M50 thread

momo55

Hello
I got a job in Allianz and i will be traveling on M50 every day from Swords.

I have timed it out during the day and it only took about 23 mins to get , but i don t know how long it takes in the mornings.

Does anyone know how long it takes to get there and what are the best /worst times ?I can’t afford arriving late to work late especially when starting a new role.

Thank you

First Up

momo55 wrote:

Does anyone know how long it takes to get there and what are the best /worst times ?I can’t afford arriving late to work late especially when starting a new role.

Might help if you told us where "there" is.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Might help if you told us where "there" is.

The heading says Clondalkin

First Up

Deleted User wrote:

The heading says Clondalkin

Heading?
I'm reading it in the phone version of Boards and there is no reference to Clondalkin in that.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Heading?
I'm reading it in the phone version of Boards and there is no reference to Clondalkin in that.

Pity, the phone version doesn't show the headings - not very helpful in situations like this....

steinbock123

Can somebody explain to me what is the thinking/reasoning behind the recent road marking/lane revisions at the above junction? I travel inbound on the N7 twice a day, and take the freeflow on to the M50 southbound and then get off at the next junction (Ballymount/Cookstown). Up until these revisions, I could stay on the left lane on the freeflow and M50 all the way . Now, thanks to these recent revisions, this inside lane has now been replaced with a hard shoulder meaning that any traffic getting on to the M50 at N7 and exiting at Ballymount is now forced out into the through traffic on the M50, and then has to filter back out again.This is not such a problem in these particular lightly trafficked weeks, but just wait until the schools go back and the traffic firms up again. You are going to see this causing a tailback right the way around the freeflow circle and back up on to the N7 inbound, particularly in the morning.
In very simple terms, at a place where traffic is joining a fast moving artery from the left, I cannot understand how it makes sense to reduce the road width by one lane.
Makes no sense to me.
I've written to them in similar vein, but of course, no reply has been received to date.

veryangryman

steinbock123 wrote: »

Can somebody explain to me what is the thinking/reasoning behind the recent road marking/lane revisions at the above junction? I travel inbound on the N7 twice a day, and take the freeflow on to the M50 southbound and then get off at the next junction (Ballymount/Cookstown). Up until these revisions, I could stay on the left lane on the freeflow and M50 all the way . Now, thanks to these recent revisions, this inside lane has now been replaced with a hard shoulder meaning that any traffic getting on to the M50 at N7 and exiting at Ballymount is now forced out into the through traffic on the M50, and then has to filter back out again.This is not such a problem in these particular lightly trafficked weeks, but just wait until the schools go back and the traffic firms up again. You are going to see this causing a tailback right the way around the freeflow circle and back up on to the N7 inbound, particularly in the morning.
In very simple terms, at a place where traffic is joining a fast moving artery from the left, I cannot understand how it makes sense to reduce the road width by one lane.
Makes no sense to me.
I've written to them in similar vein, but of course, no reply has been received to date.

Not excusing it but it's a Motorway which is built for long distance traffic, specifically to bypass the city. Travelling 1 junction down doesn't count and discourages it's function as a fast moving motorway.

steinbock123

veryangryman wrote: »

Not excusing it but it's a Motorway which is built for long distance traffic, specifically to bypass the city. Travelling 1 junction down doesn't count and discourages it's function as a fast moving motorway.

My point is that it's dangerous, and it's created a dangerous situation where one did not exist previously. If the M50's function is, as you say, to ''bypass the city'', why have a junction at Ballymount at all, why was the M50 not built with just a junction at the airport, one at the Naas Rd., and maybe another at Bray? That would bypass the city. I witnessed a very near rear-ender yesterday morning solely due to this new layout. I would also add that there are a huge number of drivers, not just me, exiting at N7 and exiting the M50 at Ballymount every day. It's a well worn route to the Ballymount / Walkinstown industrial area for anyone travelling from the south.

yannakis

A similar change was implemented in more junctions, and I believe their objective was to avoid the 2 ramps merging with each other at the same time they were merging with the M50. Now each ramp has only one merge onto the M50. Less chances for phookoops :pac:

rameire

The inside slip is only merging onto the outside slip which is the auxiliary lane, meaning coming from n7 to Ballymount there is no need to merge onto lane 1 of the M50 proper.
the reason for this was that the outside slip merged quite quickly into the m50 lane 1, and this change will reduce the amount of merges thus speeding up mainline traffic.

