A1(M) Leeming - Barton

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.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by A9NWIL »

NICK 647063 wrote:
In the current situation I'm not sure renumbering north of Hook Moor as the M1 would be a good idea– generally motorway numbers should be used for routes that might be used as through routes, but the M1 wouldn't be a viable through route– using the M1 between Hook Moor and J32 is much slower than using the A1(M)/M18.
But let’s be honest it’s not like the M1 ends in Leeds anymore it already bends east to join the A1(M), so in your vision it already fails, the fact is even some of us use the M18 route and A1 Highways England always state this completes the motorway link from London to Newcastle via the M1 and A1(M), I really think the A1 north of hook Moor should be the M1.

It’s good news another section is opening hopefully the rest in March as stated.
It would also take the record for the UK's longest motorway at 447km long! Beeting the M6 at 388km unless that took over the A74(M) and M74 to become 526km long! But if the M1 was taken all the way to Edinburgh, along the A1(M) route, it would be 640km long!
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Stevie D »

6637 wrote:In hindsight I think the problem is that too few junctions were put in.

The junctionless stretch from J50 to J51 is very long, and a junction for the B6267 would have been very useful. Firstly for traffic from Thirsk wanting to go to the A1(M) north (this traffic currently has to either use the LAR for the long distance to J51 or take a detour south to J50). And secondly for traffic from Masham and Bedale wanting to access the A1(M) southbound, a junction there would have been useful. I have no idea why they decided against a junction for the B6267– sure, it's not necessary due to the LAR, but it would have been helpful and at little extra cost.
There really is no need for a junction with B6267. For traffic between Thirsk and The North, it involves travelling 7 miles along the LAR, where you can legally and easily maintain a steady 60mph apart from two roundabouts along the way. That means that it costs about 80–90 seconds compared with having a junction for B6267. But depending on where in Thirsk you are travelling to/from, even with the extra junction it might still be slower than the route via A168 and Dishforth interchange, because the A61 heading out of Thirsk and through Skipton-on-Swale is such a poor road.

Thirsk is a small town. It already has connections to the A1(M) North via A168 at Dishforth, A61 at Baldersby, and B6267/A6055 at Leeming Bar. That is perfectly sufficient. Similarly, the existing arrangements for traffic between Bedale or Masham and The South, via A684 or A6055, are completely adequate for the volume of traffic. Putting in an extra junction for such a tiny volume of traffic is totally unnecessary, especially when there is an NSL LAR running alongside it.
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Osthagen »

NICK 647063 wrote:
But let’s be honest it’s not like the M1 ends in Leeds anymore it already bends east to join the A1(M), so in your vision it already fails, the fact is even some of us use the M18 route and A1 Highways England always state this completes the motorway link from London to Newcastle via the M1 and A1(M), I really think the A1 north of hook Moor should be the M1.
Extend the M1 to the North East, yes. But north of J32, I’d divert it along the M18 and then up the A1(M) to Gateshead. Renumber the remaining 40-odd miles of M1 between Aberford and Thurcroft with an M6x number (M63, M64 and M68 are available).

Reason for sending the M1 up the M18 between Thurcroft and Doncaster is that, for traffic from the North East to London (and vice versa), A1-M18-M1 is at least ten minutes quicker than A1-M1.
"I see the face of a child. He lives in a great city. He is black. Or he is white. He is Mexican, Italian, Polish. None of that matters. What matters, he's an American child"
- Richard Nixon
User avatar
Mark Hewitt
Member
Posts: 31412
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:54
Location: Chester-le-Street

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Mark Hewitt »

McNessA720 wrote:
NICK 647063 wrote:
But let’s be honest it’s not like the M1 ends in Leeds anymore it already bends east to join the A1(M), so in your vision it already fails, the fact is even some of us use the M18 route and A1 Highways England always state this completes the motorway link from London to Newcastle via the M1 and A1(M), I really think the A1 north of hook Moor should be the M1.
Extend the M1 to the North East, yes. But north of J32, I’d divert it along the M18 and then up the A1(M) to Gateshead. Renumber the remaining 40-odd miles of M1 between Aberford and Thurcroft with an M6x number (M63, M64 and M68 are available).

