They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

On Friday, 31 March 2017 12:24:19 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down.

I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing the rest of the traffic down.

On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

On 31/03/2017 12:50, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 31 March 2017 12:24:19 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down.

I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing the rest of the traffic down.

On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

If only the lorry drivers could use their common sense and only overtake
lightly loaded lorries. But two heavily laden lorries in an overtaking
situation will snarl the traffic terribly.

On 31/03/17 13:06, Broadback wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:50, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 31 March 2017 12:24:19 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down.

I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing
the rest of the traffic down.

On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

If only the lorry drivers could use their common sense and only overtake
lightly loaded lorries. But two heavily laden lorries in an overtaking
situation will snarl the traffic terribly.

Nothing to do with loading. All to do with speed limiters


--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first centurys developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

On 31/03/2017 14:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/03/17 13:06, Broadback wrote:


If only the lorry drivers could use their common sense and only overtake
lightly loaded lorries. But two heavily laden lorries in an overtaking
situation will snarl the traffic terribly.

Nothing to do with loading. All to do with speed limiters


That may be true on the level. But going up hill, few lorries can reach
the speed limiter speed and their speed is determined by power to weight
ratio.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Roger Mills formulated on Friday :
That may be true on the level. But going up hill, few lorries can reach the
speed limiter speed and their speed is determined by power to weight ratio.

Exactly, which is why the best place for over takes to take place, is
on the hill climbs rather than ban them there.

On 31/03/2017 14:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/03/17 13:06, Broadback wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:50, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 31 March 2017 12:24:19 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down.

I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing
the rest of the traffic down.

On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

If only the lorry drivers could use their common sense and only overtake
lightly loaded lorries. But two heavily laden lorries in an overtaking
situation will snarl the traffic terribly.

Nothing to do with loading. All to do with speed limiters

I can assure you many lorries that are laden do slow down up inclines.

On 31/03/2017 14:22, Huge wrote:
On 2017-03-31, Broadback wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:50, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 31 March 2017 12:24:19 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down.

I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing the rest of the traffic down.

On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..

If only the lorry drivers could use their common sense and only overtake
lightly loaded lorries. But two heavily laden lorries in an overtaking
situation will snarl the traffic terribly.

If you'd ever sat behind 2 "elephant racing" lorries for mile after mile
after mile, you'd think it was a good idea, as I do.



The correct name for the drivers of such vehicles are knob jockeys.



--
Adam

On 31/03/17 14:49, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:22:35 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2017-03-31, Broadback wrote:
[quoted text muted]

If you'd ever sat behind 2 "elephant racing" lorries for mile after mile
after mile

I have seen the entire M4/A34-M3/A34 slowed for 27 miles because of a
series of lorries playing roadblock.


"Doing the commercial two-step"


I also notice that the stretch the other way (towards the M40) *does*
have restrictions in place to prevent this behaviour. The landscape
geography is no different to the M4-M3 stretch. However David Cameron
does live there ????



--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:22:35 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2017-03-31, Broadback wrote:
[quoted text muted]

If you'd ever sat behind 2 "elephant racing" lorries for mile after mile
after mile

I have seen the entire M4/A34-M3/A34 slowed for 27 miles because of a
series of lorries playing roadblock.

I also notice that the stretch the other way (towards the M40) *does*
have restrictions in place to prevent this behaviour. The landscape
geography is no different to the M4-M3 stretch. However David Cameron
does live there ????

Yes I've been a victim of them on the A34, from M4 J13 (Newbury) to Didcot
many times. It's better now they've brought in the HGV-overtaking ban on
Gore Hill (the steep hill just south of Didcot), but it's still a problem -
mainly because so many HGVs use that route from Southampton to Birmingham.

M1 from M18 to Ferrybridge (start of 3-lane motorway rather than 2-lane
dual-carriageway) is bad too at times.

On 31/03/2017 15:26, NY wrote:
"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:22:35 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2017-03-31, Broadback wrote:
[quoted text muted]

If you'd ever sat behind 2 "elephant racing" lorries for mile after mile
after mile

I have seen the entire M4/A34-M3/A34 slowed for 27 miles because of a
series of lorries playing roadblock.

I also notice that the stretch the other way (towards the M40) *does*
have restrictions in place to prevent this behaviour. The landscape
geography is no different to the M4-M3 stretch. However David Cameron
does live there ????

