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.
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 05:12
The lane restriction at J4A has now been removed and the 50mph lead in zone extended down to Frankly Services to help stem the flow before the lane drop at J3. This may actually help the flow up the hill from J3 which has struggled in peak usually as it was two lanes with a 70mph speed limit and would clog up quickly.
They have removed it due to pressure from the public. They also undertook more traffic models which showed that enough flow was being taken off and that for the final stage of the project enough people are now aware of the restrictions further up.
I believe most of the issues were actually Sandwell council who moaned about how much traffic would leave at J2 and were the ones who asked for it to be implemented in the first place.
As for the project itself, not much has happened as they enjoyed a nice fortnight off when the weather has been perfect for working in (watch it snow later this month).
I think progress is quicker but hard to tell. Looks like most of the joints are nearly repaired anyway.
The other end needs sorting too where the slip road from the southbound M6 narrows to a single lane for no apparent reason. This causes queues onto the M6 at Bescot. The slip road from the J7 direction remains as two lanes and suffers no queuing which is blatantly obvious as the J7 direction carries far less traffic than from the Bescot direction. Trying to force motorists to avoid the M5 by constricting the approaches is clearly failing although I agree with the lane drops at J1 and J3 which allows 33% of the capacity to leave rather than have the lane drops before the junction and the inevitable queues which would then form.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir? Big and complex.
Will the bullet have to be bitten sooner or later and the Midlands links viaducts, Oldbury, and others of similar vintage have to be completely demolished and rebuilt/replaced?
Are they approaching the end of their safe and useful lives now?
As we pretty much all now know, elevated motorways are immensely destructive to the urban areas they sever and require a lot of maintenance.
I know the traffic disruption would be immense, but would it be better to start planning for the inevitable now? Perhaps make the M6 Toll free and build a Western orbital to take the Midlands flows whilst the viaducts are knocked and replaced.
I remember reading an article years ago about “concrete cancer” afflicting many structures in the UK dating from the 1960s and 70s. Are the Midlands links, including Spaghetti junction, and other motorway viaducts and structures of similar vintage affected?
EDIT: I see according to a webpage in a Birmingham news website marking the 40th anniversary of Gravelly Hill (aka Spaghetti Junction) that when built it was designed to last 120 years. Given the traffic volumes and loads using it, is this lifespan actually likely?
Enceladus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 20:07
I know the traffic disruption would be immense, but would it be better to start planning for the inevitable now? Perhaps make the M6 Toll free and build a Western orbital to take the Midlands flows whilst the viaducts are knocked and replaced.
I remember reading an article years ago about “concrete cancer” afflicting many structures in the UK dating from the 1960s and 70s. Are the Midlands links, including Spaghetti junction, and other motorway viaducts and structures of similar vintage affected?
It seems inevitable that at some point the cost of maintenance or replacement would be the same as the cost of buying out the M6 Toll DBFO and building something West of M5 to take some traffic off that way. The weak link ever remains the M42, which cannot easily replace itself and another major motorway even if upgraded to ALR, as too many local journeys are made between J4 to 8. It would need C/D lanes which are damn near impossible. With that in mind, any M5 J1-4 replacement would need to be D3 or D4M which is a tall order!
This comes back to another case of enthusiasm for new motorways running out at the wrong time. Perhaps the M5 seemed adequate to avoid a Western Link being needed in the 20th Century but the traffic through Birmingham has exploded since then and we're really quite stuck.
Enceladus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 20:07
Will the bullet have to be bitten sooner or later and the Midlands links viaducts, Oldbury, and others of similar vintage have to be completely demolished and rebuilt/replaced?
Are they approaching the end of their safe and useful lives now?
As we pretty much all now know, elevated motorways are immensely destructive to the urban areas they sever and require a lot of maintenance.
I know the traffic disruption would be immense, but would it be better to start planning for the inevitable now? Perhaps make the M6 Toll free and build a Western orbital to take the Midlands flows whilst the viaducts are knocked and replaced.
I remember reading an article years ago about “concrete cancer” afflicting many structures in the UK dating from the 1960s and 70s. Are the Midlands links, including Spaghetti junction, and other motorway viaducts and structures of similar vintage affected?
EDIT: I see according to a webpage in a Birmingham news website marking the 40th anniversary of Gravelly Hill (aka Spaghetti Junction) that when built it was designed to last 120 years. Given the traffic volumes and loads using it, is this lifespan actually likely?
