M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

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
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by fras »

When one looks at the site from the air, the constraints on options are quite plain to see. With money available, but not huge, the option chosen looks pretty good to me. Clearly there is never going to be an "Almondsbury" there !
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4728
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by traffic-light-man »

I'm quite a fan of the loop idea. It's like a much grander M62 J6/M57 J1. That has worked wonders for the roundabout there, albeit slightly different scenarios.
Simon
C83
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 15:56

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by C83 »

The loop is a reasonable attempt, my only real concern, is that the M60N middle lane of 5 to the roundabout for M62E, is potentially going to queue back between two flowing streams for M66N and M60W which will be fun for those who don't know the area and are trying to get in the right lane late. Will need to be well signed several miles back.

I presume all consultations need a 'rings' effort to show alternatives were considered.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Bryn666 »

C83 wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 22:57 The loop is a reasonable attempt, my only real concern, is that the M60N middle lane of 5 to the roundabout for M62E, is potentially going to queue back between two flowing streams for M66N and M60W which will be fun for those who don't know the area and are trying to get in the right lane late. Will need to be well signed several miles back.

I presume all consultations need a 'rings' effort to show alternatives were considered.
The right turn from the M60 to M62 is surprisingly not that heavy as everyone in the know goes up the A663/A627(M). Indeed, it's often quicker to use the "Leeds M62" lane, then the signals, and join the M60 instead of sitting in the current queue for the left turn free-flow lane... :o

The uphill section from J19 causes a natural slowdown for traffic anyway, so it isn't going to be as hectic as you may fear.
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
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Barkstar »

Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 21:45 I'd expected a concrete barrier between J14-18 but nope. 12-14 was done.

But it seems concrete barriers are now not being installed in Area 10, the M53, M56, M65, and M67 have all been given new corrugated steel barriers. Wonder how they swung the departures for that given the traffic levels warrant concrete.
I thought corrugated barriers were frowned upon now as they act like bacon slicers on a sliding motorcyclist? :yikes:

As for the Simister scheme the twin bridges looks like the illegitimate child of a Mensa quiz and Escher puzzle :yuck:
User avatar
jgharston
Member
Posts: 2437
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 18:06
Location: Sheffield/Whitby

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by jgharston »

It will still have traffic lights on a motorway. I'd prefer a scheme where the M60-M60 route was the mainline, and you turned off to get to the other routes, as per one of the suggestions on page one here.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by jackal »

jgharston wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2020 08:41 It will still have traffic lights on a motorway.
No it wouldn't? The M60 to M60 movements are freeflow with the Northern Loop option. You will still need traffic lights to go between different motorways, which is regrettable but not unusual.
I'd prefer a scheme where the M60-M60 route was the mainline, and you turned off to get to the other routes, as per one of the suggestions on page one here.
Well, HE haven't deigned to provide turn counts, but as the M62 is a bit busier than the M60 (S) it stands to reason that M60-M62 should retain the mainline. Note that this has always been the plan - even the 60s drawings show the mainline continuing along the M62.

One thing that is different from the 60s plan is that the M66 gets priority with the M60 clockwise merging from the left. This probably doesn't match volumes but is understandable as it saves a bridge, will match the anticlockwise arrangement, and still allows the M60 to get two dedicated lanes (double lane gain).
Hdeng16
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 20:47

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Hdeng16 »

How on earth has the inner links options made it this far? It’s absolutely abysmal - all that money and I honestly think it would actually be worse than the existing situation
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Peter Freeman »

Let's benevolently assume that the inner-links option is a joke :wink: - included because you have to put forward a choice. Then the North Loop proposal is as much as we could expect, and will do the job, for now.

If more was affordable, I'd suggest providing a similar loop in the NW quadrant, catering for the M60 anti-clockwise to M62 movement. It could repeat the rather good design of the NE loop, including: an early diverge (shared with the new left turn jet-lanes), a long 3- or 4-span bridge, a loop on the big green space, and the eastbound ramp to the roundabout slightly bent out of the way (as on the M66 one). The loop would be smaller than the NE one, but I don't believe its radius would be a problem - ever heard about speed limits? And the M62 mainline might be too high to bridge: try a tunnel.

I realise that this right turn is not the next in order of traffic demand, but the other two are difficult. Treating a lower order movement substantially alleviates the stress on the remainder (collateral benefit). The roundabout would, with these two right turns removed, have only one conflict point to signalise. And incidentally one piece of the roundabout circulation would be rendered redundant!

If this extra cannot be afforded, the current design should at least be future proofed for this (or another) second stage.
Last edited by Peter Freeman on Thu Jun 25, 2020 09:03, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
stu531
Member
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 23:10
Location: Harrogate

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by stu531 »

Might've been mentioned before, but - although I like the loop, I think it's good - traffic heading from Liverpool towards Ashton (i.e. M60 eastbound to M60 southbound) will need to cross A56 traffic as well as any existing traffic heading onto the roundabout.

What I mean by that is, heading east, Lane 1/2 is M60S, Lane 3 is M66, Lane 4/5/6 is M62. I think Lane 1 should be M66, Lane 2/3 M60S, and so on. That way there'd be less weaving. I'm saying that from the position of it might not be feasible to squeeze the loop bridge in...
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8737
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by trickstat »

stu531 wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2020 14:51 Might've been mentioned before, but - although I like the loop, I think it's good - traffic heading from Liverpool towards Ashton (i.e. M60 eastbound to M60 southbound) will need to cross A56 traffic as well as any existing traffic heading onto the roundabout.

