Needlessly long road numbers

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

User avatar
Patrick Harper
Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 14:41
Location: Wiltshire

Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Patrick Harper »

There's a handful of former one and two-digit A-roads that were changed to four digits when they were bypassed. A lot of the time, this makes sense; the A34 was rerouted to the M40 at Wendlebury, and the Peartree junction prioritises this movement, so it makes sense that the M40 act as a multiplex from here to M42 J4 instead of keeping the old A34 running through Stratford etc.

In the same area though, there's been the loss of the A41 between Warwick and Solihull, which makes no sense to me. It's still a main, albeit not primary route. The A425 inexplicably dog legs around Europa Way, while it could run along the A4189 to Redditch.

Then there's the A1081 and A5183, 80s creations that don't need much introduction. Again, the Dunstable section makes sense because of the bypass, but the rest could be just A5 without contradicting the network in any way. Same with the A1081 from London Colney north, and A6 would be a more important sounding designation for an airport link to boot.

There's probably more but, I don't want to spoil all of them. :) I hope everyone has had a comfy Christmas.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19295
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by KeithW »

Well the A41 was largely renumbered when the M40 was opened to discourage traffic from using the old road which is largely now the B4100. In the case of the A1 the road from Boroughbridge to Seaton Burn has changed beyond all recognition, the old road is still there of course, mostly as the A167. Many drivers are creatures of habit so changing the road numbers in such cases is usually considered a good idea. As for the A1081 I doubt any sensible person today would use it in preference to the current A1, there is a reason they built the Barnet Bypass back in 1928 but unfortunately they gave different numbers to each section - the A5092, A5093 and the A5088.

This turned out to be very confusing !

Read Wolfie Coopers book the Great North Road Then and Now for chapter and verse.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-North-Ro ... 1870067797

Well before road numbers were even thought of the Great North Road went through York ! Indeed in 1960 the route taken by buses from Newcastle to London went through Gateshead, Chester-Le-Street, Stockton-On-Tees, Middlesbrough, Thirsk and York before taking the A64 to the A1. Of course the A19 still ploughed through most towns along the way, I recall seeing the bypasses being built in the 60's and 70's.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46716/4 ... 6716-h.htm
User avatar
Owain
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 26350
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:02
Location: Leodis

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Owain »

Patrick Harper wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 16:17Then there's the A1081 and A5183, 80s creations that don't need much introduction. Again, the Dunstable section makes sense because of the bypass, but the rest could be just A5 without contradicting the network in any way. Same with the A1081 from London Colney north, and A6 would be a more important sounding designation for an airport link to boot.
They're not actually '80s creations'; both are older than that. The road atlas I grew up with was a 1977 AA Book of the Road, which showed both in 'downgraded' form, causing me to spend much of my childhood wondering what had happened to the A5 in that part of the world, and why the A6 appeared to begin in such a random place.

It didn't bother me as much as the complete absence of an A42, though - I didn't discover where that had originally been until I was fully grown up! Speaking of which, the A4074 would be another for your list...
Former President & F99 Driver

Viva la Repubblica!
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9836
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Glenn A »

The whole point of downgrading a by passed road is to encourage traffic to use the new road. Some by passed roads do retain a certain amount of importance if they pass through a busy town, some going from an Ax to Axxx number, but a village that is by passed and has little through traffic could see the former road unclassified. Near me, the former A66/ A594 from the east end of Cockermouth to Embleton has so little traffic it has been unclassified since 1977. Another example of a by passed road that still is fairly important as it goes through a busy town is the former A1 through Morpeth that was partly reclassified as A192 as it carries a considerable volume of traffic in the north of the town. ( The A192 from North Shields also joined the former A1 in Morpeth town centre).
User avatar
RichardA626
Member
Posts: 7849
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 22:19
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by RichardA626 »

When I started using it on a regular basis I was surprised the Princess Parkway had A5103 for a number.
Beware of the trickster on the roof
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8812
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by trickstat »

Patrick Harper wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 16:17 Then there's the A1081 and A5183, 80s creations that don't need much introduction. Again, the Dunstable section makes sense because of the bypass, but the rest could be just A5 without contradicting the network in any way. Same with the A1081 from London Colney north, and A6 would be a more important sounding designation for an airport link to boot.
None of the A1081 between the M1 and Luton Airport is on the route of the A6.
User avatar
rileyrob
Member
Posts: 3518
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 09:18
Location: Lochaber

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by rileyrob »

There is no need for any 4 digit A roads in Zones 7-9. A large number of those that exist now are the result of lazy renumbering, particularly in zones 7 & 9
A7066, A7071, A8082 and B9119 were all B roads with the same numbers, and the A9000 is the former A90. The former A7002 also falls into the first group, while the A8010 was the B801 and the A8014 was the B814, but at the time the A8xx numbers hadn't all been used / some were already defunct (A842/3).