Yes I've been a victim of them on the A34, from M4 J13 (Newbury) to
Didcot many times. It's better now they've brought in the HGV-overtaking
ban on Gore Hill (the steep hill just south of Didcot), but it's still a
problem - mainly because so many HGVs use that route from Southampton to
Birmingham.

M1 from M18 to Ferrybridge (start of 3-lane motorway rather than 2-lane
dual-carriageway) is bad too at times.

That's such a short section (~ 1 mile?) that it doesn't really make any
difference.

The main problem comes on level sections, where a lorry's speed is
determined by its governor, more or less regardless of the state of
loading. So when one lorry overtakes another, the closing speed is
determined by slight differences in their governor settings - and the
manoeuvre can literally go on for miles.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
M1 from M18 to Ferrybridge (start of 3-lane motorway rather than 2-lane
dual-carriageway) is bad too at times.

That's such a short section (~ 1 mile?) that it doesn't really make any
difference.

No, check a map. It's about 18 miles. Although *some* of the intervening
section is A1(M), which I'd forgotten about, it's still (I'm sure) only 2
lanes.

On 31/03/2017 15:26, NY wrote:

M1 from M18 to Ferrybridge (start of 3-lane motorway rather than 2-lane
dual-carriageway) is bad too at times.

You are correct

I am sure you meant A1 not M1 and some of that section it just good old
fashioned A1 and not A1(M).

Those bad times you mentioned (Northbound) are every Monday to Friday
from 7am to 9am:-)

I can get to Ferrybridge (I work there quite often) faster from
Doncaster via the A630 the M18 and M62.






--
Adam

whisky-dave wrote :
I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing the
rest of the traffic down.

Yes, but only on the up hill stretches. In my opinion the is more
opportunity for lorries to overtake with a better speed differential on
the up hill stretches than on the level or the down hill parts. There
are only two lanes on the M11.

On Friday, 31 March 2017 13:06:37 UTC+1, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
whisky-dave wrote :
I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing the
rest of the traffic down.

Yes, but only on the up hill stretches.

That's why this new rule or law whatever it is only applies to certain sections isn't it ?

This also reminds me of the esculator idea on getting people moving 'faster' by not walking up esculators.


In my opinion the is more
opportunity for lorries to overtake with a better speed differential on
the up hill stretches than on the level or the down hill parts. There
are only two lanes on the M11.

On 31/03/2017 13:06, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
whisky-dave wrote :
I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing
the rest of the traffic down.

Yes, but only on the up hill stretches. In my opinion the is more
opportunity for lorries to overtake with a better speed differential on
the up hill stretches than on the level or the down hill parts. There
are only two lanes on the M11.
Aren't they usually up against the limiter anyway, unless it's a very
steep hill?

On 31/03/17 13:37, Chris Bartram wrote:
On 31/03/2017 13:06, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
whisky-dave wrote :
I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing
the rest of the traffic down.

Yes, but only on the up hill stretches. In my opinion the is more
opportunity for lorries to overtake with a better speed differential on
the up hill stretches than on the level or the down hill parts. There
are only two lanes on the M11.
Aren't they usually up against the limiter anyway, unless it's a very
steep hill?

yes.


--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first centurys developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

On 31/03/2017 14:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/03/17 13:37, Chris Bartram wrote:
On 31/03/2017 13:06, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
whisky-dave wrote :
I thought the idea was to stop lorries over taking each other slowing
the rest of the traffic down.

Yes, but only on the up hill stretches. In my opinion the is more
opportunity for lorries to overtake with a better speed differential on
the up hill stretches than on the level or the down hill parts. There
are only two lanes on the M11.
Aren't they usually up against the limiter anyway, unless it's a very
steep hill?

yes.



No. It doesn't need much of a gradient to slow them down. A heavy
lorry's drag to weight ratio and rolling resistance to weight ratio are
quite low. But add to that a component of the weight as a result of the
slope, and the required tractive effort increases dramatically.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

You might think that but the results of the experiments carried out on the
M11 under an experimental traffic order for 18 months starting 26March
2010 showed that by restricting lorries to the inside lane there was an
increase in traffic flow, less congestion and fewere accidents due to
frustrated car drivers. What I don't understand is why they waited 5 years
before using this knowledge!

Alan

--


Using an ARMX6

On 31/03/17 16:54, Alan Dawes wrote:
In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

You might think that but the results of the experiments carried out on the
M11 under an experimental traffic order for 18 months starting 26March
2010 showed that by restricting lorries to the inside lane there was an
increase in traffic flow, less congestion and fewere accidents due to
frustrated car drivers. What I don't understand is why they waited 5 years
before using this knowledge!

