AugustusMaximus

BluntGuy wrote: »

I am all for a wide network of D2Ms rather than a smaller network of D3Ms. I think it's much more effective and I'm glad it's the approach we took.

But, in some places, even in Ireland, traffic volume will demand that D3M is used (albeit for short stretches). A good example is N2 Ashborne bypass. That was a well-thought out scheme. 2.4 km of D3M near the busy terminus at the M50 and the 13 km of D2M. Brilliant stuff. Not over-done, not under-done, just about right.

Still, I'd hate it if we ever had to go to the ridiculousness of upgrading of motorways to four or five lanes. Luckily with our system, I doubt that'll ever happen.

As a general rule of thumb, are all motorways being built close to cities with a wide median, to make upgrading easier ?

THere's certainly no need for D3M mid inter urban route.

BluntGuy

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

As a general rule of thumb, are all motorways being built close to cities with a wide median, to make upgrading easier ?

THere's certainly no need for D3M mid inter urban route.

Yes. I totally agree.

Perhaps I should have been more clear when I said *some* areas.

The M6, though I doubt it will ever be amazingly busy, should have a wide median design near Galway, just in case.

There's no point making the M9 wide-median in any parts. I would've suggested near Grannagh, but the design of the interchange would nullify any potential benefits greatly.

I'd like the M8 2 km from Dunkettle upgraded to D3M some day in the future, as there are often delays there (although that's probably more to do with the junction design admittedly).

I'd like some redudancy capacity built into the M25 Waterford bridge. Considering the traffic volumes (40,000 AADT at peak times over the old bridge) nearby, it certainally would not be foolish to make provision for a potential third lane (like the Boyne Bridge).

cherrypicker555

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

Considering that the M1 and M6 are the only motorways going North-South in the UK, you'd expect them to be 6 lanes plus ?

Wasn't someone here banging on about the problems the UK face due to having minor motorways feeding onto major ones instead of a grid style system as used in Germany ?

The M40, M11, M5, M45, M18, M61 also head north-south, most minor UK motorways are also 6 lanes.

The UK is a different shape to Germany hence arterial rather then grid, problem is its the third most crowded place on Earth.

cherrypicker555

BluntGuy wrote: »

Well either way...

The main point here is that there is no major difference in safety between 6-lane and 4-lane motorways based purely on the number of lanes.

We simply use 4-lane motorway (AADT - 50,000) because that is enough capacity for us. That said, I would've prefered wide median for some of our new road-building schemes to allow for upgrade to three-lanes in each direction.

Extra capacity is desirable, but it is unneeded. Six-lane stretches are only needed near the terminal cities of these motorways.

I guess if you come from the UK, it may take a while to get used to there being only two lanes in each direction.

The UK has tens of thousands of miles of dual carriageway much with a 70 mph limit.

SeanW

Could someone tell me exactly what a "Left In Left Out" juntion is?

I'm guessing it means an exit/entry that can only be accessed from one carriageway of the motorway.

Doesn't sound perfect but if the proper exiting and merging-in lanes and facilities are provided, I don't see any logical reason why a section of carraigeway cannot be reclassified as motorway.

weehamster

LILO on the Naas Road after the upgrade.
I don't think vehicles coming out of these junctions would be fast enough to join the motorway traffic and could cause problems.

AugustusMaximus

Give em a long enough slip road and they certainly could accelerate to the neccessary speed.

weehamster

Oh agreed. But how many of these junctions have a long enough exit lane? No extra work is going to be carried on the redesignated roads.

The above picture has short exits which are a bit dangerous I feel but at least its has 3 lanes to merge into so you would join a 'slow-ish' lane. the redesignated roads only have 2 lanes

Zoney

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

But yet 6 lane UK motorways have a better safety record then the Republics 4 lane new ones, and are much busier,how do you explain that ?

Considering L drivers are prohibited from driving on both.

