N7 - Newlands Cross upgrade

Sam Russell

You would need average speed cameras to make it stick with strict enforcement. They could also enforce tax and NCT at the same time.

omicron

nordydan wrote: »

Would variable speed limit outbound on the N7 in the evenings help this? i.e. 80km/hr between 4:30 and 7 with enforcement via speed cameras

Assuming drivers read the signs of course ;-)

Would help a little with crashes but from Rathcoole west is below 80 on busy evenings anyway. It is partly down to bad driving but realistically the reduced capacity from Naas is the major issue.

MICKEYG

Sam Russell wrote: »

You would need average speed cameras to make it stick with strict enforcement. They could also enforce tax and NCT at the same time.

Why are we wasting Gards time enforcing tax. It has no bearing on road safety. NCT has little bearing either, most accidents are due to driver not mechanical issues.
Both tax and NCT could be policed at insurance renewal time.

apoeiguq3094y

MICKEYG wrote: »

Why are we wasting Gards time enforcing tax. It has no bearing on road safety. NCT has little bearing either, most accidents are due to driver not mechanical issues.
Both tax and NCT could be policed at insurance renewal time.

Do you have any statistics to back that wild statement up?

The_Pretender

MICKEYG wrote: »

Why are we wasting Gards time enforcing tax. It has no bearing on road safety. NCT has little bearing either, most accidents are due to driver not mechanical issues.
Both tax and NCT could be policed at insurance renewal time.

Is it not possible that so few accidents are down to mechanical error partly because of the NCT?

markpb

MICKEYG wrote: »

Why are we wasting Gards time enforcing tax. It has no bearing on road safety.

Because the Guards job is to enforce the law?

duffman13

apoeiguq3094y wrote: »

Do you have any statistics to back that wild statement up?

In fairness it's not ridiculously wild, about 12% off all car accidents are caused by mechanical failure the vast majority of which are tyre failure. A quick Google will bring up the stats, I remember Antoine Savage talking about the NCT and the checks they do outside of tyres only account for less than .5% off all car accidents. I don't know where he got his stats from

MICKEYG

markpb wrote: »

Because the Guards job is to enforce the law?

Do they check people have paid their property tax?

MICKEYG

apoeiguq3094y wrote: »

Do you have any statistics to back that wild statement up?

No but the focus on road safety by the RSA is predominantly on driver behaviour so I imagine they know that it is rarely the cars fault.

markpb

MICKEYG wrote: »

Do they check people have paid their property tax?

Nope because the government decided to make enforcement of the LPT act something for Revenue to worry about and did not make it a criminal matter. However, enforcement of NCT and Motor Tax are firmly within the remit if the Guards. If you don't like it, take it up with a TD.

MICKEYG

markpb wrote: »

Nope because the government decided to make enforcement of the LPT act something for Revenue to worry about and did not make it a criminal matter. However, enforcement of NCT and Motor Tax are firmly within the remit if the Guards. If you don't like it, take it up with a TD.

It is clear I dont like it. That is my point. Why are we wasting the Gards time on this?
Does every question asked on this thread gets a "take it up with your TD" response?

MICKEYG

The_Pretender wrote: »

Is it not possible that so few accidents are down to mechanical error partly because of the NCT?

It may help be but it still does not explain why the Gards need to enforce it.

nlgbbbblth

I commute daily from Newbridge to Finglas.

The flyover has improved the morning trip. I leave between 7.30 and 7.45 each morning. I can get from my house to the M50 J5 Finglas exit in 40 minutes. It then takes 10 / 15 minutes to get through the exit. So about 55 minutes in total.

The evening leg has mostly been a disaster - anything from 70 to 105 minutes. It's like Friday traffic every day. The M50 is generally ok [occasional accident or slow crawl]. I leave work at about 5.10pm and can get from Finglas to Newlands in 20 minutes. The problem is the N7 and slow-up can start at J4 Rathcoole. This week the average journey time home was 80 minutes [Monday 65, Tuesday 95, Thursday 85]. Didn't drive on Wednesday or yesterday.

