M181

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
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35717
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Bryn666 »

RichardA35 wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 13:24
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 13:10Baffling.
Follow the thread of the detrunking and the 1975 Special Road modifcations orders, noting when they can be implemented and it all makes reasonable procedural sense if not a tidy solution in terms of numbers on the ground. A few hundred pounds in signfaces or patching is very little in the overall scheme of things.
I know the legal proceedings, the whole thing is still not how it should be done though. This will cause havoc with route planning calculations, introduces a new road number for maybe 18 months at most, and is just generally a complete mess.

And that's before we address the flaws of the direction signs that have been installed.

This is a classic example of industry incompetence, frankly, people thinking they are clever and proving themselves to not be. Detrunking, despecialisation, and handover to the local authority should have been a simple one step process, road is then futureproofed and ready for the development.

How exactly does any of this mess improve the situation for a general road user?
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16896
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Chris5156 »

delinquentwoody wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 12:30 For comparison here's the previous sign from GSV. I wonder why the replacement has the destinations missed off.
The destinations are a complete mess. The sign pointing south from Frodingham Grange roundabout lists Doncaster, Hull, Grimsby, the Humber Bridge and the airport, but the sign at the new roundabout - made and installed at the same time - lists only Doncaster and the Humber Bridge. You’d think anyone paying even a bit of attention would see that’s ridiculous.
someone
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:46
Location: London

Re: M181

Post by someone »

ais523 wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 02:23Both the road, and the bridge, are S1 (or at least, were before the works started).
Also a new east-west road will cross the development slightly farther north than Brumby Common Lane, in line the new roundabout.

The current alignment will only exist in the east to pass Brumby Common before veering north to run between villages 1 and 2. In the west the lane will be retained outside the development, ending on a new north-south perimeter road around villages 5 and 6.
User avatar
ForestChav
SABRE Developer
Posts: 11075
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 00:00
Location: Nottingham (Bronx of the Midlands)
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by ForestChav »

delinquentwoody wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 12:30 There's more new signs for the A1077(M) appearing daily, this one on the western approach to Frodingham Grange roundabout has appeared this morning, placed on new poles. 20210512_071830.jpg
For comparison here's the previous sign from GSV. I wonder why the replacement has the destinations missed off.
Screenshot_20210512-122613_Street View.jpg
Its destination is a roundabout with a S1 in the middle of nowhere.
C, E flat and G go into a bar. The barman says "sorry, we don't serve minors". So E flat walks off, leaving C and G to share an open fifth between them.

Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

An earthmover being transported on the back of a low loader hit the pedestrian bridge over the A1077(M) and came off onto the carriageway this morning. Luckily it didn't hit anyone as if it had it surely would have killed them.

I came across the scene what must have been minutes later. So I rang HE and they clearly told me that the road was no longer their responsibility. I explained it was previously the M181 until last week but he was adamant and told me it was no longer a HE road and I should ring 101 to report it.

So it looks like the A1077(M) is now the responsibility of NL council.
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3321
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: M181

Post by ManomayLR »

XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 09:13 An earthmover being transported on the back of a low loader hit the pedestrian bridge over the A1077(M) and came off onto the carriageway this morning. Luckily it didn't hit anyone as if it had it surely would have killed them.

I came across the scene what must have been minutes later. So I rang HE and they clearly told me that the road was no longer their responsibility. I explained it was previously the M181 until last week but he was adamant and told me it was no longer a HE road and I should ring 101 to report it.

So it looks like the A1077(M) is now the responsibility of NL council.
So this is indeed a detrunked motorway.

Aside from that, will the bridge be cleared up?
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16896
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Chris5156 »

Yikes. Hope everybody was OK.

It’s uncanny, you know. You spend your whole life as a road enthusiast and the M181 barely enters your consciousness at all. And then boom! In the space of one week it spawns a whole new motorway, it changes hands, there’s debates about whether new signs are permanent or temporary, and now it’s closed because there’s been a bridge strike. All in one mile of motorway that never troubled anyone before this month :laugh:
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

EpicChef wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 09:44
XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 09:13 An earthmover being transported on the back of a low loader hit the pedestrian bridge over the A1077(M) and came off onto the carriageway this morning. Luckily it didn't hit anyone as if it had it surely would have killed them.