But in Ireland, a significant proportion of our drivers are "learners" and drive on motorways regardless. They've changed things recently with the new learners permit and allegedly stricter enforcement of all learners driving accompanied, but until recently, people were on the provisional licences for years, driving unaccompanied, and certainly on motorways.

That will have impacted on any safety figures for Ireland.

cherrypicker555

weehamster wrote: »

LILO on the Naas Road after the upgrade.
I don't think vehicles coming out of these junctions would be fast enough to join the motorway traffic and could cause problems.

Thats going to become a black spot, scenario, speeding boy racer, poor visibility/dusk/ drizzle etc, pensioner pulls out slowly in micra = fatality.

All motorway Motorway graded junctions/slip roads should be at least of as third of a mile long to allow traffic to safely converge.

cherrypicker555

Zoney wrote: »

But in Ireland, a significant proportion of our drivers are "learners" and drive on motorways regardless. They've changed things recently with the new learners permit and allegedly stricter enforcement of all learners driving accompanied, but until recently, people were on the provisional licences for years, driving unaccompanied, and certainly on motorways.

That will have impacted on any safety figures for Ireland.

Obviously thats a factor, but so are poor safety features.

Many of the motorway accidents that I've been aware of, have been single vehicle ones or crashing into vehicles parked on the hard shoulder.

All down to plain bad driving!

Chris_533976

That N7 LILO is the same quality (actually better) than some of the junctions on the (to be redesignated) Ennis bypass.

Chris_533976

Chris_533976 wrote: »

That N7 LILO is the same quality (actually better) than some of the junctions on the (to be redesignated) Ennis bypass.

If the NRA insist on building junctions like that with such short on-slips, then at least have flashing amber lights warning motorists that slow vehicles are merging.

ardmacha

The slips should be lengthened, there is no reason in the picture above why the on slip could not be longer.

That said merging is often poorly done even on long slips, there is a role for some law enforcement here (as in so many things) where people are merging excessively slowly or failing to use the length of the slip road and cutting on to the running lane.

weehamster

If the NRA insist on building junctions like that with such short on-slips, then at least have flashing amber lights warning motorists that slow vehicles are merging.

THE NRA really should try to extend the exits if possible. An advance warning might work but there is always a few who will ignore it. Also slowing the traffic on the motorway could cause its own problems.

Here's another example on the N7, remember this has 3 lanes. The re-designated roads are only 2 lanes.

Full Res picture

murphaph

ardmacha wrote: »

The slips should be lengthened, there is no reason in the picture above why the on slip could not be longer.

Exactly. The onslips are needlessly short as they stand. They should burn off those markings and extend the acceleration area by a couple of hundred yards now. I've wodered since day one why those N7 slips were marked so short. You can't get even up to 100km/h on them now!

BluntGuy

The slips are dreadful...

And is that one-panel per lane panelling I can see?

Eugh... I hope the pictures are outdated.

weehamster

The slips are dreadful...
And is that one-panel per lane panelling I can see?
Eugh... I hope the pictures are outdated.

I don't think so. The M11 was only changed recently.

Hey murphaph, if you are every hyper bored one day, any chance you can hop on you bike to Athlone and take a few nice photos of the bypass like you did for the above photo a while ago.

weehamster

weehamster wrote: »

I don't think so. The M11 was only changed recently.

Hey murphaph, if you are every hyper bored one day, any chance you can hop on you bike to Athlone and take a few nice photos of the bypass like you did for the above photo a while ago.

Ther's only one bad LILO on the Athlone bypass and that is being rebuilt as part of the Ballinasloe section of the M6.

The other one on the Roscommon road could do with a longer slip, but the bridge limits what can be done there.

BluntGuy

The Athlone bypass is mostly fine. I don't think one evil LILO should impede it being granted m-way status.

My only real problem with it is that there are so many junctions in such a small area. If the Athlone bypass was being constructed today as HQDC, you can garuntee that only two of those junctions - possibly three if we were to stretch it - would still exist.