Reason for sending the M1 up the M18 between Thurcroft and Doncaster is that, for traffic from the North East to London (and vice versa), A1-M18-M1 is at least ten minutes quicker than A1-M1.
It is and is often less congested than the M1 route which can often be at a standstill whereas the A1 is busy but moving.
DavidBrown
Member
Posts: 8398
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 00:35

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by DavidBrown »

Stevie D wrote:
6637 wrote:In hindsight I think the problem is that too few junctions were put in.

The junctionless stretch from J50 to J51 is very long, and a junction for the B6267 would have been very useful. Firstly for traffic from Thirsk wanting to go to the A1(M) north (this traffic currently has to either use the LAR for the long distance to J51 or take a detour south to J50). And secondly for traffic from Masham and Bedale wanting to access the A1(M) southbound, a junction there would have been useful. I have no idea why they decided against a junction for the B6267– sure, it's not necessary due to the LAR, but it would have been helpful and at little extra cost.
There really is no need for a junction with B6267. For traffic between Thirsk and The North, it involves travelling 7 miles along the LAR, where you can legally and easily maintain a steady 60mph apart from two roundabouts along the way. That means that it costs about 80–90 seconds compared with having a junction for B6267. But depending on where in Thirsk you are travelling to/from, even with the extra junction it might still be slower than the route via A168 and Dishforth interchange, because the A61 heading out of Thirsk and through Skipton-on-Swale is such a poor road.

Thirsk is a small town. It already has connections to the A1(M) North via A168 at Dishforth, A61 at Baldersby, and B6267/A6055 at Leeming Bar. That is perfectly sufficient. Similarly, the existing arrangements for traffic between Bedale or Masham and The South, via A684 or A6055, are completely adequate for the volume of traffic. Putting in an extra junction for such a tiny volume of traffic is totally unnecessary, especially when there is an NSL LAR running alongside it.
To be fair, I personally don't think the A61's that bad - the worst bit is the lights at Skipton-on-Swale, which if coming from Thirsk are just before the B6267 anyway. But having done that journey thousands of times as a youngster, I agree that the LAR is more than sufficient. Also don't forget that, depending on where up north they're going, the A19 is right on their doorstep. When we lived in Thirsk and had a holiday home in Northumberland, we'd always check Teletext traffic to see if the A1 or A19 was the better option that Friday evening!
Altnabreac
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:50

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Altnabreac »

Stevie D wrote:
6637 wrote:In hindsight I think the problem is that too few junctions were put in.

The junctionless stretch from J50 to J51 is very long, and a junction for the B6267 would have been very useful. Firstly for traffic from Thirsk wanting to go to the A1(M) north (this traffic currently has to either use the LAR for the long distance to J51 or take a detour south to J50). And secondly for traffic from Masham and Bedale wanting to access the A1(M) southbound, a junction there would have been useful. I have no idea why they decided against a junction for the B6267– sure, it's not necessary due to the LAR, but it would have been helpful and at little extra cost.
There really is no need for a junction with B6267. For traffic between Thirsk and The North, it involves travelling 7 miles along the LAR, where you can legally and easily maintain a steady 60mph apart from two roundabouts along the way. That means that it costs about 80–90 seconds compared with having a junction for B6267. But depending on where in Thirsk you are travelling to/from, even with the extra junction it might still be slower than the route via A168 and Dishforth interchange, because the A61 heading out of Thirsk and through Skipton-on-Swale is such a poor road.

Thirsk is a small town. It already has connections to the A1(M) North via A168 at Dishforth, A61 at Baldersby, and B6267/A6055 at Leeming Bar. That is perfectly sufficient. Similarly, the existing arrangements for traffic between Bedale or Masham and The South, via A684 or A6055, are completely adequate for the volume of traffic. Putting in an extra junction for such a tiny volume of traffic is totally unnecessary, especially when there is an NSL LAR running alongside it.
What's the signed route to Lightwater Valley from the north these days? it always used to be exit at B6267 and go via B6267, Moor Lane and then join A6108 at West Tanfield.