Alan


Sure Belgium has been doing this for years - seemed that way last time I
was there.

And yes, it was incredibly civilised - at least until the R0 ring
outside of Brussels which was slightly mad (but nothing compared to La
Peripherique around Paris which is mental).

Huge wrote:
On 2017-03-31, Tim Watts wrote:

[23 lines snipped]

And yes, it was incredibly civilised - at least until the R0 ring
outside of Brussels which was slightly mad (but nothing compared to La
Peripherique around Paris which is mental).

I used to drive regularly from Port de Bagnolet to Aulnay sous Bois
round the Peripherique and up the A1. The scariest driving experience(s)
I've ever had.



Try the Atlanta ring road in rush hour!

On 31/03/17 17:32, Huge wrote:
On 2017-03-31, Tim Watts wrote:

[23 lines snipped]

And yes, it was incredibly civilised - at least until the R0 ring
outside of Brussels which was slightly mad (but nothing compared to La
Peripherique around Paris which is mental).

I used to drive regularly from Port de Bagnolet to Aulnay sous Bois
round the Peripherique and up the A1. The scariest driving experience(s)
I've ever had.

Scary yes, but not as scary as A7/A12 around Genova.



--
djc

(–€Ì¿Ä¹Ì¯–€Ì¿ Ì¿)
No low-hanging fruit, just a lot of small berries up a tall tree.

On 3/31/2017 5:32 PM, Huge wrote:
On 2017-03-31, Tim Watts wrote:

[23 lines snipped]

And yes, it was incredibly civilised - at least until the R0 ring
outside of Brussels which was slightly mad (but nothing compared to La
Peripherique around Paris which is mental).

I used to drive regularly from Port de Bagnolet to Aulnay sous Bois
round the Peripherique and up the A1. The scariest driving experience(s)
I've ever had.


Brussels ring road, 70's, lane 3 of four on an embankment without a
crash barrier, a wagon in lane 2 flipped a metal structure into my lane
giving me a fast front puncture on cross-plies (and a slow rear
puncture, as it turned out). That was fun for a moment.

They had that on the A20 coming out of Dover but as there are no police to enforce it the drivers just ignored it and sat beside each other going up the hill.

On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 16:09:55 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
wrote:



I have a vague memory that there was an earlier experiment on the M42
past the NEC/M6 junction.

There's still a short section on the A42 section Northbound just
before Ashby. Works well until the lorries are allowed to overtake
again.

--
AnthonyL

AnthonyL wrote:

There's still a short section on the A42 section Northbound just
before Ashby. Works well until the lorries are allowed to overtake
again.

Also the western end of the A14, but only certain times of day

On 31/03/2017 20:27, Andy Burns wrote:
AnthonyL wrote:

There's still a short section on the A42 section Northbound just
before Ashby. Works well until the lorries are allowed to overtake
again.

Also the western end of the A14, but only certain times of day


What happened to the caravans must keep to left hand lane on the M5?

Just after Gordano services ISTR.

--
Adam

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.

good

'bout bloody time

Surely that is the wrong?

Nope

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able to
do a similar speed.

The lorries that are in the right hand lane clog it up so that all of the
traffic is forced to trundle along at 65 mph for mile after mile after mile

I once sat in the left hand lane all the way and timed how long it took,
compared with another trip where I sat in the right hand lane behind the
string of overtaking lorries

and from J9 (where the A10 joins) to J8 (where it goes to 3 lanes) the
difference was 90 seconds.

ISTM that a rule that lets the cars zoom past uninhibited is worth asking
the lorries to suffer an extra 90 seconds on their journey time

tim

On 31/03/2017 17:56, tim... wrote:

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be
able to do a similar speed.

The lorries that are in the right hand lane clog it up so that all of
the traffic is forced to trundle along at 65 mph for mile after mile
after mile

You're lucky that they are speeding.

On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
..... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

--

Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

On 02/04/2017 10:17, Fredxxx wrote:
On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be able
to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

Not a bad idea but there is the money aspect. Plus the tree huggers will
whine. Certainly the motorways in France often have 'crawler' lanes on
key stretches on long inclines etc.



--

Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

On 03/04/2017 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 10:17:09 +0100, Fredxxx wrote:

On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be
able to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary
delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

Building extra roads creates traffic. Look how all new roads have just
filled up. The M25 was expanded massively.