Well if thats the case then yes the M6Toll will need to become free and become the mainline M6 and the Western Orbital will need to be built just to maintain the long distance connections!
With the raised bits of motorway demolished can ordinary dualled link roads for locals be put in their place? Not in Oldbury but maybe in other areas?
Truvelo wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:12
Even if the M6 Toll was free and the M42 had infinite capacity it would be an extra 20 miles to get from M5 J4a to M6 J11a than using the M5.
Enceladus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 06, 2019 20:07
I know the traffic disruption would be immense, but would it be better to start planning for the inevitable now? Perhaps make the M6 Toll free and build a Western orbital to take the Midlands flows whilst the viaducts are knocked and replaced.
I remember reading an article years ago about “concrete cancer” afflicting many structures in the UK dating from the 1960s and 70s. Are the Midlands links, including Spaghetti junction, and other motorway viaducts and structures of similar vintage affected?
It seems inevitable that at some point the cost of maintenance or replacement would be the same as the cost of buying out the M6 Toll DBFO and building something West of M5 to take some traffic off that way. The weak link ever remains the M42, which cannot easily replace itself and another major motorway even if upgraded to ALR, as too many local journeys are made between J4 to 8. It would need C/D lanes which are damn near impossible. With that in mind, any M5 J1-4 replacement would need to be D3 or D4M which is a tall order!
This comes back to another case of enthusiasm for new motorways running out at the wrong time. Perhaps the M5 seemed adequate to avoid a Western Link being needed in the 20th Century but the traffic through Birmingham has exploded since then and we're really quite stuck.
The western orbital is imperative to maintaining the link in the future! As for the M42 well the only bit requiring C/D lanes would be from the current M6 to the M6Toll!
I think that the M69 extended down the A46 and along to the M5 round the Gloucester area would help relieve the M42.
That would certainly be useful for long distance NE-SW traffic. Mostly unproblematic routing-wise too. The A46 should absolutely be a RIS3 target to become an D2M expressway with technology options for ALR later, for the amount of load it would take off the struggle in the Birmingham box. It could easily connect into the M5 at Strensham, giving a continuous but much more direct route between Wales and the East Midlands. With the A465 completed also, that would be a massive change for people making those currently awkward journeys.
It's a similar situation to Newport really - do we upgrade our motorways where they have become local distributors, or do we bypass them? The difference in the West Midlands is the danger of time running out on all the early structures of the network.
lotrjw wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 14:45
Thats why the western orbital is needed!
If they built the Western Orbital today, how wide should it be?
D4M, D3M, D4 or D3?
Personally I would definitely go for D4M.
Oh D4M from the start! Why go for lower capacity when your bound to need the higher capacity as time goes on? Also I would build a wide central reservation so that you can add a 5th lane each way later. Essentially have the equivalent of a hard shoulder each side of the central reservation that can easily be turned into a new lane with little work!
DB617 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 15:18
That would certainly be useful for long distance NE-SW traffic. Mostly unproblematic routing-wise too. The A46 should absolutely be a RIS3 target to become an D2M expressway with technology options for ALR later, for the amount of load it would take off the struggle in the Birmingham box. It could easily connect into the M5 at Strensham, giving a continuous but much more direct route between Wales and the East Midlands. With the A465 completed also, that would be a massive change for people making those currently awkward journeys.
It's a similar situation to Newport really - do we upgrade our motorways where they have become local distributors, or do we bypass them? The difference in the West Midlands is the danger of time running out on all the early structures of the network.
Bypassing motorways that have become local distributor roads is the only way forward! Make the new motorways the mainline, renumber where necessary and hand the old motorways under 3 figure numbers to the local council.
Johnathan404 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 15:48
If they built it now you'd probably get D3 ALR...
Thats no good the capacity would be choked very fast! That would make traditional widening the only option in the future which would be expensive and disruptive!
Build it right first time (D4M (4 lanes and a HS)) with the width for at least one more lane each way on top!
Such futureproofing whilst lovely for roadgeeks would never pass any economic appraisal.
The Western Orbital would feed into D4 SM routes at either end so having the bit in the middle wider would create choke points at either end.
Junctions cause flow breakdown. Therefore motorways need fewer junctions. Unfortunately the idea of building motorways for strategic movements and not local junction hoppers has been totally forgotten and any western corridor is simply going to be a development magnet and be screwed from the start.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
So far so good with the removal of the restrictions. Everything is flowing much better both down at J4A and leading into the roadworks themselves. Big test is Friday afternoon though.