But now there is a choice of B6268 via Bedale and Masham, LAR to B6267 or continue to J50 and go via Ripon. Google reckons all are much of a muchness time wise.
NICK 647063
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 17:48
Location: Leeds

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by NICK 647063 »

If I remember correctly lightwater valley is signed via J50, I do agree with above comments about no need for another junction as the LAR is perfectly good enough but I must admit I always now just use the A168 to dishforth then A1(M) north from Thirsk it’s far quicker than the poor quality A61.

On another note noticed today that all the 50 signs along the section north of Catterick now have the speed camera symbol covered by a yellow patch although all the cameras have now been removed with only the ones on the section around Catterick remaining, also a sign on the A1 south slip at Scotch corner reads “motorway restrictions come into force on 26th February” as was stated by people yesterday.
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by A9NWIL »

McNessA720 wrote:
NICK 647063 wrote:
But let’s be honest it’s not like the M1 ends in Leeds anymore it already bends east to join the A1(M), so in your vision it already fails, the fact is even some of us use the M18 route and A1 Highways England always state this completes the motorway link from London to Newcastle via the M1 and A1(M), I really think the A1 north of hook Moor should be the M1.
Extend the M1 to the North East, yes. But north of J32, I’d divert it along the M18 and then up the A1(M) to Gateshead. Renumber the remaining 40-odd miles of M1 between Aberford and Thurcroft with an M6x number (M63, M64 and M68 are available).

Reason for sending the M1 up the M18 between Thurcroft and Doncaster is that, for traffic from the North East to London (and vice versa), A1-M18-M1 is at least ten minutes quicker than A1-M1.
In that case there needs to be a new section that cuts the corner quite dramatically between the M18 and current line of A1/A1(M) between Doncaster and Ferrybridge. Also the bits of M18 and A1/A1(M) used need to become D4M or at least D3M. The current A1(M)/M1 merge point would need a change of priorities too.
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Osthagen »

lotrjw wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:
NICK 647063 wrote:
But let’s be honest it’s not like the M1 ends in Leeds anymore it already bends east to join the A1(M), so in your vision it already fails, the fact is even some of us use the M18 route and A1 Highways England always state this completes the motorway link from London to Newcastle via the M1 and A1(M), I really think the A1 north of hook Moor should be the M1.
Extend the M1 to the North East, yes. But north of J32, I’d divert it along the M18 and then up the A1(M) to Gateshead. Renumber the remaining 40-odd miles of M1 between Aberford and Thurcroft with an M6x number (M63, M64 and M68 are available).

Reason for sending the M1 up the M18 between Thurcroft and Doncaster is that, for traffic from the North East to London (and vice versa), A1-M18-M1 is at least ten minutes quicker than A1-M1.
In that case there needs to be a new section that cuts the corner quite dramatically between the M18 and current line of A1/A1(M) between Doncaster and Ferrybridge. Also the bits of M18 and A1/A1(M) used need to become D4M or at least D3M. The current A1(M)/M1 merge point would need a change of priorities too.
Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
"I see the face of a child. He lives in a great city. He is black. Or he is white. He is Mexican, Italian, Polish. None of that matters. What matters, he's an American child"
- Richard Nixon
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by A9NWIL »

McNessA720 wrote:
lotrjw wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:
Extend the M1 to the North East, yes. But north of J32, I’d divert it along the M18 and then up the A1(M) to Gateshead. Renumber the remaining 40-odd miles of M1 between Aberford and Thurcroft with an M6x number (M63, M64 and M68 are available).

