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.
JRN wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 23:04
OK fair enough, I may have been underestimating the percentage of local traffic. Still the M6 toll carries only ~50k AADT, and I just have to believe that being pretty much the only easily avoidable tolled road in the UK doesn't significantly depress that figure below what it otherwise would be. A lot of people just don't like paying.
Whereas the M6 carries ~ 135k AADT at a single point between j5 and j6: https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/manualcountpoints/36023
(circa 2018)
It wouldn't necessarily in this scenario have to follow from nationalisation that the "new" M6 would carry more traffic than the "old" M6, just that enough traffic would transfer to the long distance route to allow the old viaduct through Birmingham to be restored to D3M.
Also the v. low percentage of HGV traffic that currently uses the M6 toll. That traffic is probably disproportionately long-distance relative to the total, but most hauliers currently won't pay the tolls.
The section between J8 and J10 past Wolverhampton is higher than that through Birmingham, at around 160k, and as pointed out previously, a large proportion of the long-distance traffic on this section is M5 <-> M6, M6 <-> M54 and M5 <-> M54, for all of whom the M6 Toll is pretty much useless.
As someone who did commute through the entire section (pre-pandemic), the D2M section through J6, whilst not helping the situation, isn't actually anywhere near as much of a problem journey time wise as the inevitable queues and crawling traffic between J10A and J7.
As an aside, traffic counts are also available on SABRE Maps, which is much easier than hunting through the DfT.
Steven
Motorway Historian
Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
M6 Junction 5-8 2024-25 - the viaducts are going to be a nightmare to provide any kind of ERAs along, indeed the only two between 5 and 6 are conveniently placed where a railway line passes under at a skew at Bromford. This is going to be a frequent trouble site with stopped vehicles causing mayhem, be intrigued how they're going to manage this one.
probably have a dedicated response wrecker on standby - with regular cross under/over in place to allow the wrecker to get to the scene of the breakdown quickly and tow / push the obstruction clear
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
3 1/2 years to turn a solid white line into a dashed one, throw some new signs up and a spot of stationary vehicle detection.
Or are we getting more emergency refuges?
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.
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
3 1/2 years to turn a solid white line into a dashed one, throw some new signs up and a spot of stationary vehicle detection.
Or are we getting more emergency refuges?
It will be the same contractors working on M1 J13-16 who are taking twice as long as it took to build the whole 70 mile stretch of M1, M10 and M45 from scratch in the first place. Probably contractors involving a 2 person crew who are normally skilled at driveway or pavement surfacing given the endless time it is taking, following from and endless amount of time it took to change the central barrier north of J15.
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
3 1/2 years to turn a solid white line into a dashed one, throw some new signs up and a spot of stationary vehicle detection.
Or are we getting more emergency refuges?
Reading GC 302 Section E/8 says:
"The minimum spacing requirements for places of relative safety in GD 301 [Ref 28.N] shall not apply to existing places of relative safety on upgrade schemes".
Which means that the standards does not require an DHSR upgrade to ALR to meet the current ALR standards. Didn't really answer your question thou.
Places of relative safety means ERA & hard shoulders (including those on off-sliproads).
Also section E9 says that ERAs must be in accordance with the current ALR standards, and if the current ERA cannot be practically modified to meet the current standards then it can be closed.
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
Same has gone up at J4, although that area is going to get hit soon with HS2 works, the SB J4 offslip is already currently being closed on nights.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
3 1/2 years to turn a solid white line into a dashed one, throw some new signs up and a spot of stationary vehicle detection.
And presumably 3 1/2 years of ~18 miles of traffic management, while they work on a few hundred yards at a time...
brummie_rob wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 15:20
Looks like there is about to be progress on this on the M6, a sign has appeared today by J10A saying 'Preparing for digital motorway upgrade from 10a-4, complete Spring 2025'. Let the fun commence!
3 1/2 years to turn a solid white line into a dashed one, throw some new signs up and a spot of stationary vehicle detection.
And presumably 3 1/2 years of ~18 miles of traffic management, while they work on a few hundred yards at a time...
They do need to install a concrete barrier in the central reservation which will probably be the bulk of time on this. I hope for the sake of everyone that this isn't going to be a full 18 mile stretch of 50mph zone (though speeds are quite slow through here anyway but even more so when people go through roadworks).
At any rate I very much doubt that they'll be working on the entire section for four years. It is more a rolling programme of schemes that can be conveniently covered under one heading (J4-10a).
As emergency refuges were mentioned above, I'll say that I don't think there will be any new ones on this section. The only part of it that was identified as having a cluster of accidents was J5-6. You can see HE's response here:
Petition
Scrap Smart Motorways & reinstate hard shoulders
The Government needs to address the danger of smart motorways & reinstate the hard shoulder for distressed vehicles.
