The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.
There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).
Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.
orudge wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 13:06
There's some fairly shaky helicopter footage of the southern section of the AWPR here, along with some high-res aerial photos (such as this one of the next roads.org.uk Bad Junctions entry!)
That's the junction at Stonehaven??? So northbound traffic has to cross southbound traffic? Isn't that going to be chaos from the minute it opens? And there was me thinking Scotland had it's head screwed on re infrastructure
My money is on they paid the same numpty who thought the exact same crossing of flows at M40 J10 was a solid concept...
Which particular one of the cr*p versions of J10? Yes, I can take a random pick; it's still an embarrassment to road designers and a PiTA for road users, as we approach what is probably the 30th anniversary of the first M40j10 design workshop)
My sympathies to Aberdonians; but hey, what a great cycle route!
Mike Hindson-Evans. Never argue with a conspiracy theorist.
They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
That's the junction at Stonehaven??? So northbound traffic has to cross southbound traffic? Isn't that going to be chaos from the minute it opens? And there was me thinking Scotland had it's head screwed on re infrastructure
My money is on they paid the same numpty who thought the exact same crossing of flows at M40 J10 was a solid concept...
Which particular one of the cr*p versions of J10? Yes, I can take a random pick; it's still an embarrassment to road designers and a PiTA for road users, as we approach what is probably the 30th anniversary of the first M40j10 design workshop)
My sympathies to Aberdonians; but hey, what a great cycle route!
I'm sure that a few weeks ago there was considerable criticism from cyclists over a lack of cycling provisions on the new road. On top of that, there were objections to NCN195 between Aberdeen and Ballater being cut off where it crosses the bypass at Milltimber.
Glen wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:08
South end of the Fastlink and Stonehaven junction
More crap signs. White panels on primary flag signs and a mix of primary/non-primary colours on a single arm of a roundabout sign. Is Bryn the last person working in highway engineering who can actually produce TSRGD-compliant designs? No road project seems to be able to employ anyone with half a clue about TSM chapter 7.
Whoever designed that white–background roundabout sign on the B979 approach is obviously someone from the old school, and NO it is not correct!
The correct method is to make the flag sign all green with "Stonehaven" on white and "B979" in yellow, bracketed, the same being on the green A90 panel for Perth/Dundee off the right–hand arm!
In the old days pre–1994 regs, that was the correct way of showing additional routes "led to" from the main signed primary route.
For example, approaching Hardwick Roundabout from King's Lynn, you would have the RH–most exit to the A47 west with "Swaffham" in black on white and "A47" in yellow on a small rectangular patch, then you'd have "Sleaford (A17)", " Boston (A16)" etc., entirely in black on white.
Incidentally rounded rectangular number–patches were a 1994 TSRGD. introduction I believe!
SteveA30 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 09:28
Why this peculiar obsession that rbts have to be a perfect circle? Are they designed only by computer with no human involvement?
There are so many examples of older rbts designed for the specific location, resulting in ovals, pear shaped, teardrop, rectangular with gentle corner curves. and so on.
There are some situations where a non-circular roundabout might be the most appropriate, but generally that isn't the case. The key point to safe roads is – as far as possible – to have curves of constant radius. This applies to main carriageways and connecting/link roads as well as roundabouts. The more that drivers have to change their angle of steer, the more likely they are to leave their lane and potentially come into conflict with other drivers. A "running track oval" (I can't find the mathematical name for the shape, but you know what I mean!) is a good compromise for roundabout interchanges or where an elongated shape is needed, because the curved sections do indeed have constant radius.
Where it then goes slightly pear-shaped (appropriately) is when the lanes on the roundabout don't have constant radius. On some roundabouts where spiralling lanes have been used but where the lanes are tight, this can lead to lanes being kinked and this means drivers find it harder to stick in their lane. This can be exacerbated when the circulatory carriageway is not completely flat, and so changes in vertical deflection combine with an irregular horizontal path combine to throw drivers off course.
Burns wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 20:00Is that where some people walked and cycled over the road?
I don't think so, I think the event was just from Milltimber to Cleanhill and back, so I don't know why bits have been resurfaced there.
It wouldn't surprise me if the damage had nothing to do with the event and was caused by some other silly reason, like maybe a subcontractor was doing some work and they put some plant on the road because nobody told them not to.
SteveA30 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 09:28
Why this peculiar obsession that rbts have to be a perfect circle? Are they designed only by computer with no human involvement?
There are so many examples of older rbts designed for the specific location, resulting in ovals, pear shaped, teardrop, rectangular with gentle corner curves. and so on.
There are some situations where a non-circular roundabout might be the most appropriate, but generally that isn't the case. The key point to safe roads is – as far as possible – to have curves of constant radius. This applies to main carriageways and connecting/link roads as well as roundabouts. The more that drivers have to change their angle of steer, the more likely they are to leave their lane and potentially come into conflict with other drivers. A "running track oval" (I can't find the mathematical name for the shape, but you know what I mean!) is a good compromise for roundabout interchanges or where an elongated shape is needed, because the curved sections do indeed have constant radius.
