A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon "news"

[darkcape]

Also, I’m sure that roadworks on dual carriageways used to be 50 by default until about 5 years ago

Hard to justify in some cases, bit like the boy who cried wolf. Might prevent more accidents if TM stopped throwing cones in front of cars and wandering across live lanes without looking

Have you driven through the works in rush hour? Even 40mph feels too fast, 30mph would be better, the lanes are narrow and the lorries wobble out of lane 1, and you get the odd idiot lorry driver that decides to push through in lane 2. 40mph is fully justified.

No-one working in TM that wants to live would walk out in front of live traffic without looking. 99% of the accidents are between other drivers and vehicles, and when a driver goes through the TM it is normally because they are drunk/on drugs/asleep/on their phone/distracted. It is a worryong attitude that you're suggesting TM operatives are causing the accidents that justify a 40mph limit.

[Berk]

Why should we doubt what another member has seen when they were driving?? They have no axe to grind.

But the reduced limits (down to 40), continue even when work isn’t in progress in adjoining lanes. When I drove to Heathrow (3 months ago), the 40 limit was in force, and yet there were no workers anywhere remotely near the road, or even within 200m of it. And this was on a weekday evening, around 7pm.

That was excessive.

I can see why you might need to have a 50 limit 24/7, but the 40 really must be limited to when works are in progress fearing live running lanes. And not because “it’s too difficult” to tailor the TRO to apply them more discretely.

[Andy33gmail]

So, either I’m very ignorant, or very good at keeping in a lane, but I really don’t see why any sober, non-tired, non-mobile-using driver should struggle to keep within those lanes at 70mph, never mind 40. Yes, they’re narrow, but they’re dead straight, and in a car, you have what? 2ft either side. That said, I do appreciate that it is terrifying when another driver doesn’t keep in lane, because there’s no margin for error left. And this also makes hazard observation harder - e.g. you have less time to see someone “wanting” to pull out

I’ve seen on multiple occasions people, not defended by a TLA* vehicle placing signs and cones with their back to traffic. And crossing causing me to brake at least once.

When they close lanes, I realise it’s tricky, but I see them sliding cones out into the road from the side. They don’t have to screw that up much to cause someone to swerve, lose control and total their car. I don’t really know what the solution should be, but I wonder if a rolling (one-lane) road block would be better

*Three letter Acronym == whatever the word is for the lorry with the crumble zone for numpties to crash into

So, no, I’m not claiming that road workers or traffic management are responsible for more than 50% of accidents. I think a significant minority of them to contribute to the risk, and so do people who (as mentioned) do idiotic things like using drugs and phones and booze to bring their driving below the pretty low standard required to not crash

[Berk]

Here on the parkways, if maintenance is about to begin they have a big truck, sometimes with a folding lift like a cherry picker, and a large ‘keep left/right’ sign on the back with flashing LED lights. And that is deployed at the point comes need to be doled out, reversing back until that lane is entirely coned off.

Surely HE contractors have got access to those??

[Andy33gmail]

I’ve seen them used, but not every time. And yes, much more appropriate then exposing workers to live traffic and having moving cones in the carriageway!

[Bryn666]

Any TM contractor not following Chapter 8 procedure on a trunk road would be out of business in 30 seconds. Local authorities may employ sloppier operatives but the method statement and risk assessment process to even drive a TM vehicle on a trunk road before you lay a single cone...

Also motorway mobile night time TM is now single banked signs (wrongly in my view as single banking on 3 or 4 lane carriageways is useless for drivers to spot the signs) so no one is crossing any live lanes.

I'm calling myself very sceptical on this one. In any case TM and lower speed limits are primarily designed to protect drivers, not workers. The lateral safety zone is for them; you're slowed down because of the temporary layouts and massively reduced width/geometry.

[Andy33gmail]

I'm calling myself very sceptical on this one.

So, specifically, I've seen an A14 off-slip closed by sliding in one cone at a time from the verge, into live traffic. Perhaps a IPV was previously used at the start of the coned off area, but they were extending it forwards to close the slip-road without protection. And if a single cone had over-shot, they'd have caused a crash - you're not really meant to have to swerve for cones as a driver ...

I also noticed them do the same process on a documentary, from their frame of reference, complaining about how aggressive motorist were (which is fair comment), so it's can't be that much of a no-no

[RichardA35]

To be fair, within a major works site such as A14 there will be night time closures where the same tapers are re-established nightly. Rather than lay these out with a lorry each night, it is practice that these are laid out once and stored on the verge to be then walked out into position by operatives on the ground then walked off in the morning. There would usually be a crash cushion protecting the operation and of course signage that the lane is closed from a mile back and the traffic (at A14) is only doing 40mph. That is apart from all the people who can't see big signs and don't see why the speed limit applies to them as the lanes are wide enough and pretty straight and "there's no one working", which is why the public are treated as if all are at the lowest common denominator..

