Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

[Article] Dual Carriageways to be re-classified as Motorways

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    flogen wrote:
    Just wanted to check something - the old Swords road / Dublin Road which runs kind of parallel with the M1 from the airport onwards to Balbriggan - would that be made into a motorway too?
    No, only select sections (those with motorway characteristics) would be. Otherwise Baggot Street and O'Connell Street would become motorways.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    no


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 425 ✭✭Niall1234


    I'd imagine that if Dunkettle to Carrigtowhill was reclassified to Motorway, then the section between the Dunkettle Roundabout and Dunkettle Interchange would still stay as National route due to the obvious alternative route predicament and for access to the Lee Tunnel for learners.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    Victor wrote:
    No, only select sections (those with motorway characteristics) would be. Otherwise Baggot Street and O'Connell Street would become motorways.

    Ah right... fair enough. It would be a bit of a pain if they did, as that road is probably used heavily by L-drivers going in that direction (including the girlfriend!)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    and for access to the Lee Tunnel for learners.

    Why should learners need access to the Lee Tunnel, are there not other places in Cork where you can learn to drive? This concept that learner drivers have to be allowed drive everywhere has to end, a provisional licence is a means of learning to drive, not a means of being able to drive from A to B. The qualified person accompanying the learner can drive through the tunnel if they want to cross the Lee.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,035 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Learners aren't the only motorway forbidden road users that need to get from A to B.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,879 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Niall1234 wrote:
    BTW, why is a rocket man up your back, maybe doing 120 when your doing 100, more dangerous than a 100 kph coming up to a 35 kph tractor ?
    Because on a dual carraigeway you have an inside lane? It's supposed, in theory, to be clear of normal (non overtaking) traffic, but you will normally find plenty of boy racers and other scoff-laws speeding in it.

    I oppose this move because I think dual carraigeways make better by-passes - normal road rules and usually fewer tolls mean nothing or noone has to go through the town, or whatever passes for the "alternative" route.
    Why should learners need access to the Lee Tunnel, are there not other places in Cork where you can learn to drive? This concept that learner drivers have to be allowed drive everywhere has to end, a provisional licence is a means of learning to drive, not a means of being able to drive from A to B.
    Perhaps because it takes anything from 10 months to over a year to get a driving test? The L driver is an easy target on these boards and elsewhere it seems. But at least until we have a driver licensing system that functions, L drivers will always be with us.

    I would much prefer that local authorities used their powers to apply special speed limits of 120kph to sections of HQDC. Would be much more practical.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,709 ✭✭✭jd


    SeanW wrote:
    I would much prefer that local authorities used their powers to apply special speed limits of 120kph to sections of HQDC. Would be much more practical.

    I guess the main reason the NRA want the roads designated as motorways is to prevent development leading to access on to the carriageways. If I remember correctly, Clare Co. Council were granting planning permission for developments alongside National Roads, perhaps the NRA want to avoid a repeat of this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 425 ✭✭Niall1234


    Sean. Just a few points.

    1. Tolls mean the roads are generally Motorways. Motorways do not mean the roads are generally tolled.
    2. 120kph on N routes are a nice idea, but cars driving at 120 sharing traffic with tractors, cyclists and pedestrians is dangerous. This is why these vehicles are banned on motorways.
    3. I agree regarding learner drivers. At present with such long waiting lists, learners will have to be given breathing room. Laws regarding leanrers can only really be implemented when you'll be able to get a driving test within a month or two of applying and when there will be less than 20,000 learners on our roads.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,082 ✭✭✭Chris_533976


    jd wrote:
    I guess the main reason the NRA want the roads designated as motorways is to prevent development leading to access on to the carriageways. If I remember correctly, Clare Co. Council were granting planning permission for developments alongside National Roads, perhaps the NRA want to avoid a repeat of this.
    And having cyclists and tractors with 120kmh traffic bunching around them is dangerous.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    jd wrote:
    Even the "New" Asford/Rathnew section? I thought it was built to HQDC standard, what is the problem with it?
    It wasn't built to HQDC. Due to a few issues, such as frontage access, and the need to protect trees from unnecessary destruction, many parts of the N11 in Wicklow were built below spec. There would be too much destruction if the N11 from Bray-Wicklow was upgraded. The best we can hope for is more junctions like at Delgany and minor improvements to existing junctions. And maybe a couple more frontage accesses closed off.