The A9011/2/3 were issued in Aberdeen when there are several A9xx numbers that have never been used, and more that are long term defunct.

The remainder of the early A80xx numbers that were issued were possibly needed in the first instance, although it is dubious if the first two used (A8001/2) actually needed to be A roads / could have been spurs. Most of the newer ones could have re-used defunct numbers (A8003/6/10/11), while the A8004 is a bit of a nonsense. This really just leaves the A8015 & former A8005, and for many years the A898 number appears to have been vacant - the first known use is for the Erskine Bridge in 1970, with other numbers probably already defunct, although both could have just been B roads.
Rob.
My mission is to travel every road and visit every town, village and hamlet in the British Isles.
I don't like thinking about how badly I am doing.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19295
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by KeithW »

trickstat wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 00:15 None of the A1081 between the M1 and Luton Airport is on the route of the A6.
As I recall Harpenden to Kidney Wood was the A6 until it was truncated in the 1980's and renumbered A1081.
See
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... A6/history
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... itle=A1081

From the SABRE Wiki: A6/history :

Page under construction'

At classification, the A6 was made Britain's second longest road and therefore England's longest. Its start was at Barnet at London and then moved to Bignell's Corner with the opening of the Barnet Bypass. In 1986, the M25 opened and the road was shortened by 17 miles. That made the A38 and A30 roads longer and relegated the A6 down to fourth place.


It's a good job the A6 hasn't been renumbered further north than Luton, as the A6 number has gone down in UK

... Read More
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9836
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Glenn A »

The A1 was rerouted through the Tyne Tunnel in 1978 and the former A1 through Gateshead and Newcastle was renumbered as A6125 and A6127 on maps and kept its primary status as this was still a busy route and included the Newcastle CME, which was renumbered A6127(M). To make matters confusing, only the signs on the motorway and its approaches were ever renumbered or replaced, and the majority of road signs in Newcastle still kept the A1 sign, while the A108 through the Tyne Tunnel had the 08 patched over. This confusion finally ended when the western by pass was opened and used the A1 number, with the Tyne Tunnel becoming the A19, and the Great North Road, while still important, being downgraded to a B road with all the old A1 signs finally removed. Also the CME gained a more important A167(M) number.
User avatar
ForestChav
SABRE Developer
Posts: 11126
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 00:00
Location: Nottingham (Bronx of the Midlands)
Contact:

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by ForestChav »

KeithW wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 09:15
trickstat wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 00:15 None of the A1081 between the M1 and Luton Airport is on the route of the A6.
As I recall Harpenden to Kidney Wood was the A6 until it was truncated in the 1980's and renumbered A1081.
See
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... A6/history
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... itle=A1081
That may be the case but I think trickstat was referring to the section which intersects that from the M1 to the airport. The present section of A1081 which was previously the A6 terminates on the dual carriageway, the western end of which was previously a motorway spur, before heading in to the airport and meeting the A505. I would have thought that the A6 would have carried straight on here and then either have been renumbered A1081 entirely into the middle of Luton or ending at the motorway spur when the M1 was built, which was presumably about the time the A5 and A6 became A5183 and A1081. The airport extension probably came much later.
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.

From the SABRE Wiki: A6/history :

Page under construction'

At classification, the A6 was made Britain's second longest road and therefore England's longest. Its start was at Barnet at London and then moved to Bignell's Corner with the opening of the Barnet Bypass. In 1986, the M25 opened and the road was shortened by 17 miles. That made the A38 and A30 roads longer and relegated the A6 down to fourth place.