[Big L]

So, either I’m very ignorant, or very good at keeping in a lane, but I really don’t see why any sober, non-tired, non-mobile-using driver should struggle to keep within those lanes at 70mph, never mind 40. Yes, they’re narrow, but they’re dead straight, and in a car, you have what? 2ft either side. That said, I do appreciate that it is terrifying when another driver doesn’t keep in lane, because there’s no margin for error left. And this also makes hazard observation harder - e.g. you have less time to see someone “wanting” to pull out...

So what you're after is a 70 limit in the r/h lane for folk that can drive and a 40 limit in the l/h lane for those that can't?

[Andy33gmail]

So, either I’m very ignorant, or very good at keeping in a lane, but I really don’t see why any sober, non-tired, non-mobile-using driver should struggle to keep within those lanes at 70mph, never mind 40. Yes, they’re narrow, but they’re dead straight, and in a car, you have what? 2ft either side.

So what you're after is a 70 limit in the r/h lane for folk that can drive and a 40 limit in the l/h lane for those that can't?

I like your thinking

I realise it just doesn't work, but the idea that even 40mph is too fast too me aback (or 20mph in the Rotherhide tunnel!)

[Chris Bertram]

... (or 20mph in the Rotherhide tunnel!)

To be fair, the Rotherhithe tunnel is quite narrow, and has sharpish bends at either end. But now that traffic over 2m wide is banned (enforced by barriers, though I note that the fire service has its own unrestricted barrier-controlled access), a 20mph limit is too low, 30 would be fine. And enforcing the 20 limit by average speed cameras is what I term "oppressive" enforcement.

[Andy33gmail]

And enforcing the 20 limit by average speed cameras is what I term "oppressive" enforcement.

At that speed, there's probably more chance of dying of natural causes in the excessive time it takes to get across, than through anything remotely related to driving

[darkcape]

So, either I’m very ignorant, or very good at keeping in a lane, but I really don’t see why any sober, non-tired, non-mobile-using driver should struggle to keep within those lanes at 70mph, never mind 40. Yes, they’re narrow, but they’re dead straight, and in a car, you have what? 2ft either side.

Thanks for explaining Andy. You're right, it should be perfectly acceptable to drive at 50mph through the works - however bear in mind that in between the junctions there are some entrances and exits that are standing-starts, such as the cottages opposite Robins Lane on the southbound carriageway, the Crematorium and houses just after the M11 heading NB, as well as various works accesses as well - and it's much easier to join at 40mph than 50mph.

I'm calling myself very sceptical on this one.

So, specifically, I've seen an A14 off-slip closed by sliding in one cone at a time from the verge, into live traffic. Perhaps a IPV was previously used at the start of the coned off area, but they were extending it forwards to close the slip-road without protection. And if a single cone had over-shot, they'd have caused a crash - you're not really meant to have to swerve for cones as a driver ...

I also noticed them do the same process on a documentary, from their frame of reference, complaining about how aggressive motorist were (which is fair comment), so it's can't be that much of a no-no

As you may have seen on TV, the aggression of drivers trying to push through a closure is why the operatives stand well back and throw the cones out - despite multiple signs saying 'road closed' there'll always be one idiot squeezing through. I'd agree that to the driver the process doesn't seem safe, if anything the cones fall slightly short and are then straightened and put right up to the line but at least the cones are there for protection. Chucking them out is also the quickest way, and the less time the operatives are in the carriageway the safer they are. In other locations such as roundabouts where there isn't room for an IPV or vehicle, you wait for a gap and then chuck the cones out - in heavy traffic its the only way to get enough cones out to stop people driving around them.

Others may know, but in my 5years experience I've never heard of an accident attributed to TM operatives putting cones out unsafely.

[Andy33gmail]

So, either I’m very ignorant, or very good at keeping in a lane, but I really don’t see why any sober, non-tired, non-mobile-using driver should struggle to keep within those lanes at 70mph, never mind 40. Yes, they’re narrow, but they’re dead straight, and in a car, you have what? 2ft either side.

Thanks for explaining Andy. You're right, it should be perfectly acceptable to drive at 50mph through the works - however bear in mind that in between the junctions there are some entrances and exits that are standing-starts, such as the cottages opposite Robins Lane on the southbound carriageway, the Crematorium and houses just after the M11 heading NB, as well as various works accesses as well - and it's much easier to join at 40mph than 50mph.