Sam Russell

MICKEYG wrote: »

Why are we wasting Gards time enforcing tax. It has no bearing on road safety. NCT has little bearing either, most accidents are due to driver not mechanical issues.
Both tax and NCT could be policed at insurance renewal time.

There would be no wasting Garda time. The average speed cameras would read the number plates of cars periodically along the route and if the average speed exceeded the limit (by some amount) then a speeding ticket would issue. At the same time, the tax and NCT status would be checked and if not correct, a ticket would issue.

Using an untaxed car would then be silly. Speeding would be silly. If the speed limit was variable, and set at the optimum for the volume at the moment, the flow of traffic would be better - and all would benefit. This scheme works during extended road works on the UK motorways.

[Aside - I do not think the current RSA obsession with the NCT makes any sense. There is no evidence that there are any accidents attributable to failure of the NCT. There have been a few accidents with PSVs (school buses) but that is not covered by the NCT. If they intend to make it essential that cars pass the NCT, they should get rid of the backlog. They should also abandon the 'anniversary date' and have a minimum validity of the NCT of 12 months.]

The_Pretender

MICKEYG wrote: »

It may help be but it still does not explain why the Gards need to enforce it.

Because driving a car that is not roadworthy can lead to serious accidents and even deaths.

MICKEYG

The_Pretender wrote: »

Because driving a car that is not roadworthy can lead to serious accidents and even deaths.

Yes, but as we have said, unroadworthy cars cause a very small percentage of crashes. Garda time would be better spent monitoring driving behaviour.

A car does not suddenly become unroadworthy the day its NCT expires.
We have a database of all car registrations. We simply cross reference this to tax and NCT records and insurance is refused if these are out of date.
At any stage we can check if a car is uninsured, untaxed or has an out of date NCT. There will also be an address and owner details with that reg. Letters, points and fines can then be sent automatically.
There will of course be occasions where valid excuses are available but they can be dealt with after the fact. Surely this is more effecient than random labour heavy roadside checkpoints.

MICKEYG

MICKEYG wrote: »

Yes, but as we have said, unroadworthy cars cause a very small percentage of crashes. Garda time would be better spent monitoring driving behaviour.

A car does not suddenly become unroadworthy the day its NCT expires.

It's probably true to say that most mechanical failures occur on cars that have a valid cert, as the vehicle will fail the next test.

But, yes, most crashes are caused by bad driving!

Carawaystick

Sam Russell wrote: »

There would be no wasting Garda time. The average speed cameras would read the number plates of cars periodically along the route and if the average speed exceeded the limit (by some amount) then a speeding ticket would issue. At the same time, the tax and NCT status would be checked and if not correct, a ticket would issue.

Who would the ticket be issued to? driver or owner?

ciarsd

Jaysus where's the N7 upgrade conversation gone!

ciarsd

ciarsd wrote: »

Jaysus where's the N7 upgrade conversation gone!

For the most part, the job has been completed. The only construction work left is on the slip roads and the lights, it appears that no one here really cares about that. :P

AugustusMinimus

Could people please setup a new thread in the motors forum if they want to discuss mechanical failures in cars. This stuff is destroying this thread for others.

regedit

I live in Newbridge too and use Newlands Cross 5 days a week. After a few days of getting used to it, there's no more issues there. Traffic is running smooth there but issues are arising in the evening at the Ball in naas which is resulting in tailbacks much before Naas. Some think that this is due to the fact that there's a constant stream of traffic from RCR to the M7. On the other hand, there's definitively been a large increase in the volume of the traffic leaving and entering Dublin. Somebody commented that there's been roughly a 25% increase in the traffic after NX was opened.
The solution seems to be simple, widen the M7. When this will happen is impossible to predict but it doesn't seem to be on list of priorities. I think in fairness, this topic should be now split and people should start /continue posting on the M7 thread

ttenneb

The main topic in this thread seems to have got lost along the way, lane etiquette and mechanical problems entering into the discussion. So at the risk of being accused of doing the same thing may I ask has anyone mentioned the dangerous arrangement at the Red Cow interchange? When phase 2 of the interchange was at the design stage I requested a photo montage of the new layout and was alarmed to discover the method of accessing the Luas/Clondalkin slip road, coming from either the city or from the airport.