    Does anyone know if the access at Delgany village is going to be closed off when the Delgany interchange opens next year? They need this, the town basically has the N11 traffic whizzing by right outside pubs, etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,109 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    spacetweek wrote:
    Does anyone know if the access at Delgany village is going to be closed off when the Delgany interchange opens next year? They need this, the town basically has the N11 traffic whizzing by right outside pubs, etc.

    thats not Delgany, its Kilpeddar. I'd imagine the access on the northbound carriageway will be closed, but the one on the other side (leads to Kilquade) will probably be left open as it doesn't connect with the new junction.

    As part of the upgrade the northbound access from Delgany is being widened to become On\Off - this will mean traffic looking to access Delgany village (including the 184 bus) will no longer have to make a long detour up to the Glenview Hotel to turn around.


  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,894 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    As far as I know, the existing interchange at Delgany Golf Club will remain open to traffic, whilst the Kilpeddar village exit is closed off and linked to local roads. Did you know that the Delgany junction was the very first grade separated road junction in the Republic of Ireland? It opened in 1973 or 1974.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    JupiterKid wrote:
    Did you know that the Delgany junction was the very first grade separated road junction in the Republic of Ireland? It opened in 1973 or 1974.

    Was this before the Belfield flyover?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭Gillie


    Slightly off topic but there was mention yesterday of speed limits on Dual Carraigeways being upped to match Motorways?
    Anyone else hear this?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,588 ✭✭✭Bluetonic


    Gillie wrote:
    Slightly off topic but there was mention yesterday of speed limits on Dual Carraigeways being upped to match Motorways?
    Anyone else hear this?

    *ahem* Thread a few threads down from this one....

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=246


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,794 ✭✭✭Bards


    Gillie wrote:
    Slightly off topic but there was mention yesterday of speed limits on Dual Carraigeways being upped to match Motorways?
    Anyone else hear this?


    if you would care to read the topics of the threads there is one titled "dual carriageways to be re-classified as motorways" just a few threads below this


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭Gillie


    Jesus! This has been out a while so! Thought it was just mentioned yesterday.

    Cheers


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Posts moved.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 160 ✭✭MDTyKe


    Apparently the N1 - the new bit just opened (whole thing opening in a few weeks) will be upgraded too. It's definately M standard. Im not sure what the North will do with their A1 - it may become A1(M) or may not. On the approach to Newry, it's now 3 lanes wide each side, as opposed to the current 1... definately a big change!


    Matt


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,894 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    Originally Posted by JupiterKid
    Did you know that the Delgany junction was the very first grade separated road junction in the Republic of Ireland? It opened in 1973 or 1974.

    Was this before the Belfield flyover?

    Yes, I believe so - by about a year or thereabouts. There was also a private underpass for Roadstone lorries built under the Naas dual carriageway in 1972 to access their quarry at Cheeverstown but it wasn't open to public traffic.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,634 ✭✭✭Mayo Exile


    Article on the front page of the Motoring supplement in today's Irish Times (15 August) stating that there is a delay in reclassifying DC's to Motorways.

    http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/motors/2007/0815/1187036472081.html
    Promise to re-designate dual carriageways delayed

    Changing road designations to motorway from dual carriageway are being needlessly delayed, says Tim O'Brien

    It would seem that red tape is holding up Government promises to redesignate the new high-quality dual carriageways as motorways, thereby protecting them from development and increasing the upper speed limit to 120km/h.

    Since the enactment of the Roads Act 2007 this summer the Government has the power to act as promised and retrospectively designate the State's new high quality dual carriageways as motorways.

    But motorists planning to enjoy the freedom of higher motorway speed limits would be well advised to hold their accelerator foot in check: Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey is currently not considering any high grade dual carriageways for redesignation. This is because, according to his department, the Minister has not been asked to do so.

    The stance of the Minister would appear to be at odds with the urgency displayed by his predecessor Martin Cullen, who had announced plans to change the designation of motorways as far back as May 2006.

    Confirming that the new Ashbourne bypass would be a 'national' road, the then minister said it would nevertheless have a speed limit of 120km/h instead of the 100km/h "default" speed limit, as set out in the Rules of the Road.