I came across the scene what must have been minutes later. So I rang HE and they clearly told me that the road was no longer their responsibility. I explained it was previously the M181 until last week but he was adamant and told me it was no longer a HE road and I should ring 101 to report it.

So it looks like the A1077(M) is now the responsibility of NL council.
So this is indeed a detrunked motorway.

Aside from that, will the bridge be cleared up?
From what I could see from the Frodingham Grange roundabout the damage to the bridge looked minor so I hope it will be open again soon. Luckily it was the pedestrian/farmers bridge and not the rail bridge which follows about 100 yds later.
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

Just rang NL council to see if the road was open yet. They are also denying that the road is theirs. So it seems everyone thinks it belongs to someone else.....
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: M181

Post by Conekicker »

XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 16:54 Just rang NL council to see if the road was open yet. They are also denying that the road is theirs. So it seems everyone thinks it belongs to someone else.....
Marvellous :twisted:
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

So I rang HE again.

Much patient explaining of where the road is. Much explaining of how the numbers have changed in the last week.

Outcome. He thinks it is still their road, but there is absolutely no reference on their systems to the A1077(m). If I had been incorrect and said M181 this morning then they would have acted on my report. Because I used accurate information and used the correct road number they told me to bugger off and call 101.

As you say. Marvellous..
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: M181

Post by Conekicker »

XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 18:16 So I rang HE again.

Much patient explaining of where the road is. Much explaining of how the numbers have changed in the last week.

Outcome. He thinks it is still their road, but there is absolutely no reference on their systems to the A1077(m). If I had been incorrect and said M181 this morning then they would have acted on my report. Because I used accurate information and used the correct road number they told me to bugger off and call 101.

As you say. Marvellous..
You'd like to think Humberside's finest would be snapping and snarling at someone to get it sorted. But there again I've never seen a Humberside car on their bit of the network.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35717
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Bryn666 »

Conekicker wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 22:36
XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 18:16 So I rang HE again.

Much patient explaining of where the road is. Much explaining of how the numbers have changed in the last week.

Outcome. He thinks it is still their road, but there is absolutely no reference on their systems to the A1077(m). If I had been incorrect and said M181 this morning then they would have acted on my report. Because I used accurate information and used the correct road number they told me to bugger off and call 101.

As you say. Marvellous..
You'd like to think Humberside's finest would be snapping and snarling at someone to get it sorted. But there again I've never seen a Humberside car on their bit of the network.
I think I'm just going to set up that tea rooms in rural Scotland, the industry is beyond saving isn't it?
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: M181

Post by Conekicker »

Bryn666 wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 10:25
Conekicker wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 22:36
XC70 wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 18:16 So I rang HE again.

Much patient explaining of where the road is. Much explaining of how the numbers have changed in the last week.

Outcome. He thinks it is still their road, but there is absolutely no reference on their systems to the A1077(m). If I had been incorrect and said M181 this morning then they would have acted on my report. Because I used accurate information and used the correct road number they told me to bugger off and call 101.

As you say. Marvellous..
You'd like to think Humberside's finest would be snapping and snarling at someone to get it sorted. But there again I've never seen a Humberside car on their bit of the network.
I think I'm just going to set up that tea rooms in rural Scotland, the industry is beyond saving isn't it?
To be fair to whichever HE person XC70 spoke to, they would be in an office in another part of the country and may even not have known where the M181 is.

I've always found HE to be very compartmentalised, it being difficult to track down the right person to talk to on any given subject if you didn't know the person in the first place. They don't, as far as I'm aware, have a family tree or searchable phone book (or similar) you can refer to in an attempt to track down who is the right person for any given topic. For example, you might think that the right person for service area signs in one part of the country would be the Regional Signs Officer, which is only partially correct. There is a specific team that deals with this type of signing, liaising with the various service area operators as part of their duties. After working on the network for decades I only found this out when I was seconded to HE and the team just happened to be in the same office.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16896
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Chris5156 »

Conekicker wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 10:45For example, you might think that the right person for service area signs in one part of the country would be the Regional Signs Officer, which is only partially correct. There is a specific team that deals with this type of signing, liaising with the various service area operators as part of their duties.
Seriously? Wow :shock:

What do they spend their days doing? MSA signage is universally appalling. Do they just phone MSA operators every now and then to reassure them that putting any old crap on a pole is still acceptable?
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: M181