Where it then goes slightly pear-shaped (appropriately) is when the lanes on the roundabout don't have constant radius. On some roundabouts where spiralling lanes have been used but where the lanes are tight, this can lead to lanes being kinked and this means drivers find it harder to stick in their lane. This can be exacerbated when the circulatory carriageway is not completely flat, and so changes in vertical deflection combine with an irregular horizontal path combine to throw drivers off course.
Design standards don't allow non-standard roundabout shapes any more. They are effectively classed as gyratory systems and have different geometry requirements which all but makes them impossible to get approval for.
Without sounding like a stuck record it's this sort of inflexibility in DMRB that causes us to build rubbish like Stonehaven Junction. I can only imagine that with the LTC the standards went out the window and numerous departures were agreed prior to design.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Mike Rumbles (North East Scotland) (Scottish Liberal Democrats): To
ask the Scottish Government how much resurfacing work is required on the
Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route (AWPR), and whether this will delay the
opening of the road to traffic.
(S5W-19061)
Michael Matheson: As part of the robust quality management system on
AWPR, a number of minor defects have been identified in the surfacing. This
is not unusual in projects of this nature and the repairs will be undertaken by
the contractor at no cost to the public purse. Keith Brown MSP, the then
Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Jobs and Fair Work, updated the REC
Committee in March 2018 updating them on project progress and indicating
that the road would open in late Autumn and I am pleased to say the
contractor remains on target to do so.
A north-east politician has claimed that senior sources within the AWPR project have revealed unresolved red tape has delayed the opening.
But last night, Transport Scotland dismissed the claims as “absolute nonsense” and said the road would be opened as soon as possible.
There has been widespread criticism of roads bosses for not “coming clean” on why the project has been delayed.
The 28-mile route has yet to be fully opened despite multiple stretches appearing to be in perfect condition.
Now MP Andrew Bowie has claimed several sources – including a senior member of the project team – have told him that Transport Scotland has failed to get the opening legal approval, leaving motorists in limbo.
The West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine representative said: “People across the north-east have waited decades for this road and have put up with years of disruption during construction.
As the project inches towards completion, it seems odd that Transport Scotland and the SNP government are so reluctant to set a date for opening.
I have been informed now by several sources that the root of the problem is that legal paperwork has not been completed by Transport Scotland to allow competed sections to open.
In fact, I have been told that the route – bar the River Don bridge – has been ready for several weeks now. If this is correct, then Transport Scotland and the SNP have some explaining to do.”...
A spokesman for Transport Scotland said: “This is absolute nonsense. Transport Scotland is doing everything possible to ensure the new road opens at the earliest opportunity.
We have investigated the potential to open the 31.5km (19 mile) section of new road from Craibstone to Stonehaven and Charleston as soon as possible, while remedial work at the Don progresses.
Discussions have taken place with ARL and they are currently progressing this matter through the necessary governance channels within their organisations. It is right and important that ARL considers this matter carefully, but we have urged them to conclude their deliberations swiftly so the people of the north east can start to benefit from the new road as soon as possible.”
So that sounds like my scenario 1 is still on the table... a split in the Phasing to allow early opening without Substantial Completion of Phase 3.
The Craibstone Junctions has had temporary traffic management in place for some time now with the lanes coned off, markings blacked out and temporary studs ready to open the road south of there.
So it looks like it has been the plan for to get everything except Craibstone to Goval open.
Jamie Greene (West Scotland) (Scottish Conservative and Unionist
Party): To ask the Scottish Government what impact the reported pay
disputes between Transport Scotland and the contractor are having on the
opening of the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route (AWPR).
(S5W-19119)
Michael Matheson: There are no disputes impacting on the opening of the
Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route (AWPR). While Aberdeen Roads Limited
(ARL) reports that the project is on target to open in late autumn 2018, they
are unable to estimate a precise opening date while remedial work continues
at the River Don Crossing.
Construction issues such as that experienced on the structure over the Don
are regrettable but not unusual on a project of this scale and complexity.
These defects must be taken seriously, investigated thoroughly and remedied
appropriately. The cost of these repairs will be borne by the contractor and the
public purse will not be impacted by this work, as payment is made as
sections of the road become available for traffic.
I understand and share the public frustration that the road has not yet opened,
and can confirm that Transport Scotland is doing everything possible to
deliver the benefits of the new road at the earliest opportunity, once the
outstanding repairs are properly completed.
I have instructed Transport Scotland to investigate the potential to open the
31.5km section of new road from Craibstone to Stonehaven and Charleston
as soon as possible, while remedial work at the Don progresses. Discussions
have taken place with ARL and they are currently progressing this matter
through the necessary governance channels within their organisations. It is
right and important that ARL considers this matter carefully; but I urge them to
conclude their deliberations swiftly so the people of the north east can start to
benefit from the new road as soon as possible.
The speed limit signs are right in the middle of a crossover where the central reservation is surfaced and the barrier is removable blocks.
I wonder if someone is hastily amending the speed limit orders so the signs can be moved.