It's a good job the A6 hasn't been renumbered further north than Luton, as the A6 number has gone down in UK

... Read More
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by owen b »

ForestChav wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 12:57
KeithW wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 09:15
trickstat wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 00:15 None of the A1081 between the M1 and Luton Airport is on the route of the A6.
As I recall Harpenden to Kidney Wood was the A6 until it was truncated in the 1980's and renumbered A1081.
See
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... A6/history
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ind ... itle=A1081
That may be the case but I think trickstat was referring to the section which intersects that from the M1 to the airport. The present section of A1081 which was previously the A6 terminates on the dual carriageway, the western end of which was previously a motorway spur, before heading in to the airport and meeting the A505. I would have thought that the A6 would have carried straight on here and then either have been renumbered A1081 entirely into the middle of Luton or ending at the motorway spur when the M1 was built, which was presumably about the time the A5 and A6 became A5183 and A1081. The airport extension probably came much later.
A few points / clarifications :
i) The renumberings of the A5 and A6 to A5183 and A1081 respectively occurred long after the opening of the M1 in the area, roughly 20 years later.
ii) I suspect the old A6 from (what was) J10A towards Luton town centre was declassified precisely to discourage traffic, with the powers that be preferring town centre traffic to use J11 / Hatters Way or A1081 / Gipsy Lane.
iii) Yes, Airport Way (A1081) was constructed roughly at the time of the A5183 / A1081 renumberings, initially mostly single carriageway. It has had numerous improvements since eg. the flyover at former J10A, full dualling right up to the airport, other junction improvements, and the bypass of the Vauxhall Way / Kimpton Road roundabout.

My view is that the Barnet to Luton, and the M1 J10 to Luton Airport sections of A1081 are fundamentally different in purpose, standard and compass orientation and should have different numbers.
Owen

From the SABRE Wiki: A6/history :

Page under construction'

At classification, the A6 was made Britain's second longest road and therefore England's longest. Its start was at Barnet at London and then moved to Bignell's Corner with the opening of the Barnet Bypass. In 1986, the M25 opened and the road was shortened by 17 miles. That made the A38 and A30 roads longer and relegated the A6 down to fourth place.


It's a good job the A6 hasn't been renumbered further north than Luton, as the A6 number has gone down in UK

... Read More
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Vierwielen »

One of the reasons for the very long road numbers is that road numbers are not repeated anywhere in the UK, unlike in France where "D" roads numbers are unique within the relevant departement only and likewise "C" road numbers are unique only within the local commune. The downside to the French system of course is that a road number changes when you drive from one departement to another, though it appears that in many instances, departements have been workign with each other to retain the same number wither side of the boundary.
User avatar
Was92now625
Member
Posts: 848
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 00:29
Location: near A625

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Was92now625 »

RichardA626 wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 22:31 When I started using it on a regular basis I was surprised the Princess Parkway had A5103 for a number.
I remember once (probably in the 90s), describing the route (from going north/eastbound on M56 to north/west-bound on M63 - now M60) and having to point out "don't be thrown by the 4-digit number".
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Vierwielen »

Was92now625 wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 19:30
RichardA626 wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 22:31 When I started using it on a regular basis I was surprised the Princess Parkway had A5103 for a number.
I remember once (probably in the 90s), describing the route (from going north/eastbound on M56 to north/west-bound on M63 - now M60) and having to point out "don't be thrown by the 4-digit number".
This sort of thing van be overcome by having local area urban route markers. The numbers on such route markers would be unique within any one metropolitan area only (eg Greater Manchester).
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19295
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by KeithW »

Vierwielen wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 22:11 This sort of thing van be overcome by having local area urban route markers. The numbers on such route markers would be unique within any one metropolitan area only (eg Greater Manchester).
Well of course that is pretty much happens with C roads, the problem is of course that in England at least we keep changing the boundaries of metropolitan areas. The house in which I live has been in turn in the following areas in my lifetime.

North Riding of Yorkshire
Cleveland County
County Borough of Teesside
Middlesbrough Borough Council

Then there are the contiguous roads that cross boundaries. The A1085 Trunk road which has never actually been trunk is partly in Redcar and Cleveland and the other part is in Middlesbrough.

Then we have the long established settlement of Nunthorpe which in the last round of changes was divided between Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland despite having been recorded in the Domesday book in 1086. The boundary is the railway line here , which given that the area hosted the first railway in 1825 is rather fitting.
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5278004 ... &entry=ttu
User avatar
skiddaw05
Member
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 21:33
Location: Norwich

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by skiddaw05 »

