Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

NRA invent new exit numbering system

  • 20-12-2011 11:53am
    #1
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,592 ✭✭✭✭


    the dc on the way in to Sligo now has exits numbered 's1' through 's3' on signs. And not even outbound from Sligo...
    Tagged:


Comments

  • #2
    nordydan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭nordydan


    MYOB wrote: »
    the dc on the way in to Sligo now has exits numbered 's1' through 's3' on signs. And not even outbound from Sligo...

    Bizarre


  • #3
    Chris_5339762
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,967 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Sensible. The M4 (or N4 DC) will never be extended to SLigo, and since there is some GSJ DC at the Sligo end, why not call it S1 S2 S3? Makes common sense to me.


  • #4
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,592 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Chris_5339762 wrote: »
    Sensible. The M4 (or N4 DC) will never be extended to SLigo, and since there is some GSJ DC at the Sligo end, why not call it S1 S2 S3? Makes common sense to me.

    The plan was for the N4 DC to be extended all the way to Sligo - Mullingar Longford scheme would have joined it to the Roosky BP, Castlebaldwin scheme would have brought it towards Boyle (as T1 mostly), Carrick on Shannon bypass would have brought it around there obviously and then there were plans for mostly online DC with minor bypassing (e.g. Aghamore) to link the entire thing up.

    I'd not be madly surprised if all we see this side of 2025 is the Castlebaldwin scheme (due to the danger of that road), the Carrick BP (due to the developer-caused traffic there) and maybe the Newtownforbes end of the Mullingar-Longford (by which they mean Co. Longford not Longford Town) scheme (due to the danger of the two 90 degree bends in the town).

    I'd imagine they didn't want to put "46, 47, 48" or similar on an isolated stretch, nor would they even be certain of how many junctions were going to exist.

    If the Castlebaldwin scheme gets built that'll mean there'd be GSJs before "S1". Had they numbered them *the other way* from Sligo outbound it would have been halfway acceptable.


  • #5
    nordydan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭nordydan


    Any photos of this absurd numbering scheme?

    You would have thought the NRA would have had the sense of implementing a km based numbering system a the time. It would have avoided a farce such as this


  • #6
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,151 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    nordydan wrote: »
    Any photos of this absurd numbering scheme?

    You would have thought the NRA would have had the sense of implementing a km based numbering system a the time. It would have avoided a farce such as this
    Without settling on route alignments, you can't implement distance-based numbering systems.
    In any case there is no reason to believe that DC will not eventually replace this route. Before then, however, it would have been better to have no numbers at all.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    spacetweek wrote: »
    Without settling on route alignments, you can't implement distance-based numbering systems.
    You can. You use the existing alignment and then patch over if there are changes due to new route alignments.


  • #8
    spacetweek
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,151 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    murphaph wrote: »
    spacetweek wrote: »
    Without settling on route alignments, you can't implement distance-based numbering systems.
    You can. You use the existing alignment and then patch over if there are changes due to new route alignments.
    Businesses don't like it when you do that.


  • #9
    veryangryman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,604 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    spacetweek wrote: »
    Businesses don't like it when you do that.

    Any business that doesnt move with the times deserves to lose customers - like wow a hotel would have to update 1 word on their location/directions place.


  • #10
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    veryangryman wrote: »
    Any business that doesnt move with the times deserves to lose customers - like wow a hotel would have to update 1 word on their location/directions place.
    I think that part of the problem is the sheer volume of third-party information out there that isn't updated!


  • #11
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    spacetweek wrote: »
    Businesses don't like it when you do that.
    You're not really talking about doing it any more often than (for example) adding a new prefix to a telephone number. The NRA wouldn't need to patch every sign on a route unless there was confusion. They could even "fake junction numbers" so that a newly opened stretch directly adjacent to a previously open one, took slightly "off" km numbers, to keep the sequence largely correct, with a full renumbering of junctions only taking place when two previously independent bits of motorway etc. were joined up with a new build.

    In any case, businesses can leave off the junction number on their stationery, missing postcodes are perhaps a much bigger problem for navigation that have nothing to do with motorway junction numbers.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,592 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    This has now been continued along the inner bypass to the N16 junction; S5->S10 on plates at each traffic light controlled junction.


  • #13
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,901 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    But what I want to know is - what does the "s" prefix stand for? Sligo Expressway?:D:pac:


  • #14
    veryangryman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,604 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    But what I want to know is - what does the "s" prefix stand for? Sligo Expressway?:D:pac:

    Its a bit retarded alright but in the absence of a completed N4/M4 plan Sligo-Dublin with the exits planned out, Sligo should have some sort of exit numbers on the DC . Putting them beyond the traffic lights as you approach town is a bit daft mind.


Advertisement