With a matching increase in productivity.

On 3 Apr 2017 11:16:51 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2017-04-03, Fredxxx wrote:
On 03/04/2017 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

[27 lines snipped]

Building extra roads creates traffic.

Untrue.


Of course it's true. Before we had roads there was no traffic.

Think about it.

--
AnthonyL

On Tue, 04 Apr 2017 13:08:09 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , AnthonyL
wrote:

On 3 Apr 2017 11:16:51 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2017-04-03, Fredxxx wrote:
On 03/04/2017 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

[27 lines snipped]

Building extra roads creates traffic.

Untrue.


Of course it's true. Before we had roads there was no traffic.

Think about it.

Yes there was and you are a troll.


What traffic, people walking through the forest?

You've missed the point and you've missed the point of roads.

There are journeys made now that wouldn't have been made if the roads
weren't there. I certainly think nothing of going to see someone 100
miles away that when I started driving would have been a two day trip
to make it worthwhile.

The whole idea of roads is to carry traffic and just about every time
a new route is opened or improved then new traffic will find its way
there.

The A42/M42 when first opened was quiet. I could traverse its length
M1 to M5 in around 40-45 mins on runs down to Exeter early in the
morning, a business run that 50 years ago couldn't be reasonably done
in a day.

The reason that we still keep getting traffic flow issues is not the
building of the roads, its that we're simply not keeping up with the
demand that is there, so by the time a road is built, or expanded, the
pressure has reformed.

--
AnthonyL

On 03-Apr-17 10:17 AM, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 10:17:09 +0100, Fredxxx wrote:

On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be
able to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary
delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

Building extra roads creates traffic. Look how all new roads have just
filled up. The M25 was expanded massively - not that you'd know. Smart
motorways have added an extra lane and now *they* are already at capacity.

Building new roads or improving existing ones does not magically create
traffic that did not exist before. It may, however, attract traffic from
other routes and that is often the purpose of the new roads. The Western
section of the M25 is a particular example of this happening, although
to a greater degree than anybody first expected. I suspect that the
answer there would be to follow part of the original ringway plan and
build another motorway well outside it, with limited access to other
motorways only. That would then serve the purpose of allowing through
traffic to avoid London, without the road becoming a commuter route.

We'd be better off making better use of what we have:

1) start with getting used to staggered hours, so roads are evenly used

An idea that has never caught on and is unlikely to do so now.

2) Higher standards of driving for motorways - or an additional licence.

Motorways are the safest roads in Britain. We need to encourage people
to use them, not to provide a disincentive.

3) Enforcing minimum speed limits

Too many problems with minimum speed limits for them to be used except
in very specific cases, usually tunnels.

4) Re-tune traffic junctions signals to assist, not impede traffic flow...

Oddly enough, if you read the many pages of guidance on how to design
light controlled junctions, that is exactly what they are supposed to
do. Of course, it may not always be the road you happen to be on that
they are optimised for.



--
--

Colin Bignell

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
4) Re-tune traffic junctions signals to assist, not impede traffic
flow...

Oddly enough, if you read the many pages of guidance on how to design
light controlled junctions, that is exactly what they are supposed to do.
Of course, it may not always be the road you happen to be on that they are
optimised for.

One of the problems with traffic light junctions is the hours that they
work. When traffic is busy, lights are essential to give everyone their turn
to access the roundabout or cross roads, without a heavy stream of traffic
in one direction permanently denying access to the stream to its left. But
at quiet times they cause traffic to stop unnecessarily when it is obvious
that there is no other traffic that you need to give way to.

The other problem is traffic lights which are not properly phased so each
stream of traffic that enters the roundabout has access right off the
roundabout in whichever direction it wants to go, without having to
"ratchet" around the roundabout, passing one exit on each phase of the
lights.

The thing that really kills a junction is when traffic which has just left
the junction builds up on one of the exit roads, maybe because of another
set of lights further up the road. You find that one stream of traffic fills
up the road ahead when it has its turn through the lights, then the lights
allow traffic from another direction to access the junction, but it can't
enter the junction (if it's a box junction) because its exit is blocked by
the queue of traffic. That means that traffic from one direction never gets
its chance because its green-light phase is "wasted" because it always
corresponds to the time when the exit is queued back to the junction.

NY wrote:
"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
4) Re-tune traffic junctions signals to assist, not impede traffic
flow...