My view is DHS needs replacing with ALR. I've witnessed too many vehicles using the hard shoulder as a running lane when it is not in operation. It's just an accident waiting to happen when a stranded vehicle is parked in the hard shoulder when it is closed. As for ALR it provides a useful boost in capacity and on sections I use regularly such as M6 J16-19 and M1 J16-19 it has made a difference compared to the previous D3M layout. As breakdowns are less common now there is no longer a need for a continuous hard shoulder. So to sum things up I would support a conversion of D3M in busy areas and all existing DHS to ALR.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir? Big and complex.
Truvelo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 18, 2021 20:18
My view is DHS needs replacing with ALR. I've witnessed too many vehicles using the hard shoulder as a running lane when it is not in operation. It's just an accident waiting to happen when a stranded vehicle is parked in the hard shoulder when it is closed. As for ALR it provides a useful boost in capacity and on sections I use regularly such as M6 J16-19 and M1 J16-19 it has made a difference compared to the previous D3M layout. As breakdowns are less common now there is no longer a need for a continuous hard shoulder. So to sum things up I would support a conversion of D3M in busy areas and all existing DHS to ALR.
Except that my own experience of M6 Jn16-19 is that if anybody breaks down in Lane 1, Lane 2 is shut as well, thus reducing the road from 4 lanes to 2. The considerable traffic level soon creates enormous traffic jams.
Truvelo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 18, 2021 20:18
My view is DHS needs replacing with ALR. I've witnessed too many vehicles using the hard shoulder as a running lane when it is not in operation. It's just an accident waiting to happen when a stranded vehicle is parked in the hard shoulder when it is closed. As for ALR it provides a useful boost in capacity and on sections I use regularly such as M6 J16-19 and M1 J16-19 it has made a difference compared to the previous D3M layout. As breakdowns are less common now there is no longer a need for a continuous hard shoulder. So to sum things up I would support a conversion of D3M in busy areas and all existing DHS to ALR.
Except that my own experience of M6 Jn16-19 is that if anybody breaks down in Lane 1, Lane 2 is shut as well, thus reducing the road from 4 lanes to 2. The considerable traffic level soon creates enormous traffic jams.
On busy stretches of motorway I'd rather have four lanes 99% of the time and two lanes 1% of the time than three lanes 100% of the time.
Truvelo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 18, 2021 20:18
My view is DHS needs replacing with ALR. I've witnessed too many vehicles using the hard shoulder as a running lane when it is not in operation. It's just an accident waiting to happen when a stranded vehicle is parked in the hard shoulder when it is closed. As for ALR it provides a useful boost in capacity and on sections I use regularly such as M6 J16-19 and M1 J16-19 it has made a difference compared to the previous D3M layout. As breakdowns are less common now there is no longer a need for a continuous hard shoulder. So to sum things up I would support a conversion of D3M in busy areas and all existing DHS to ALR.
Except that my own experience of M6 Jn16-19 is that if anybody breaks down in Lane 1, Lane 2 is shut as well, thus reducing the road from 4 lanes to 2. The considerable traffic level soon creates enormous traffic jams.
On a quiet motorway I would generally try to pull out of lane 1 if a car's in the hard shoulder, especially if there's obviously people in or around it. People in stressful situations act unpredictably and there could easily be kids on the loose. If you have the ability to, why wouldn't you give pedestrians on a smart motorway a large buffer? If nothing else it means the occasional red X ignorer might at least have swerving space.
It would seem smart motorways can't catch a break - if they're not being criticised for being too unsafe, they're being criticised for being too safe!
jnty wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 20:01
If you have the ability to, why wouldn't you give pedestrians on a smart motorway a large buffer? If nothing else it means the occasional red X ignorer might at least have swerving space.
It would seem smart motorways can't catch a break - if they're not being criticised for being too unsafe, they're being criticised for being too safe!
Indeed, given a HS is narrower than lane 1 on an ALR, it is rather dangerous that lane 1 on a traditional motorway is not closed when there's a stranded car in the HS.
Furthermore, I would assume that on a controlled motorway (i.e., hard shoulder plus smart motorway gadgets) lane 1 is actually closed in such circumstances.
So this supposed problem of smart motorways is not really to do with the presence or absence of a hard shoulder. It's basically just opposition to active traffic management, which I thought was the one thing that everyone agreed was good about smart motorways. Even the usual drivel from the transport select committee is premised on controlled motorways being safer than any other motorways.
jackal wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:58
Indeed, given a HS is narrower than lane 1 on an ALR,
Is that true? My recollection of the original motorways is that the hard shoulder had to be redone with deeper foundations to allow contra-flow when the first round of resurfacing was needed.
jnty wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 20:01
If you have the ability to, why wouldn't you give pedestrians on a smart motorway a large buffer? If nothing else it means the occasional red X ignorer might at least have swerving space.
It would seem smart motorways can't catch a break - if they're not being criticised for being too unsafe, they're being criticised for being too safe!
Indeed, given a HS is narrower than lane 1 on an ALR
If so one presumes the lane markings would be adjusted to place the narrowest lane on the right (where HGVs are banned from) rather than on the left.