in addition to what they have done, I think they need to install the flappy paddles to separate the slip aux from lane 1 to further reduce the weaving.

steinbock123 wrote: »

Can somebody explain to me what is the thinking/reasoning behind the recent road marking/lane revisions at the above junction? I travel inbound on the N7 twice a day, and take the freeflow on to the M50 southbound and then get off at the next junction (Ballymount/Cookstown). Up until these revisions, I could stay on the left lane on the freeflow and M50 all the way . Now, thanks to these recent revisions, this inside lane has now been replaced with a hard shoulder meaning that any traffic getting on to the M50 at N7 and exiting at Ballymount is now forced out into the through traffic on the M50, and then has to filter back out again.This is not such a problem in these particular lightly trafficked weeks, but just wait until the schools go back and the traffic firms up again. You are going to see this causing a tailback right the way around the freeflow circle and back up on to the N7 inbound, particularly in the morning.
In very simple terms, at a place where traffic is joining a fast moving artery from the left, I cannot understand how it makes sense to reduce the road width by one lane.
Makes no sense to me.
I've written to them in similar vein, but of course, no reply has been received to date.

marno21

Irish Times article on congestion on the M50

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/m50-blues-ireland-s-busiest-road-dublin-s-biggest-car-park-1.3259694

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

Irish Times article on congestion on the M50

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/m50-blues-ireland-s-busiest-road-dublin-s-biggest-car-park-1.3259694

Love the video, plenty of distracted driving talking to the dash camera and some clips obviously taken on a mobile phone by the driver. Just what’s needed on the M50.

Also the lady who mentions the lane lottery and how you’ve to guess which is the fastest lane to jump into, not which is the correct lane to be in. Great examples of why the M50 is a disaster.

pat ticket

Clayton’s husband works in St Stephen’s Green. He takes the train into town every day. Clayton does not have the same choice. There is no direct public transport link from Celbridge to UCD.

This is news to the users of the 67X!

Sam Russell

pat ticket wrote: »

This is news to the users of the 67X!

Clayton’s husband works in St Stephen’s Green. He takes the train into town every day. Clayton does not have the same choice. There is no direct public transport link from Celbridge to UCD.

Hazel Hatch to Grand Canal Dock and Dart to Sydney Parade. There is a UCD shuttle that goes from Sydney Parade.

Another journey discussed in the IT article was Malahide to Leopardstown. Either Dart to Dunlaoghrie and 75 bus or Dart to Tara St and Luas Green Line to Leopardstown. (Shorter walk once the BXD extension opens.

I do not think any of them even considers PT.

markpb

Sam Russell wrote: »

Another journey discussed in the IT article was Malahide to Leopardstown. Either Dart to Dunlaoghrie and 75 bus or Dart to Tara St and Luas Green Line to Leopardstown. (Shorter walk once the BXD extension opens.

You're right that they're probably not considering public transport but I doubt you'll find those options are much faster than driving, especially if you consider getting from their home to Malahide train station or walking from the 75 to Central Park or South County. At best those trips might be cheaper or more reliable but not faster or more convenient.

Sam Russell

markpb wrote: »

You're right that they're probably not considering public transport but I doubt you'll find those options are much faster than driving, especially if you consider getting from their home to Malahide train station or walking from the 75 to Central Park or South County. At best those trips might be cheaper or more reliable but not faster or more convenient.

Exactly, there was no critical thinking in the article. The author of the article took no time to investigate the possible routes for the unfortunate commuters by car along the M50. For example Malahide to Lepardstown can be achieved by using the Port Tunnel (@€;10) vs the M50 toll, or R107 and then Malhide Rd and East Link (€1.40 toll) and out N11. PT was not considered at all.

JupiterKid

The M50 cannot be upgraded any further. Traffic management for the route must be the focus now, active policing and variable speed limits.

Public transport is the only real solution to the M50 problems, such as fast, high capacity connections from the North and West of Dublin to the South. The proposed metro system will be a key part of this.

A long-term solution would be an outer orbital route, from the M7 near Naas to the M1 at Balbriggan. But this would be long-term in scope.