There may be good reasons for this if you know the area, but I’ll bring the A4500 and A5076 at Northampton into the discussion. The (albeit unimaginative) renumbering of the A45 between Wellingborough and Northampton makes sense but if memory serves me correctly the A45 used to TOTSO at the GSV with the A508, with the latter taking over the through route down to M1 J15. This is all now the A45 but it seems a long way round via the M1 multiplex to get back to the A45 at J16. The A5076 seems to me to be more of a bypass than a ring road so I’m not sure of the reason for the cumbersome renumbering of this and the A4500 to J16
User avatar
Owain
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 26350
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:02
Location: Leodis

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Owain »

Vierwielen wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 17:01 One of the reasons for the very long road numbers is that road numbers are not repeated anywhere in the UK, unlike in France where "D" roads numbers are unique within the relevant departement only and likewise "C" road numbers are unique only within the local commune. The downside to the French system of course is that a road number changes when you drive from one departement to another, though it appears that in many instances, departements have been workign with each other to retain the same number wither side of the boundary.
France does have some unnecessary four-digit N-and D-numbers (such as the former N6 over Mont Cenis), although I agree that there are far fewer than in Britain.

The situation here is not helped by the refusal to issue Bx and Bxx numbers (with the exception of the B77, of course!). Northern Ireland does have them, with the result that there are relatively few Bxxx and (AFAIK) no Bxxxx numbers there.

I don't really buy the argument that renumberings like A4074 and B4100 necessarily discourage people from using former Axx roads. Anybody who looks at a map and sees a motorway - or nowadays just follows a satnav - will avoid the old road by default.

And if there really is a fear that B41 might be mistaken for being a better road than the M40, what's the point in having A-, B- or M- prefixes, let alone signage in different colours?
Former President & F99 Driver

Viva la Repubblica!
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35939
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by Bryn666 »

Was92now625 wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 19:30
RichardA626 wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 22:31 When I started using it on a regular basis I was surprised the Princess Parkway had A5103 for a number.
I remember once (probably in the 90s), describing the route (from going north/eastbound on M56 to north/west-bound on M63 - now M60) and having to point out "don't be thrown by the 4-digit number".
The A5103 of course was originally just a local road that happened to have the M56 plug into it later. I've argued in the past that the A56 should've been rerouted down Princess Road (the old A56 west of Bowdon being renumbered as it serves no point) with the A556 being extended through to central Manchester. The A56 could then reappear at the west end of the M56 and take over that end of the A494 down to the A55 and voila, a single number for the approach to North Wales.
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
RichardA626
Member
Posts: 7849
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 22:19
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by RichardA626 »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Dec 28, 2023 11:04
Was92now625 wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 19:30
RichardA626 wrote: Tue Dec 26, 2023 22:31 When I started using it on a regular basis I was surprised the Princess Parkway had A5103 for a number.
I remember once (probably in the 90s), describing the route (from going north/eastbound on M56 to north/west-bound on M63 - now M60) and having to point out "don't be thrown by the 4-digit number".
The A5103 of course was originally just a local road that happened to have the M56 plug into it later. I've argued in the past that the A56 should've been rerouted down Princess Road (the old A56 west of Bowdon being renumbered as it serves no point) with the A556 being extended through to central Manchester. The A56 could then reappear at the west end of the M56 and take over that end of the A494 down to the A55 and voila, a single number for the approach to North Wales.
Yes that would be a better use for the number, it's possible to see on Princess Road where it was widened to be a dual carriageway by pulling down a row of houses.
Beware of the trickster on the roof
User avatar
orudge
Site Manager
Posts: 8368
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 12:23
Location: Banchory
Contact:

Re: Needlessly long road numbers

Post by orudge »

rileyrob wrote: Wed Dec 27, 2023 09:08 There is no need for any 4 digit A roads in Zones 7-9. A large number of those that exist now are the result of lazy renumbering, particularly in zones 7 & 9
A7066, A7071, A8082 and B9119 were all B roads with the same numbers, and the A9000 is the former A90.
The A9119 came into being recently as a renumbering of the B9119. I’m sure a different number could have been picked, of course.

The Cross Tay Link Road is to be numbered A9294, linking the A9 and the A94, but again, something shorter could surely have been picked!

From the SABRE Wiki: A9119 :

The highest numbered A road in the UK, the A9119 is one of the main routes radiating out of Aberdeen.

The road begins on the B986 at the Woolmanhill Roundabout in front of the former Royal Infirmary the city centre. It heads south initially on Woolmanhill and then curves round to run west along Skene Street, the initial spell of grand facades quickly giving way to parkland and tower blocks. Skene Street becomes Carden Place, lined with elegant villas set back in gardens and

... Read More
Post Reply