What I mean by that is, heading east, Lane 1/2 is M60S, Lane 3 is M66, Lane 4/5/6 is M62. I think Lane 1 should be M66, Lane 2/3 M60S, and so on. That way there'd be less weaving. I'm saying that from the position of it might not be feasible to squeeze the loop bridge in...
The fly-through shows the access to the loop being a slip to the left of the approach to the roundabout for M66 traffic. If the loop is built, M60S would have to be signed to the inside.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by jackal »

Here's how I think they could complete a full freeflow interchange.

M60 J18 - Copy.png

Stage 1 - current scheme with Northern Loop.
Stage 2 - direct connector between M62 and M66.
Stage 3 - the two final freeflow movements.
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by fras »

Maybe the best idea is to knock it all down and do an "Almondsbury" !
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Stevie D »

fras wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2020 19:35 Maybe the best idea is to knock it all down and do an "Almondsbury" !
That would involve demolishing most of the village of Simister.
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Peter Freeman »

Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 16:52 Still got major concerns about weaving from J17 however - this will become a lane gain (5 lanes ALR), but you'll still need to move to the right as traffic is moving to the left. The controversial (and ultimately correct answer) if HE want to make the M60 strategic priority, not commuter priority) is to just close J17... that won't ever happen of course.
The increase to D5 between J18 and J17 might sufficiently alleviate that weaving problem. Is there a similar problem eastbound?

Four possible measures to address the issue:

a) Could that section fit one more lane, to make it D6, or 6W+5E ? That would slightly help the problem, but not solve it, and I'm guessing there's not quite enough space.
b) The proposed (and even the current) tiger-tail merge westbound from J18 (and perhaps also the diverge for J17) seems excessively generous and thus gobbles up the inter-junction distance. Permission to shorten these from the standard recommendation would help, marginally.
c) Instead of the D4 to D5 transition occurring by lane-gain, the fifth lane should appear spontaneously before the merge - as far as practicable before. Traffic intending to exit at J17 could thus begin moving leftwards earlier. I know of locations on Melbourne's freeways having this design, with good results.
d) The proper fix is ramp braiding. The westbound exit for J17 should diverge immediately after clearing the J18 roundabout supports, and pass below the westbound on-ramp from the roundabout, and below the left-turn free-flow ramp. It should then run parallel to and south of the main M60 carriageway, pass under Sandgate Road through a new aperture just south of the existing structure, and continue to the J17 off-ramp. This, in engineering terms, is not difficult. It's hard for me to see where some of the back-yards end, so just possibly a house or two might be needed.

Regarding closure of J17, in my opinion that's undesirable. It would lead to loss of facility for many users, and possibly increased local traffic problems. It could of course be half-closed, taking away only the east-facing ramps. Still undesirable.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by jackal »

There's no space for braiding. The best practical solution to weaving here would be small footprint C/D lanes like M8 J22-J23 or Kingston Bridge (northbound). It might, however, be tricky coming up with a lane allocation appropriate to volumes. D5 lets traffic sort that out for itself.
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Big L »

jackal wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2020 07:35 There's no space for braiding. The best practical solution to weaving here would be small footprint C/D lanes like M8 J22-J23 or Kingston Bridge (northbound). It might, however, be tricky coming up with a lane allocation appropriate to volumes. D5 lets traffic sort that out for itself.
Except when folk try to take the exit from lane 5 at the 100 yard marker board.
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16908
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Chris5156 »

Peter Freeman wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2020 03:06The proposed (and even the current) tiger-tail merge westbound from J18 (and perhaps also the diverge for J17) seems excessively generous and thus gobbles up the inter-junction distance. Permission to shorten these from the standard recommendation would help, marginally.
J17 is very busy - not least with traffic from the Leeds direction, for which it’s the first exit in Manchester proper. Shortening the exit slip to J17 might have the unintended consequence of reducing stacking space and introducing queues onto the mainline.
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by fras »

Stevie D wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2020 20:56
fras wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2020 19:35 Maybe the best idea is to knock it all down and do an "Almondsbury" !
That would involve demolishing most of the village of Simister.
Well, the villages of Sipson and Harmandsworth are to be demolished to build the London Airport 3rd runway !
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: M60 Junction 18 Simister Island Interchange

Post by Peter Freeman »

jackal wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2020 07:35 There's no space for braiding. The best practical solution to weaving here would be small footprint C/D lanes like M8 J22-J23 or Kingston Bridge (northbound). It might, however, be tricky coming up with a lane allocation appropriate to volumes. D5 lets traffic sort that out for itself.
Unless there's some impediment that's not visible to me when using GSV or GE, then I think the "no space" assessment is pessimistic, or connected with engineering timidity.

The crossover point for the braiding would be west of the stackabout: not on the school grounds, but on the unused land surrounding the power line pylon. The new carriageway would then move close to the M60 mainline before reaching Sandgate Road. The new aperture there could probably be two lanes wide, but possibly one lane only. The new carriageway would run fairly close to housing for a while then, before transforming into the westbound J17 off ramp. The ramp would have its existing final 3-lane width extended to provide more storage.

I wouldn't recommend this solution to be part of the current project: it's the fatal scope creep. We should see how the completed bare current scheme performs (at J17 and elsewhere) - is there really a serious problem? If so, it becomes a J17, not a J18, problem, and might subsequently need addressing in that context.
Post Reply