In order to access the inner lane, those coming from the city have to traverse one lane (northbound M50 traffic joining outbound N7). Worse still, having left the M50 from the airport, traffic heading for Clondalkin or Luas must cross 3 lanes (from outermost lane to innermost). I brought this to the attention of whoever supplied the map to me and was told that the distance involved was adequate.

With the build-up of traffic stretching back from Newlands producing a snail's pace at Red Cow, it's been quite a headache to negotiate this manouevre, but as the traffic now moves much faster on the interchange there's a touch of kamikaze in it. Am I alone in my anxiety?

K.Flyer

That was something I always wondered about myself, it seems like they stuck the exit in as an after thought and didn't realise that those in the outer lane were fecked trying to get across.
But what can we expect from an intersection that has been badly designed and executed from the very beginning. So many years down the road and after several facelifts they might be getting close to it being right, but that is still a serious flaw in the design.

ttenneb

The same thing's going to happen at Newland's. In 5 years' time they'll realise they should have built a proper flyover. The only improvement is that east and westbound traffic is facilitated. It's still, and will continue to be useless for traffic approaching from both Tallaght and Clondalkin. Why can't they ever get it right first time?

ttenneb

ttenneb wrote: »

The same thing's going to happen at Newland's. In 5 years' time they'll realise they should have built a proper flyover. The only improvement is that east and westbound traffic is facilitated. It's still, and will continue to be useless for traffic approaching from both Tallaght and Clondalkin. Why can't they ever get it right first time?

Very unlikely that they'll build a north-south freeflow, it's an "R" road for starters and money is tighter than usual.

Hotblack Desiato

ttenneb wrote: »

In order to access the inner lane, those coming from the city have to traverse one lane (northbound M50 traffic joining outbound N7). Worse still, having left the M50 from the airport, traffic heading for Clondalkin or Luas must cross 3 lanes (from outermost lane to innermost). I brought this to the attention of whoever supplied the map to me and was told that the distance involved was adequate.

With the build-up of traffic stretching back from Newlands producing a snail's pace at Red Cow, it's been quite a headache to negotiate this manouevre, but as the traffic now moves much faster on the interchange there's a touch of kamikaze in it. Am I alone in my anxiety?

No.
The only times I have to go M50S/B -> Clondalkin/Luas exit, are at the weekends in fairly light traffic so even with lights at Newlands it was often flowing quite quickly. It's not really a problem on the bike with better visibility and much better acceleration, but it can feel a bit hairy in the car, especially as you're merging leftwards. A really bad layout.

I had hoped that as part of this works they'd move the exit at least a couple of hundred metres down the road and loop it back to the bridge...

spacetweek

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

No.
The only times I have to go M50S/B -> Clondalkin/Luas exit, are at the weekends in fairly light traffic so even with lights at Newlands it was often flowing quite quickly. It's not really a problem on the bike with better visibility and much better acceleration, but it can feel a bit hairy in the car, especially as you're merging leftwards. A really bad layout.

I had hoped that as part of this works they'd move the exit at least a couple of hundred metres down the road and loop it back to the bridge...

They should move the entrance and exit to this road and build a short link over to the luas car park.
Exiting traffic would be forced down to the lights at Newlands by segregating it from the mainline. Close the existing slips.

paulbok

How are those City inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening finding it the last few days?

Traffic has been a lot lighter as people finish up early for Xmas, so might be a fairer comparison to the traffic volumes just before Newlands opened.

nlgbbbblth

I go onto M50 North at Red Cow but inbound was fine all week aside from Friday. Took 20 minutes to get through the flyover due to broken down van.

Outbound was grand. Finglas to Newbridge was 55 minutes yesterday [5:15 - 6.10pm] which is unbelievably fast for a Friday.