    Challenged on the issue Mr Cullen announced a review of the designation of all the new high quality dual carriageways, with the aim of changing them from 'N' designation to 'M' designation.

    The new high-quality dual carriageways are built to the same specification as motorways he said, they were among the State's newest and safest roads, and he hinted strongly that he believed they had only been designated N roads in the first place because the planning process for an M road was more complex.

    Mr Cullen told the Seanad on March 7th this year that the change was important as anyone could create an access point to a national road, while access to a motorway was restricted to grade separated junctions.

    The creation of a power that would allow a minister to change a designation from national road to motorway was, he said, essential if the National Roads Authority investment of billions of euro in the major inter-urban roads was to be protected from over-development and urban sprawl.

    In the interim, however, the Republic would have to put up with yet another "Irish solution to an Irish problem": two different designations for new, high quality roads with different speed limits.

    Both have a carriageway width of seven metres and a hard shoulder of 2.5 metres and can carry the same volumes of traffic.

    The Department of Transport advises that road signs on national roads are green and therefore an upper "default" speed limit of 100km/h applies. Motorway sections would have blue road signs and an upper default limit of 120km/h.

    The Rules of the Road and the Road Safety Authority website tell a similar story but this is clearly not the case at Ashbourne where the "default" limit has been raised as the road forlornly awaits its promised redesignation.

    And there are other difficulties for the unsuspecting driver. The new road from Dublin to the Border was officially described as "motorway" in ministerial speeches at the opening of the final stretch from Dundalk to the Border earlier this month. But the green signs on the southern side of the Border depict an N designation - strongly implying a speed of only 100km/h.


    A number of the new high-quality dual carriageways will actually be tolled roads despite not yet being motorway schemes.

    Why has new Minister Noel Dempsey not acted to sort this out once and for all?

    Or perhaps for that matter, is it the State's 400,000 provisional drivers who are behind it, as they too are not permitted to drive on motorways?

    Certainly the National Roads Authority, with its billions of euro investment is a body which should be keen to see the designation made uniform. However, it said it can't designate roads, as that is a power reserved for the Minister.

    But this week Mr Dempsey's office appeared to lay the blame squarely at the authority's door. A spokeswoman said the Minister must first get an application in from the NRA to upgrade any route "and so far none have been received".

    In a written statement on the issue the Department added: "The key point here is that it is up to the NRA in the first instance to decide which routes, or parts of routes, would merit being reclassified from national to motorway status.

    "This is in keeping with the respective roles of the NRA and the Minister under the original Roads Act 1993. This Act, which established the NRA, places responsibility for the detailed planning, design and implementation of the national roads programme with the NRA. The Minister for Transport has responsibility for overall policy and funding of the programme.

    It seems the root of the delay is that someone needs to call into the NRA offices in Waterloo Road and ask them to ask the Minister.

    I have highlighed a piece above indicating the ambiguity here. Louth Co Co byelaws effective from today give a speed limit of 120km/h on this scheme.

    http://www.louthcoco.ie/downloads/Byelaws/NationalRoadsSpecialSpeedLimitByeLaws2007.pdf

    (See fifth schedule).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,972 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    My proposed solution to this is a mass ignoring of the 100 km/h limit, we can all plead confusion caused by ministerial ambiguity.

    Mike.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 524 ✭✭✭DerekP11


    My proposed reply to this news....its a ****ing joke. No doubt about it.

    What a half arsed little nation we are. A bit like a lotto winner wasting all the cash on ****e that has no foundation.

    Can't wait on the book. Whats it called again? Oh yeah, "After the Celtic Tiger - A Transport legacy."


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,639 ✭✭✭Zoney


    Well, Dempsey wasn't known for *high speeds* in his last job either...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,082 ✭✭✭Chris_533976


    Much as I'd like blue signs to go up everywhere, I think it would make common sense to wait till the interurbans are done. Its a waste of money (and signs) to have "Start of motorway" and "End of motorway" signs everywhere in a piecemeal fashion.