Oddly enough, if you read the many pages of guidance on how to design
light controlled junctions, that is exactly what they are supposed to do.
Of course, it may not always be the road you happen to be on that they are
optimised for.

One of the problems with traffic light junctions is the hours that they
work. When traffic is busy, lights are essential to give everyone their turn
to access the roundabout or cross roads, without a heavy stream of traffic
in one direction permanently denying access to the stream to its left. But
at quiet times they cause traffic to stop unnecessarily when it is obvious
that there is no other traffic that you need to give way to.

Many countries in Europe (and elsewhere?) turn the lights to 'flashing
orange' in all directions to handle this.

--
Chris Green
·

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 03-Apr-17 10:17 AM, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 10:17:09 +0100, Fredxxx wrote:

On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be
able to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary
delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

Building extra roads creates traffic. Look how all new roads have just
filled up. The M25 was expanded massively - not that you'd know. Smart
motorways have added an extra lane and now *they* are already at
capacity.

Building new roads or improving existing ones does not magically create
traffic that did not exist before.

Oh it certainly does

people who used not to be able to make a specific journey to a job 10-20
miles away because the local route was too heavily congested have now been
provide with a way to make that journey.

This is especially true of the M25. I know someone who commuted from Harlow
to Gatwick every day - that would have been impossible without the M25
meaning that when his job relocated he would have had to move (and his wife
would have had to give up her job)

It may, however, attract traffic from other routes and that is often the
purpose of the new roads. The Western section of the M25 is a particular
example of this happening, although to a greater degree than anybody first
expected. I suspect that the answer there would be to follow part of the
original ringway plan and build another motorway well outside it, with
limited access to other motorways only. That would then serve the purpose
of allowing through traffic to avoid London, without the road becoming a
commuter route.


The problem with only having junctions at the motorways so that they don't
because a commuter route is that you are then denying locals the opportunity
to join the motorway for their long" journey

take a simple example of the original plan for the A329(M) which was to link
up with the M3 (and possibly beyond). Would it really be sensible to build
this road without providing an access for Bracknell?

tim... wrote:


"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 03-Apr-17 10:17 AM, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 10:17:09 +0100, Fredxxx wrote:

On 02/04/2017 09:23, Brian Reay wrote:
On 31/03/2017 12:24, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
They are bring in an overtaking ban, on the M11 up hill stretches.
Surely that is the wrong?

An heavily laden lorry versus a lightly loaded one, will make for a
quicker overtake on an uphill, because the heavily laden one will
slow
down. On the downhill parts, the advantage is gone and all will be
able to do a similar speed.

Discuss..


Long overdue.

Lorries overtaking and taking forever to do it cause unnecessary
delays.

Tougher rules for lorries are long over due- minimum spacing,
overtaking, allowing vehicles to pass, limit days they can use roads,
.... Before people scream they aren't practical, they work in other
countries.

Perhaps we should have an extra lane on the affected stretches, to
match
the increase in population over the past 10 years?

Building extra roads creates traffic. Look how all new roads have just
filled up. The M25 was expanded massively - not that you'd know. Smart
motorways have added an extra lane and now *they* are already at
capacity.

Building new roads or improving existing ones does not magically
create traffic that did not exist before.

Oh it certainly does

people who used not to be able to make a specific journey to a job 10-20
miles away because the local route was too heavily congested have now
been provide with a way to make that journey.

This is especially true of the M25. I know someone who commuted from
Harlow to Gatwick every day - that would have been impossible without
the M25 meaning that when his job relocated he would have had to move
(and his wife would have had to give up her job)

It may, however, attract traffic from other routes and that is often
the purpose of the new roads. The Western section of the M25 is a
particular example of this happening, although to a greater degree
than anybody first expected. I suspect that the answer there would be
to follow part of the original ringway plan and build another motorway
well outside it, with limited access to other motorways only. That
would then serve the purpose of allowing through traffic to avoid
London, without the road becoming a commuter route.


The problem with only having junctions at the motorways so that they
don't because a commuter route is that you are then denying locals the
opportunity to join the motorway for their long" journey

take a simple example of the original plan for the A329(M) which was to
link up with the M3 (and possibly beyond). Would it really be sensible
to build this road without providing an access for Bracknell?



Having commuted from Gravesend to Wembley every day, before the M25 I
can assure you that it quite possible to go through central London
without significant problems. So your Gatwick example is invalid.