Post by Conekicker »

Chris5156 wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 12:45
Conekicker wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 10:45For example, you might think that the right person for service area signs in one part of the country would be the Regional Signs Officer, which is only partially correct. There is a specific team that deals with this type of signing, liaising with the various service area operators as part of their duties.
Seriously? Wow :shock:

What do they spend their days doing? MSA signage is universally appalling. Do they just phone MSA operators every now and then to reassure them that putting any old crap on a pole is still acceptable?
That team aren't sign design experts, it's mostly the admin they do. The designs are done by outside parties, usually consultants for MSA operators. Remember also that many MSA are extremely old and paid for by the operators, so they are often reluctant to put their hands in their corporate pocket to pay for replacements, no matter how manky the existing signs might be.

As far as I'm aware, for "standard" prescribed MSA signs, for which clear design rules exist, no one in HE checks the designs. The same holds for all other signs on the network. The designs are supposed to be done by competent designers and checked by equally competent checkers before they go off to the sign shop. HE don't have anything like enough skilled staff to check the number of signs that go up each year of course, hence it's left to the tender mercies of their contractors. So no need for HE staff to check as "others" are already paid, via HE contracts, to do that.

Unfortunately most of the design organisations creating these abominations don't have enough competent designers and even fewer competent checkers. Which explains why so many horrors are out there. Some sign manufacturers will question dodgy designs, many wont. This is usually because they've tried to do so in the past and been told, in effect, to STFU or they'll not get future work. So STFU they do, much as it grates with some of them.

In the past whenever I've had sight of poor designs I've made comment on them, "being professionally helpful" as it were. Sometimes the designs were fixed, sometimes they weren't. Sadly, as they weren't the responsibility of whomever I was working for at the time, there was nothing more I could do about it.

The only signs that HE signs experts check are non-prescribed ones, before the designs are submitted to DfT for authorisation - and those designs are gone over with a very fine-toothed comb believe me! That assumes that whoever is doing the design realises it's non-prescribed and submits it to HE for checking in the first place of course. Some designers don't do this and thus the dubious signs proliferate.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35717
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: M181

Post by Bryn666 »

Conekicker wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 13:27 The only signs that HE signs experts check are non-prescribed ones, before the designs are submitted to DfT for authorisation - and those designs are gone over with a very fine-toothed comb believe me! That assumes that whoever is doing the design realises it's non-prescribed and submits it to HE for checking in the first place of course. Some designers don't do this and thus the dubious signs proliferate.
Oh I know, I've thrown back one design which they don't like the proposed signs for with the professional equivalent of "you came up with a non-standard junction layout that can't be signed with any of the prescribed signs we have, but it's somehow my problem that you don't like what I've come up with?"

Their suggestion didn't fill me with much joy, being another one of those cut through signs with floating destinations. Had someone thought about it there'd now be gantries on this proposal but £££.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

All the cones and lane closure on approaches have been removed, I assume over the weekend. The temporary 50 limit on the northbound approach has been removed and the 50 limit now starts at the new roundabout. You can now go round the roundabout too.

Lo and behold the chevrons on the northbound approach have been flattened and there are some deep tyre tracks in the earth across the roundabout and off the side back onto the carriageway.

Seems like 40 weeks of construction isn't enough for people to realise that there is a big roundabout in the way......
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: M181

Post by Conekicker »

XC70 wrote: Mon May 17, 2021 09:18 All the cones and lane closure on approaches have been removed, I assume over the weekend. The temporary 50 limit on the northbound approach has been removed and the 50 limit now starts at the new roundabout. You can now go round the roundabout too.

Lo and behold the chevrons on the northbound approach have been flattened and there are some deep tyre tracks in the earth across the roundabout and off the side back onto the carriageway.

Seems like 40 weeks of construction isn't enough for people to realise that there is a big roundabout in the way......
Who could possibly have predicted that happening? :roll:

Same issue here:

2014:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.48323 ... 6656?hl=en

2017 (note the missing 606):
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.48324 ... 6656?hl=en

2020:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.48325 ... 8192?hl=en
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
XC70
Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 23:22

Re: M181

Post by XC70 »

Didn't developers build one on the A516 south of Derby which had something like 2 dozen vehicles crash over it in the first 24 hours of opening?
Post Reply