    Just wait till each interurban is finished and upgrade it to M THEN.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,035 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    How much can the signs actually cost? You're still going to have to have signs on all junctions entering and exiting the motorway, which would be the significant cost I would imagine. I also imagine the signs are reusable, as in they can be taken up and put somewhere else where they're needed. Meanwhile, while waiting for the road to become motorway, there's the danger of private accesses popping up, thereby ruining the massive investment made in the road.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Much as I'd like blue signs to go up everywhere, I think it would make common sense to wait till the interurbans are done. Its a waste of money (and signs) to have "Start of motorway" and "End of motorway" signs everywhere in a piecemeal fashion.

    Just wait till each interurban is finished and upgrade it to M THEN.
    But surely a bigger waste of money to erect ALL signs in green only to replace them ALL again with blue! Start/End of motorway signs are small and cheap, full size ADS signs are large and pricey!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16 Ford Cortina


    I don't know about sign manufacture, but isn't there a way spray paint the signs blue and then "repaint on the wording" in situ. In the US the letters on the sign are removeable.

    Or....Are the signs so cheap that it's just as well to replace them?

    I wonder will the contractor 1)remove the yellow stripes to make continuous yellow line, or 2) will they just paint straight over them? I think option 1 will look cleaner but probably not worth it.


  • Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Who does everything have to be so difficult, all that's needed is to replace the 100Km/h signs with 120Km/h ones. In the UK, dual carriageways have the same speed limit as motorways. If anything the ones in Ireland are safer as there is a hard shoulder for slow vehicles to use.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    In the UK, dual carriageways have the same speed limit as motorways.
    Really?? I'm pretty sure they don't. I was under the impression that our move in 2005 to allow 120 on a non-motorway was unusual at the time because it isn't normal in other countries, especially the UK.

    Agreed on upgrading to Mway before the road opens, otherwise you're spending loads of money on signs and then having to replace all of them. And they'll screw that up, like they usually do. The NRA should be directly responsible for sign erection on national roads!
    Stark wrote:
    Meanwhile, while waiting for the road to become motorway, there's the danger of private accesses popping up, thereby ruining the massive investment made in the road.
    I know there's no law against that, only a policy, but surely only a really stupid local council would actually allow it? ::roll eyes::


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,035 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    spacetweek wrote:
    Really?? I'm pretty sure they don't. I was under the impression that our move in 2005 to allow 120 on a non-motorway was unusual at the time because it isn't normal in other countries, especially the UK.

    It's definitely 70mph for a dual carriageway in the UK

    http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.htm#103

    That said, you do see an awful lot of them with 60mph signs up.
    spacetweek wrote:
    but surely only a really stupid local council would actually allow it?

    Well from the original article:
    The National Roads Authority has however been alarmed at the level of housing and commercial 'ribbon' developments permitted alongside dual-carriageways. When these developments are being built new access slip roads and junctions are also created.

    New NRA research has shown that 26pc of road deaths and 50pc of all crashes occur at junctions where drivers are making right-hand turns off roads and this is a growing problem on dual-carriageways where planning permissions are granted for developments with access roads to the dual-carriageway.
    ....
    Mr Dempsey said yesterday that there were major differences between the access and development controls that apply to the two road types.

    Development beside and access to motorways was far more stringently controlled than in the case of dual carriageways.

    So it seems that there are in fact, some really stupid local councils in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,639 ✭✭✭Zoney


    Stark wrote:
    So it seems that there are in fact, some really stupid local councils in Ireland.

    "Really stupid" would suggest that they aren't aware of what they're doing and the reprecussions. However, that's not the case.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,709 ✭✭✭jd


    At one stage a few years ago the NRA said it would find it hard to justify spending money on N roadsin County Clare because of the lax approach to planning permission there.


  • Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    spacetweek wrote:
    Really?? I'm pretty sure they don't. I was under the impression that our move in 2005 to allow 120 on a non-motorway was unusual at the time because it isn't normal in other countries, especially the UK.

    As someone who learned to drive in the UK and have driven there for 30 years, I can assure you that 70mph is the default speed on Motorways & duel carriageways, but as Stark says many sections have been reduced to 60mph, mainly on older sections that were existing roads that had a parallel two lane road built to make it duelled (the existing section sometimes being a bit windey).

    Many other sections have had the speed reduced because of volumes of traffic and large numbers of junctions thet cross the central reservation.
    Most interurban duel carriageways are 70mph (one exception I know of is the A14 between Huntingdon & Cambridge, when constructed 70mph - then reduced to 60mph when the road was redesignated the A14 (used to be A604) along with at least six speed cameras!, may now be 50mph due to ever increasing traffic levels (I believe more traffic than the Dublin M50!)).