Of course, you can't remove the junctions now, that'd just cause even more havoc.

murphaph

weehamster wrote: »

I don't think so. The M11 was only changed recently.

Hey murphaph, if you are every hyper bored one day, any chance you can hop on you bike to Athlone and take a few nice photos of the bypass like you did for the above photo a while ago.

I'd have to be uber bored to go to Athlone WH! Certainly if i'm in the area I'll take snaps.

Cian R

Any news on the N11 Enniscorthy Bypass or the N25 New Ross bypass? Will either of them be of Motorway standard? Has the funding dried up in these harsh times?

BluntGuy

Cian R wrote: »

Any news on the N11 Enniscorthy Bypass or the N25 New Ross bypass? Will either of them be of Motorway standard? Has the funding dried up in these harsh times?

The N25 New Ross bypass is rolling around in the doldrums for ages now. All I know is that the granting of planning permission has been pushed back over-and-over again, but I think a decision is due this month.

I'd expect to hear more about it when the Waterford Bypass is finished.

As for N11 Enniscorthy, I haven't a clue where that's going.

nordydan

BluntGuy wrote: »

The N25 New Ross bypass is rolling around in the doldrums for ages now. All I know is that the granting of planning permission has been pushed back over-and-over again, but I think a decision is due this month.

I'd expect to hear more about it when the Waterford Bypass is finished.

As for N11 Enniscorthy, I haven't a clue where that's going.

Map here:

http://www.wexford.ie/wex/Departments/Roads/Maps/Thefile,6065,en.pdf

BluntGuy

Nice to see the AA are on top of things. Only ONE MONTH :rolleyes: after the first round of redesignations came into effect, they've got their news story on it:

http://www.aaroadwatch.ie/news/story.asp?ID=1437

Bravo...

Nice to see how they've got most of the revised opening dates wrong as well...

And their route planner still doesn't include the redesignated stretches (even after I kindly e-mailed them about this).

Stark

They had a notice about the motorway redesignations up for a few weeks. The route planner thing is annoying though; it seems to be falling into general disrepair. I e-mailed them a while back about the "avoid tolls" option not working properly and their response was simply to remove the "avoid tolls" option.

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

If the NRA insist on building junctions like that with such short on-slips, then at least have flashing amber lights warning motorists that slow vehicles are merging.

They could also do with Northern Irish style 'max exit speed 40km/h' warning signs so that people don't assume they can exit at 120... surprised there aren't more people mounting the triangular islands on the LILOs on the N7 (you'd see scuffs/bits of cars if there were) actually.

L1011

Replying very late to this as I missed it entirely

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

The A 702 is a road which goes across remote parts of Scotland in parts, which you refer to, its like comparing a road across Kerry with the M1.

It comprises part of the official signposted route from Edinburgh to London. A road across Kerry is not a valid comparison. The N8/M8 is a valid comparison - which will be an infinitely better route come 2010.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Even the older sections have a better safety record then the republics new "motorways". Also better lighting,electronic signage, defelctors,service stations, 6 lanes mostly, colour coded cats eyes which are not used in the rep.

Better lighting = questionable at best as to wheter this is true
Electronic signage = only on stretches. We've about the same distance of motorway with VMS as they do. The "older sections" you mention have none at all.
Deflectors = what do you mean by this?
Service stations = this is a safety feature how now? Disgrace we don't have them but irrelevant
6 lanes = this is capacity not a safety issue, we have them where needed (for the most part).
Colour coded cats eyes = What? We have the standard white/yellow/green that the UK has. Beyond that all I know of are the blue 'ice warning' ones which we don't have; and 'active' eyes for dangerous sections. Which motorways should have - and which we do use (they're on the N11).

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

A roads are the UKs trunk roads, often dual carriageways, these have become motorways in the rep, are you seriously claiming the republics twisty single lane N roads are better ?