Reason for sending the M1 up the M18 between Thurcroft and Doncaster is that, for traffic from the North East to London (and vice versa), A1-M18-M1 is at least ten minutes quicker than A1-M1.
In that case there needs to be a new section that cuts the corner quite dramatically between the M18 and current line of A1/A1(M) between Doncaster and Ferrybridge. Also the bits of M18 and A1/A1(M) used need to become D4M or at least D3M. The current A1(M)/M1 merge point would need a change of priorities too.
Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
The current A1(M)/M18 junction isnt the best for freeflow between the A1/A1(M) north and the M18 west, being a roundabout junction. I havent driven it at rush hour but I can imagine it getting very busy.
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Stevie D »

McNessA720 wrote:Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
The A1(M) Doncaster By-pass is a horrendous bit of road. It's only 2 lanes each way, the alignment is poor, and the intermediate junctions with A630 and A635 are very low capacity with substandard slip-roads. The road is frequently congested due to sheer volume of traffic. The roundabout interchange between A1(M) and M18 regularly suffers from long queues in all directions. And that's the good bit ... the A1 between Doncaster and Ferrybridge is seriously dangerous, it has a dreadful accident record, and the southbound queues on the approach to the 3-into-2 are a near-permanent feature.

And this is without that being the main signposted route between the north and south, and requiring two TOTSOs (in either direction) compared with one or none for traffic using the M1 all the way. If the M1 was to be routed this way then more traffic would use the route, and you could forget about getting out of second gear except between 8pm and 6am. The road is dangerously substandard now, and it could not cope with more traffic using it in its current form.

But while the A1 section could be fairly easily replaced by a triple-carriageway (D3M + LAR), the A1(M) section would be more challenging because of its proximity to residential areas and the existing infrastructure – and it is hard to see how the interchange with M18 could be significantly improved to increase capacity for turning traffic without razing the whole thing and rebuilding it from scratch ... but it's so close to other junctions that there isn't the space needed for a high-capacity free flow. The easy way around that would be to build a new link road from the M18 north of Maltby to the A1(M) near Marr, with only fork junctions needed at either end, to by-pass the section of the route that would be most challenging to upgrade.
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by A9NWIL »

Stevie D wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
The A1(M) Doncaster By-pass is a horrendous bit of road. It's only 2 lanes each way, the alignment is poor, and the intermediate junctions with A630 and A635 are very low capacity with substandard slip-roads. The road is frequently congested due to sheer volume of traffic. The roundabout interchange between A1(M) and M18 regularly suffers from long queues in all directions. And that's the good bit ... the A1 between Doncaster and Ferrybridge is seriously dangerous, it has a dreadful accident record, and the southbound queues on the approach to the 3-into-2 are a near-permanent feature.

And this is without that being the main signposted route between the north and south, and requiring two TOTSOs (in either direction) compared with one or none for traffic using the M1 all the way. If the M1 was to be routed this way then more traffic would use the route, and you could forget about getting out of second gear except between 8pm and 6am. The road is dangerously substandard now, and it could not cope with more traffic using it in its current form.

But while the A1 section could be fairly easily replaced by a triple-carriageway (D3M + LAR), the A1(M) section would be more challenging because of its proximity to residential areas and the existing infrastructure – and it is hard to see how the interchange with M18 could be significantly improved to increase capacity for turning traffic without razing the whole thing and rebuilding it from scratch ... but it's so close to other junctions that there isn't the space needed for a high-capacity free flow. The easy way around that would be to build a new link road from the M18 north of Maltby to the A1(M) near Marr, with only fork junctions needed at either end, to by-pass the section of the route that would be most challenging to upgrade.
Also the new link road could be the mainline carriageway and the A1(M) and the M18 bits left over being the secondary bits.
The current M1/18 junction and the current M1/A1(M) junction could do with a priority change so that the new M1 would be the mainline through, might need a redesign at both junctions for this to work.
The M18 left over could remain as M18 and the old bit of M1 could be the M63.
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Osthagen »

lotrjw wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:
lotrjw wrote:
In that case there needs to be a new section that cuts the corner quite dramatically between the M18 and current line of A1/A1(M) between Doncaster and Ferrybridge. Also the bits of M18 and A1/A1(M) used need to become D4M or at least D3M. The current A1(M)/M1 merge point would need a change of priorities too.
Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
The current A1(M)/M18 junction isnt the best for freeflow between the A1/A1(M) north and the M18 west, being a roundabout junction. I havent driven it at rush hour but I can imagine it getting very busy.
Ah, I see what you mean now. Yes, M18 J2 can be (very, very) annoying. How you’d go about fixing it though is a whole other question in itself. The cheapest thing to do would be to leave the junction as it it and build two link roads between the M18 and A1(M) that bypass the junction itself.
"I see the face of a child. He lives in a great city. He is black. Or he is white. He is Mexican, Italian, Polish. None of that matters. What matters, he's an American child"
- Richard Nixon
A9NWIL
Member
Posts: 3319
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 02:36

