![]() |
Right hand traffic (was London Squares)
In article , tim
[snip] the second lane. Between Junction 11 (Chertsey) and Junction 12 (M3) only vehicles wanting to leave on the M3 are usually to be found in the nearside lane, because it is a short distance. The advantage is that it gives vehicles a much better chance of getting into the exit lane well in advance of the junction, and stops much of the last-minute darting for the exit that you find elsewhere. But this isn't why it is like that. It is because when they widened to 4 lanes it was too expensive to rebuild the junction so the extra lane was only built between the junctions. As you say it works well, but I don't think that they often do it that way by design. The motorways in Washington New Town (was County Durham, now Tyne & Wear) are all like that. It is obviously planned like that. It works well, as it should. Michael Bell -- |
Right hand traffic (was London Squares)
"Michael Bell" wrote in message
... In article , tim But this isn't why [M25 between A3 and M4] is like that. It is because when they widened to 4 lanes it was too expensive to rebuild the junction so the extra lane was only built between the junctions. As you say it works well, but I don't think that they often do it that way by design. The motorways in Washington New Town (was County Durham, now Tyne & Wear) are all like that. It is obviously planned like that. It works well, as it should. I believe that the North Circular was planned and built like that from Hale End Rd to Palmers Green, and I know that the scrapped plan for Palmers Green to Bound Green Road inclusive was also like that (2+2 lanes through junctions and 3+3 between them). -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
London Squares
Terry Harper wrote:
"Arthur Figgis" ] wrote in message ... On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:19:51 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper" wrote: Nigeria made the change, and lorries and buses changed first, then cars a few days later. They did however keep cars off the road for those few days.... But they must have a horrendous road safety record there, given the number of widows and orphans who e-mail me details of millionaire TOP OFFICIALs who have died in TRAGIC AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTs. They did, and probably still do. Playing chicken with heavy trucks on a single lane road doesn't work, and the result is usually an overturned car on the hard shoulder. Probably makes running a scam preferable to driving a car for a living:-) Surely you mean the verge? If there were a hard shoulder then they'd be stupid not to redesignate it "road" to avoid the problem. And UIVMM most of the roads around there are unsealed anyway, so the same would apply to a soft shoulder. |
Right hand traffic
Neil Williams wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:47:21 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper" wrote: Really the answer is to provide an extra lane between junctions, so that there is never any need to merge off a slip road. I don't like that when driving a slower vehicle (e.g. a minibus) because it means you are forever moving back and forth. Only if you stick to the extra lane. I think most lorry drivers would probably agree - unless such lanes were permanently marked with dotted lines to be for turning vehicles only. They do a similar thing on the A2 between Falconwood and Dartford. The leftmost lane was designated "local traffic only" and apart from buses, all vehicles in it had to leave at the next junction. The rules were relaxed slightly when they found that traffic wasn't always able to merge, and the roundabouts near the Danson Underpass could not cope with the traffic volume, so some people were driving the wrong way down a one way street in order to avoid the jams. The lane is still "local traffic only" but it no longer all has to leave at the next exit. The solution is just to have a slip road such that the slowest-accelerating vehicle you're likely to get on a motorway (say, an oldish, heavily-laden lorry) can accelerate safely to the prevailing speed of the inside lane (let's say 60mph or so) without going absolutely flat out. There is no single solution - different locations have different constraints. That would probably, I'd say, involve doubling the length of a good proportion of existing sliproads with an upwards slope to motorway level (the downward ones obviously assisting with acceleration), and tripling the length of all sliproads which have a give way just before the motorway is met (such as older services stations). Planning the merge would also be easier with a longer period alongside the motorway itself. To merge traffic safely on the motorway, drivers (even of slower vehicles) shouldn't need to be slamming through their gears attempting to accelerate to the prevailing speed when they should be already thinking about the actual merge. Even with a decent length to do it, merging can be a problem. |
Right hand traffic
|
London Squares
"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message
... Terry Harper wrote: They did, and probably still do. Playing chicken with heavy trucks on a single lane road doesn't work, and the result is usually an overturned car on the hard shoulder. Probably makes running a scam preferable to driving a car for a living:-) Surely you mean the verge? If there were a hard shoulder then they'd be stupid not to redesignate it "road" to avoid the problem. And UIVMM most of the roads around there are unsealed anyway, so the same would apply to a soft shoulder. Delete the word "hard":-) There was usually a coating of tarmac on some of the laterite. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society Web Site: http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
Right hand traffic
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
... On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:11:33 +1030, (Aidan Stanger) wrote: I don't like that when driving a slower vehicle (e.g. a minibus) because it means you are forever moving back and forth. Only if you stick to the extra lane. Which, if it is marked as a normal lane and not a sliproad, you are supposed to do. The designation you suggest, or just marking it as a sliproad throughout, would of course solve this. Even with a decent length to do it, merging can be a problem. Oh, indeed. It's just much more difficult if you're still thinking about acceleration by the time you should be braking slightly to match speed and slot in because the sliproad is *far* too short. The usual practice seems to be to mark the slip lane with long-dash markers for the last half mile or so before and after the junction. Where you have junctions close together, like on the M25 near Heathrow, the long-dash lane separator extends virtually between the junctions. Once you are in that lane, you are effectively committed to exiting. I recall one road on the outskirts of Pittsburgh, where the signs say "Right Lane Must Exit", and they mean it. There are traffic signals on the through lanes, and no way to merge back in. It's about a 10-mile diversion, I believe. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society Web Site: http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
London Squares
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk