A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon "news"

[KeithW]

That's absolutely true - but then you have sections like the Huntingdon bypass which is of very high standard and is *effectively* of motorway standard even if it is not legally a motorway. On those roads, it would be sensible to allow all vehicles to operate at motorway speeds, but it's currently legally impossible to allow this without making the road a motorway which creates other issues.

Indeed and rejigging the whole system to allow vehicles to cover the 14 miles a couple of minutes faster seems like overkill especially given the the Cambridge Northern Bypass is normally the slowest bit.

[c2R]

That's absolutely true - but then you have sections like the Huntingdon bypass which is of very high standard and is *effectively* of motorway standard even if it is not legally a motorway. On those roads, it would be sensible to allow all vehicles to operate at motorway speeds, but it's currently legally impossible to allow this without making the road a motorway which creates other issues.

Indeed and rejigging the whole system to allow vehicles to cover the 14 miles a couple of minutes faster seems like overkill especially given the the Cambridge Northern Bypass is normally the slowest bit.

But... designating it A14(M) and allowing vans to drive a bit faster on that stretch is a much better idea, given the strategic nature of the route. I simply don't buy it that professional drivers would be confused by the notion. And if you're on a tacho, being able to do 14 miles at 70 versus 60 does make a difference. And, indeed, there's no reason why the Cambridge bypass shouldn't also be in this category, along with other sections of the A14, such as from the M6 to Kettering...

[Bryn666]

That's absolutely true - but then you have sections like the Huntingdon bypass which is of very high standard and is *effectively* of motorway standard even if it is not legally a motorway. On those roads, it would be sensible to allow all vehicles to operate at motorway speeds, but it's currently legally impossible to allow this without making the road a motorway which creates other issues.

Indeed and rejigging the whole system to allow vehicles to cover the 14 miles a couple of minutes faster seems like overkill especially given the the Cambridge Northern Bypass is normally the slowest bit.

But... designating it A14(M) and allowing vans to drive a bit faster on that stretch is a much better idea, given the strategic nature of the route. I simply don't buy it that professional drivers would be confused by the notion. And if you're on a tacho, being able to do 14 miles at 70 versus 60 does make a difference. And, indeed, there's no reason why the Cambridge bypass shouldn't also be in this category, along with other sections of the A14, such as from the M6 to Kettering...

M14 or M11 please. Let's not perpetuate the nonsense of Ax(M) please

[c2R]

Indeed and rejigging the whole system to allow vehicles to cover the 14 miles a couple of minutes faster seems like overkill especially given the the Cambridge Northern Bypass is normally the slowest bit.

But... designating it A14(M) and allowing vans to drive a bit faster on that stretch is a much better idea, given the strategic nature of the route. I simply don't buy it that professional drivers would be confused by the notion. And if you're on a tacho, being able to do 14 miles at 70 versus 60 does make a difference. And, indeed, there's no reason why the Cambridge bypass shouldn't also be in this category, along with other sections of the A14, such as from the M6 to Kettering...

M14 or M11 please. Let's not perpetuate the nonsense of Ax(M) please

Well yes, I've long argued for the abolition of the Ax(M) designation but the short lived expressway concept was all about the A14(M)

[tom66]

I've always disliked the brackets. Why is it A1(M) and not just A1M? I've noticed some very old roadsigns do dispense with the bracketry, so presumably both were acceptable at one point.

[wrinkly]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before but Google satellite view and streetview both show the Huntingdon railway viaduct part way through being dismantled.

[Bryn666]

I've always disliked the brackets. Why is it A1(M) and not just A1M? I've noticed some very old roadsigns do dispense with the bracketry, so presumably both were acceptable at one point.

Signs without the parenthesis have always been wrong. From day one the correct convention has been Ax(M).

[Ishtaria1980]

There is a valid option for allowing LGVs to travel at 70mph. There are plenty of single carriageways that have a circular red 60mph limit on them as opposed to NSL. The 60mph limit applies to all vehicles of course, unlike the NSL.

All the authorities have to do is change the speed limit from NSL to 70mph on these "expressways".

It is quite nonsensical that there are plenty of these roads which are motorway grade yet LGVs are only allowed to do 60mph when there are sub-standard motorways like the M50 where they're allowed to do 70mph.

[Chris5156]

All the authorities have to do is change the speed limit from NSL to 70mph on these "expressways".

I don't think that would make any difference. The maximum speed for any vehicle is either the posted speed limit or its vehicle class limit, whichever is lower. Posting the speed limit in a different way wouldn't change that.

[Herned]

There is a valid option for allowing LGVs to travel at 70mph. There are plenty of single carriageways that have a circular red 60mph limit on them as opposed to NSL. The 60mph limit applies to all vehicles of course, unlike the NSL.

All the authorities have to do is change the speed limit from NSL to 70mph on these "expressways".