A roads in the UK are a hodge podge between equivalent of national primary, secondary and high level regional here. There are not always 'trunk roads' and they are rarely dual carriageways - about as common as national secondary or regional road duallers here. On the whole our national primary network is better than the average quality of the UK A road network; although the combination of all what would be A-numbered in the UK isn't.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

I am a road safety expert

As defined by who?

L1011

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Yer NIs roads are shocking compared to the republics, :rolleyes:

Much of it hasn't seen maintaince in 5+ years. The further west you go, the worse it gets. High traffic A roads are narrow with no shoulders (not even the gravel shoulders they use), pitted worn surfaces, unlit junctions... stuff that's rare to find on the N network here.

Anyone who thinks their network is all sweetness and light has likely driven to Belfast on a day that there was little traffic in Newry or Sprucefield and thinks thats representative of their roads.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Coundown markers are placed at the wrong distances in the rep, at 600, 400 and 200 m points, too close to junctions at 75 mph and in the outside lane and needing to come off, esp in poor visibility, heavy traffic etc. Same with some road signage.

So pretty much identical to the UK, despite you saying their system is better, then? How about the two (usually) advance directional warning signs about 1400 and 800 metres of so (never actually checked the real distances so correct me if you've got them) that we have?

MYOB

MYOB wrote: »

Replying very late to this as I missed it entirely
Colour coded cats eyes = What? We have the standard white/yellow/green that the UK has.

The UK uses a different "standard" (iirc) red on the LHS of the left lane, white between lanes & green to the right of the overtaking lane.

MYOB wrote: »

A roads in the UK are a hodge podge between equivalent of national primary, secondary and high level regional here. There are not always 'trunk roads' and they are rarely dual carriageways - about as common as national secondary or regional road duallers here. On the whole our national primary network is better than the average quality of the UK A road network; although the combination of all what would be A-numbered in the UK isn't.



As defined by who?

Most "A" road designations were done at the start of the 20th century by either the AA or RAC (I'll wiki it)

BluntGuy

I think deflectors are those things they sometimes have at the gore of a junction. They have them on the N8 watergrasshill dc and some of the dcs in Cork City...

L1011

BluntGuy wrote: »

I think deflectors are those things they sometimes have at the gore of a junction. They have them on the N8 watergrasshill dc and some of the dcs in Cork City...

And the M50 SEM.

And not anywhere near consistently on the UK motorway network. If thats what he means...

Deleted User wrote: »

Most "A" road designations were done at the start of the 20th century by either the AA or RAC (I'll wiki it)

The defined question was asking about him being a 'road safety expert' rather than the roads, if thats what you're answering (isn't overly clear). If not, ignore this.

BluntGuy

Well either way, apart from service stations and perhaps lighting at certain junctions (although that can be poor in places in the UK as well - although generally, I'll admit, the lighting is slightly better over there at more rural junctions - one of my only problems with rural Irish motorways), our motorways are pretty much identical in terms of safety and design.

And don't forget, we have the new safe concrete barriors on most of our new roads. The UK only have the old steel (which they are now replacing), we have the much easiar to read cantilevers at junctions (although the UK have more gantries) so it's give and take... once we have the service stations, our motorway network will be virtually indistinguishable from the UK's apart from being mostly D2M, which isn't really an issue.

But the lighting is something that needs fixing on certain patches of Irish motorway. I hope they put lights into all the concrete barriors because they're difficult to make out at night. Also, emergency phones are missing from HQDC schemes that were redesignated. Hopefully they'll be installed at some point, because without them, indeed, the UK's network does look much safer (although arguably with the increase in mobile ownership - they aren't needed - an opinion I do not agree with btw).

MYOB

MYOB wrote: »

The defined question was asking about him being a 'road safety expert' rather than the roads, if thats what you're answering (isn't overly clear). If not, ignore this.

I was referring to the "A" road classification in general, which (I believe) originated a century ago, looking again at your response, you're fairly close to the mark.