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by A9NWIL »

McNessA720 wrote:
lotrjw wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:
Why does there need to be a new section then? Which corners need cutting? I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at there.
The current A1(M)/M18 junction isnt the best for freeflow between the A1/A1(M) north and the M18 west, being a roundabout junction. I havent driven it at rush hour but I can imagine it getting very busy.
Ah, I see what you mean now. Yes, M18 J2 can be (very, very) annoying. How you’d go about fixing it though is a whole other question in itself. The cheapest thing to do would be to leave the junction as it it and build two link roads between the M18 and A1(M) that bypass the junction itself.
Well other than a M18 west/A1(M) north link I cant see what other link is needed unless you are thinking about a new fully freeflow junction for a new A1(M) line that would cross the M18 to the west of the current junction?
I guess the old A1(M) would then become A100(M)?
Formerly known as 'lortjw'
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8990
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by wrinkly »

This afternoon both carriageways were still down to 2 lanes and 50mph from Catterick Central to Barton, though with good long deceleration lanes on both approaches to Scotch Corner.

The right-hand northbound lane was still crossed over to the southbound carriageway from Catterick Central to Catterick North, but I suspect that's among the things that they intend to put right by Monday.

I suspect that the cones on the southbound carriagway at Catterick North, which from Monday will form a right-hand lane drop (on the approach to the roadworks area), are already in place, but currently form part of a chicane from lanes 2 and 3 to lanes 1 and 2 - I think the road markings will be changed here.

All the side roads are open though by no means all fully finished. There are a lot of cones on side roads, many of which I suspect will be gone by Monday. The roundabout east of the mainline at Catterick North seems finished.
User avatar
punyXpress
Member
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 21:27
Location: Riding, North

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by punyXpress »

Flooding! Is there an echo on the line?
moggsy
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 09:34
Location: Bedale, North Yorkshire

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by moggsy »

punyXpress wrote:Flooding! Is there an echo on the line?
Farcical isn't it! Brand new motorway, bit of snow melt and a heavy nights rain and it floods in same place it's always flooded, big round of applause!

What a total cock-up this whole project has been!
Mikeg
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 14:15
Location: Bishop Auckland

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Mikeg »

moggsy wrote:
punyXpress wrote:Flooding! Is there an echo on the line?
Farcical isn't it! Brand new motorway, bit of snow melt and a heavy nights rain and it floods in same place it's always flooded, big round of applause!

What a total cock-up this whole project has been!
... but at least the northbound contraflow has gone!
NICK 647063
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 17:48
Location: Leeds

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by NICK 647063 »

I was stuck in this queue 40 mins this morning northbound due to the flooding, no warnings on the matrix signs of delays prior then as I approached the signs suddenly got activated, I really could not believe that after all this construction that this new road would flood just like the old one, yes it rained but nothing too bad and was completely fine and dry when I got to this flood, the new drains should have easily dealt with the water, what a joke this scheme has become.
User avatar
Andy J
Account deactivated at user request
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 09:42
Location: Leyburn

Re: A1(M) Leeming - Barton

Post by Andy J »

NICK 647063 wrote:I was stuck in this queue 40 mins this morning northbound due to the flooding, no warnings on the matrix signs of delays prior then as I approached the signs suddenly got activated, I really could not believe that after all this construction that this new road would flood just like the old one, yes it rained but nothing too bad and was completely fine and dry when I got to this flood, the new drains should have easily dealt with the water, what a joke this scheme has become.
To be fair, areas that are prone to flooding were probably the worst they have been in the five years since we moved to the area following the rapid melting of six days of snowfall, heavy rain overnight and saturated ground.
Post Reply