It is quite nonsensical that there are plenty of these roads which are motorway grade yet LGVs are only allowed to do 60mph when there are sub-standard motorways like the M50 where they're allowed to do 70mph.

The LGV speed limit is 56mph, on both motorways and dual carriageways

[Ishtaria1980]

The LGV speed limit is 56mph, on both motorways and dual carriageways

LGV = light goods vehicles up to 7.5T.

Under UK law Heavy Goods Vehicles (above 7.5T) are actually permitted to travel at 60mph on motorways and dual carriageways. They're only restricted to 56mph (90kph) because of EU law. 7.5T is classed as a light goods vehicle and they used to be able to travel at 60mph on dual carriageways and 70mph on motorways until the EU extended the speed limiters to all goods vehicles over 3.5T.

[Herned]

LGV = light goods vehicles up to 7.5T.

Oh right, LGV is a large goods vehicle in law

[Ishtaria1980]

LGV = light goods vehicles up to 7.5T.

Oh right, LGV is a large goods vehicle in law

Weird isn't it. Some non-legal terminology refers to them as light, others as large. I tend to go with light to differentiate with HGV above 7.5T. I've always said I should be in charge of everything road related

[Herned]

Weird isn't it. Some non-legal terminology refers to them as light, others as large. I tend to go with light to differentiate with HGV above 7.5T. I've always said I should be in charge of everything road related

I think you will find there is a queue for that role

[ManomayLR]

The LGV speed limit is 56mph, on both motorways and dual carriageways

LGV = light goods vehicles up to 7.5T.

Under UK law Heavy Goods Vehicles (above 7.5T) are actually permitted to travel at 60mph on motorways and dual carriageways. They're only restricted to 56mph (90kph) because of EU law. 7.5T is classed as a light goods vehicle and they used to be able to travel at 60mph on dual carriageways and 70mph on motorways until the EU extended the speed limiters to all goods vehicles over 3.5T.

56mph is extremely slow for a motorway and that EU law should be revised and scrapped.
Traffic will flow better if HGVs can do 60 or even 70.

[Truvelo]

56mph is extremely slow for a motorway and that EU law should be revised and scrapped.
Traffic will flow better if HGVs can do 60 or even 70.

From my experience of driving in the US there is less elephant racing and although some states have a 5mph lower speed limit for lorries it doesn't really cause the same problem as the 56mph limiter does over here. One thing to consider if limiters are scrapped here is the legality of driving to the EU. It will throw up a whole heap of complications. The same with the current proposal to let everyone who passed their driving test after 1997 drive vehicles up to 7.5T - will the EU accept this entitlement given they have had no training for such vehicles?

[ABB125]

56mph is extremely slow for a motorway and that EU law should be revised and scrapped.
Traffic will flow better if HGVs can do 60 or even 70.

The same with the current proposal to let everyone who passed their driving test after 1997 drive vehicles up to 7.5T - will the EU accept this entitlement given they have had no training for such vehicles?

What proposal is that? I've heard of the relaxation of trailer rules, but nothing about increases in permitted vehicle weight categories.

[Truvelo]

56mph is extremely slow for a motorway and that EU law should be revised and scrapped.
Traffic will flow better if HGVs can do 60 or even 70.

The same with the current proposal to let everyone who passed their driving test after 1997 drive vehicles up to 7.5T - will the EU accept this entitlement given they have had no training for such vehicles?

What proposal is that? I've heard of the relaxation of trailer rules, but nothing about increases in permitted vehicle weight categories.

There's currently a consultation running. Annoyingly, most news articles have incorrectly stated that all car licence holders will soon be able to drive HGVs. Journalists don't seem to know the difference between a 7.5 tonner and a 40 tonne artic.

[ManomayLR]

The same with the current proposal to let everyone who passed their driving test after 1997 drive vehicles up to 7.5T…

That would be helpful eg for hiring a moving van to move house without a driver if that is all a family can afford.

[RichardA35]

56mph is extremely slow for a motorway and that EU law should be revised and scrapped.
Traffic will flow better if HGVs can do 60 or even 70.

A couple of points:
I'm sure you'll remember that energy of a moving object at 70mph is nearly 50% greater than at 56mph (proportional to the square of the velocity).
The impact requirements for typical parapets over most railways (H4a) is to withstand a 30t HGV at 65kph at a 20 degree angle (~40mph allowing for some deceleration from 56mph).
It's clear there would have to be a programme of indentification and intervention into possibly deficient parapets throughout the country if the speed of HGVs were to be raised and this would include all parapets installed to the most recent standards on the most recent schemes.

On a social level, faster HGVs allow more services to be pulled back further away from rural populations.
For instance the nearest Parcelforce depot to Holyhead and most of North Wales is in Queensferry, Deeside, fully 80 miles away.
For Penzance it is Bodmin over 50 miles away.
Both of which are a long way to go if you're not in when the driver rings the bell and leaves a card (and yes I know alternative delivery options are available but it's the principle of logistics and centralisation that are the issue)