Zoney

BluntGuy wrote: »

And don't forget, we have the new safe concrete barriors on most of our new roads. The UK only have the old steel (which they are now replacing), we have the much easiar to read cantilevers at junctions (although the UK have more gantries) so it's give and take... once we have the service stations, our motorway network will be virtually indistinguishable from the UK's apart from being mostly D2M, which isn't really an issue.

Significant stretches of old motorway (e.g. M7) have those wire barriers - which are actually no barrier at all if not maintained (tension has to be restored after any collision, and the barrier has to be regularly checked for such detensioning - I've seen sections down for months).

jrar

BluntGuy wrote: »

Well either way, apart from service stations and perhaps lighting at certain junctions (although that can be poor in places in the UK as well - although generally, I'll admit, the lighting is slightly better over there at more rural junctions - one of my only problems with rural Irish motorways), our motorways are pretty much identical in terms of safety and design.

And don't forget, we have the new safe concrete barriors on most of our new roads. The UK only have the old steel (which they are now replacing), we have the much easiar to read cantilevers at junctions (although the UK have more gantries) so it's give and take... once we have the service stations, our motorway network will be virtually indistinguishable from the UK's apart from being mostly D2M, which isn't really an issue.

But the lighting is something that needs fixing on certain patches of Irish motorway. I hope they put lights into all the concrete barriors because they're difficult to make out at night. Also, emergency phones are missing from HQDC schemes that were redesignated. Hopefully they'll be installed at some point, because without them, indeed, the UK's network does look much safer (although arguably with the increase in mobile ownership - they aren't needed - an opinion I do not agree with btw).

I've driven extensively on UK and continental European motorways - none of them have the amount of unprotected lamp standards that we do - most of ours are at junctions on new motorways which one would think would have to pass the highest H&S guidelines, and yet we continue to declare open stretches of motorway and HQDC with no nearside barriers to protect motorists from leaving the roadway and possible overturning on steep embankment sides, or hitting one of the many unprotected lamp standards.

Until that basic issue is addressed (plus double barriers at emergency telephone spots, and more frequent clearance of crash debris, shredded tyres, and general levels of litter) we won't have a motorway network up to what would be considered basic safety levels in most other developed countries.

Other things that need to be addressed include a "no stopping" law, and a camera network for a dedicated motorway traffic corps to monitor to be able to react quickly to accidents, and incidents of unlawful activity on our motoroways (including stopping, reversing back after missing exit ramp, driving continuously in middle or overtaking lanes instead of keeping left, taking L-drivers off the motorways and fining them, etc.)

Lack of independently lit advance direction signage remains a problem, as does poor drainage on many new sections of road - we don't have enough weather alert / accident info. warning signs, and our motorways continue to have no km. markings on them to help drivers/users to alert emergency or breakdown services to their exact location etc.

When all of these things are in place, then we can start comparing ourselves ourselves to the UK, France etc. - motorways are about more than 2 strips of tarmacadam and GSJs.

Finally, we need a major campaign to raise awareness for Irish drivers as to how to behave on a motorway, and we need lots more unmarked Garda cars with video equipment to monitor and apprehend the lunatics who think motorway = mondello, or the dozy sub-set of our population who think the overtaking lane is the "fast" lane and therefore if they're going "fast", they can just sit in that lane ad infinitum.

L1011

We have a no stopping law - its just not enforced properly. Just like many of the other problems (leaners, lane discipline, etc) you mention...

Skyhater

I can't believe everyone is having these discussions..... 90% of the Irish motorway/DC network is only a few years old... They should be much better the the UK network.... but it's not. They may be marginally better in come cases, but:
1) The quality and more importantly the consistency of our signage is terrible!!
2) The "wire barriers" were a cheep solution that should never have been put in place.
3) Where it matters our Junctions have been designed to under-capacity....Having to upgrade them just a few years after being build.....and some not even planned for upgrade.

The NRA did an OK job..... but our network cost too much and stupid mistakes were made in some cases.