IIRC (I don't drive on the A14 that side of Girton that often), there's a 50mph limit and no narrow lanes by the crematorium and random houses - so no additional danger than before, just there as a buffer speed limit. Not something I'm a fan of, but I understand why it's there. I understand the actual 40mph and narrow lanes that side is from just before Bar Hill - where I can't recall there being any inappropriate accesses?

I guess the problem is, if we start saying "that little bit needs to be 40mph, that bit can be 60mph" etc, we're making things very confusing. And I understand frequent speed limit changes to be correlated with accidents, makes it harder to enforce (you can't enforce a SPECS segment across a limit change) and lets people say "But I thought the limit was"

I'm calling myself very sceptical on this one.

So, specifically, I've seen an A14 off-slip closed by sliding in one cone at a time from the verge, into live traffic. Perhaps a IPV was previously used at the start of the coned off area, but they were extending it forwards to close the slip-road without protection. And if a single cone had over-shot, they'd have caused a crash - you're not really meant to have to swerve for cones as a driver ...

I also noticed them do the same process on a documentary, from their frame of reference, complaining about how aggressive motorist were (which is fair comment), so it's can't be that much of a no-no

As you may have seen on TV, the aggression of drivers trying to push through a closure is why the operatives stand well back and throw the cones out - despite multiple signs saying 'road closed' there'll always be one idiot squeezing through. I'd agree that to the driver the process doesn't seem safe, if anything the cones fall slightly short and are then straightened and put right up to the line but at least the cones are there for protection. Chucking them out is also the quickest way, and the less time the operatives are in the carriageway the safer they are. In other locations such as roundabouts where there isn't room for an IPV or vehicle, you wait for a gap and then chuck the cones out - in heavy traffic its the only way to get enough cones out to stop people driving around them.

Others may know, but in my 5years experience I've never heard of an accident attributed to TM operatives putting cones out unsafely.

I wonder though, why an IPV can't crawl behind the operative to protect them from traffic (and give them time to place the cone more carefully).

I believe you. Although, I imagine if TM were at fault, it would be kept relatively quiet, we don't want any less trust/compliance with them than we already have.

Well, scaring drivers is a danger in itself as they might react dangerously - e.g. swerving into the other lane when it's not clear. Otherwise, I can think is is one on a M11 one lane "ghost" closure, there was a single cone about 2ft further in than the others, making it about 1ft to the left of the lane divider. But just about anything could have been responsible for that. And once I hit my mirror on a cone in the "cross-cross-crash" section because they started a "surprise" taper here https://www.google.com/maps/@52.2296442 ... 312!8i6656, it was unclear that the path from the right was closed off and therefore I didn't need to check for conflict before moving out, and there wasn't (quite) enough time to check my mirrors before moving right. But tbh, that just shows that I was driving marginally faster than was defensible in the distance I could see to be clear, something I make no excuses for.

[Fenlander]

Surely there’s a machine with an arm on that could place (and retrieve) cones with millimetre precision by now rather than putting people at risk chucking them across the road?

[Andy33gmail]

Surely there’s a machine with an arm on that could place (and retrieve) cones with millimetre precision by now rather than putting people at risk chucking them across the road?

Good point. Where my Gran lives (Dunblane), I've seen bin lorries with robotic arms to pick up the bins that are operated from within the vehicle, so it's not unprecedented

[KeithW]

Surely there’s a machine with an arm on that could place (and retrieve) cones with millimetre precision by now rather than putting people at risk chucking them across the road?

Good point. Where my Gran lives (Dunblane), I've seen bin lorries with robotic arms to pick up the bins that are operated from within the vehicle, so it's not unprecedented

All the bin lorries I have seen with 'automated arms' require a human to push the bins up to them. For every person pushing buttons there are at least 2 more running around collecting bins and crossing the road in the process.

[c2R]

Meanwhile, back on topic - some photographs of the progress of works at Ermine Street Junction:

[millionmiledriver]

Drove the Cambridge to Huntingdon section yesterday the bridge horizontals at the bridge just west of the demolished Trinity foot pub were put over the existing carriageway this last week .The famous graffiti covered hut has now also been demolished

[KeithW]

Surely there’s a machine with an arm on that could place (and retrieve) cones with millimetre precision by now rather than putting people at risk chucking them across the road?

There are several, Highways England assessed the Conemaster machine a few years ago.
The report was generally positive but did point that it would need to be used in conjunction with an IPV as the machine could not be fitted with a Crash Cushion and that while it was faster in laying and retrieving cones it required more operatives. It was also limited to coning off one lane at a time and there were issues with retrieving cones fitted with flashing lamps and it struggled a little with complex layouts. Retrieving cones seem to have often required operatives to get off the vehicle which somewhat negates the benefits.

http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/pu ... ng-trials/