Traffic management and public transport is really the only way forward.

marno21

JupiterKid wrote: »

The M50 cannot be upgraded any further. Traffic management for the route must be the focus now, active policing and variable speed limits.

Public transport is the only real solution to the M50 problems, such as fast, high capacity connections from the North and West of Dublin to the South. The proposed metro system will be a key part of this.

A long-term solution would be an outer orbital route, from the M7 near Naas to the M1 at Balbriggan. But this would be long-term in scope.

Traffic management and public transport is really the only way forward.

IMO, Metro North will take a fairly decent scelp of traffic off the M50. At the minute the main cause of congestion is traffic is M1 traffic going south as far as J13/J14.

An outer orbital will do little as the M50 problems aren't caused by people using the M50 as a Dublin bypass, its caused by commuters. If bypass traffic was removed from the M50, the displaced traffic would just be replaced by further commuter traffic, defeating the purpose of the outer bypass. The outer bypass wouldn't aid traffic using the M50 to access Dublin either.

Removing the need for so many people to commute along the M50 is what's needed here. This requires thinking outside the box and not double decking or widening

veryangryman

I noticed recently that the M50 and M11 continue each other's numbering. Will this change if/when Eastern bypass part of M50 is built

marno21

veryangryman wrote: »

I noticed recently that the M50 and M11 continue each other's numbering. Will this change if/when Eastern bypass part of M50 is built

Yes. You may have noticed that the first junction number on the M11 at Bray is J5. If the Eastern Bypass were built, the M50/M11 merge would become M11 J4, Cherrywood M11 J3, Leopardstown M11 J2 and the Eastern Bypass/M50/M11/N31 junction would become M11 J1.

Kermit.de.frog

They should build 2 toll lanes each way. These toll lanes can have their own dedicated super flyovers for users.

Charge the toll lanes for the faster journeys. Rest free.

Kermit.de.frog

New smart motorway upgrades in UK are converting hard shoulders to 4th lanes.

They could do this with the M50. Inexpensive extra lane.

First Up

Am I right in understanding the M50 will not be affected by the papal road closures next Sunday?

The published maps look like the blueprint for the Normandy invasion and are almost incomprehensible. I have no wish to go anywhere near the Phoenix Park but I would like to travel from Sandyford to the M7.

OldMrBrennan83

I was wondering the same. I've to get from Dublin Airport to Limerick on Saturday morning and I'd rather not go through Tullamore or anything.

markpb

First Up wrote: »

Am I right in understanding the M50 will not be affected by the papal road closures next Sunday?

No exit inbound at J6 Blanch, J7 Lucan or J9 Red Cow from 4am Sunday till between midnight and 6am Monday.

I'd expect traffic volumes to be significantly higher than normal for a Sunday.

https://twitter.com/M50Dublin/status/1030106310329737217

Alkers

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

They could do this with the M50. Inexpensive extra lane.

There isn't a full-with hard shoulder on most of the m50

First Up

markpb wrote: »

No exit inbound at J6 Blanch, J7 Lucan or J9 Red Cow from 4am Sunday till between midnight and 6am Monday.

I'd expect traffic volumes to be significantly higher than normal for a Sunday.

https://twitter.com/M50Dublin/status/1030106310329737217

OK thanks. That looks as if access to the M7 southbound from the M50 will be OK.

Sam Russell

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

New smart motorway upgrades in UK are converting hard shoulders to 4th lanes.

They could do this with the M50. Inexpensive extra lane.

They have been doing this for years around Birmingham.

They need to implement variable speed limits, and average speed monitoring, and speed limit enforcement first. It would yield much better results.

marno21

Widening the M50 has been continiously ruled out by all parties involved.

It is not feasible for a multitude of reasons.

The only solution now is removing traffic from the M50 in any way possible. There is some seriously low hanging fruit, and as alternatives come online that traffic will removed (yes it'll likely be replaced with other traffic).

The main congestion wave on the M50 is from the M1 to the J13-J16 business parks southbound in the morning and northbound in the evening. This traffic will be offered an alternative in the form of the Metro.

Chris_5339762

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

New smart motorway upgrades in UK are converting hard shoulders to 4th lanes.

They could do this with the M50. Inexpensive extra lane.

The UK are spending an absolute fortune on smart motorways instead of upgrading them properly. They are just sticking plasters and proper widening or new motorways will soon have to be revisited there.