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    jd wrote:
    At one stage a few years ago the NRA said it would find it hard to justify spending money on N roadsin County Clare because of the lax approach to planning permission there.
    I'd heard about Clare, does it happen anywhere else?

    They could argue that since the roads in question are being replaced with new ones anyway, that they'll then become R's and the private access would be allowed.

    Not that i'm defending them, or anything. :P


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    spacetweek wrote:
    I'd heard about Clare, does it happen anywhere else?
    Take a look at Discovery Series maps of south-east Meath, lots of rural roads (admittedly not national routes) have continuous housing frontage stretching for more than a kilometre in the middle of nowhere.
    They could argue that since the roads in question are being replaced with new ones anyway, that they'll then become R's and the private access would be allowed.
    No, they were even allowing one off houses one new national route alignments. Look at Ennis-Clarecastle, it is longer (north-south) than Cork (north-south).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,147 ✭✭✭E92


    Niall1234 wrote:
    Nice to see that common sense is starting to prevail.

    Having the likes of cyclists and tractors travelling on interurbans at scandalously slow speeds is quite ridiculous.

    Will Naas to Dublin be classified as Motorway but with a 100kph speed limit.

    If you ask me, a 110kph speed limit should be brought in for DC which aren't up to the 120kph limit.

    I would imagine the Cashel bypass won't get 120kph limit either.

    Why shouldn't it? I notice that according to the NRA the N1 Dundalk to the border scheme is a mere standard Dual Carriageway, yet it has a 120 km/h speed limit. There is therefore nothing stopping any Standard DC from having a 120 km/h speed limit.

    If all standard DC's had 120 limits, I would have no problem whatsoever with them(I'm more bothered about the fact you can only go 100 on them than anything else).

    As for the Motoways, I firmly believe that 120 is a tad conservative for them. Its still a lot better than the 70 mph limit before, but most of the Motorways I've been on in this country are well capable of as much as 160 km/h.

    I would like Motorways to have a speed limit of 140 at least, however not until such time as Irish people can drive properly.

    If the Irish could drive properly, I would see no real reason why our Motorway netwok couldn't have no speed limits whatsoever(it has been shown in Germany where they do drive properly that the parts of the German Autobahn which have no speed limit are every bit as safe as those with a speed limit, for all those who will want to slaughter me with this speed kills nonsense).


    Incidentally, when exactly are these upgrades going to happen, if indeed they will actually happen? Things have gone very quiet on this upgrading up M-way business recently.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,082 ✭✭✭Chris_533976


    Yeah, they need to actually start doing something about this now that they can.

    WE WANT BLUE SIGNS!!!


    But much as I'd like no speed limits, would you trust Irish drivers with no speed limits? Germans would be more trustworthy with that. Also, the geometry (bends etc) of the new motorways wouldnt be up to no-speed-limit standards. Slight curves at 120kmh can become unmanagable bends at 200.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,035 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    But much as I'd like no speed limits, would you trust Irish drivers with no speed limits?

    I actually don't think it would make much difference here. The thing is, it's a minority of people who want to exceed the speed limit on the motorways and they generally do regardless of what the sign says. A large percentage of drivers are happy to trottle on at less than the speed limit on our motorways. I was reading a free speeds survey (was linked off a thread here, free speed is the speed that drivers choose to drive at when the road is clear), and while the free speed in urban areas was generally 60kph (10kph greater than speed limit), free speed on motorways averaged out at about 100kph - 110kph.

    Increasing the speed limit by a significant margin might even discourage the drivers who drive small cars that aren't strictly capable of doing 120kph but drive at that speed because the sign says so imo. I know a few people driving Seicentos who will push their cars to the 120kph when on the motorway, whereas if there wasn't a speed limit, they might hang back at a more comfortable 100 - 110kph.
    Also, the geometry (bends etc) of the new motorways wouldnt be up to no-speed-limit standards. Slight curves at 120kmh can become unmanagable bends at 200.

    That is true. I notice a few of the new motorways have much narrower lanes and more incline/curvature sections. I always feel like I'm about to brush off the concrete median when I overtake on some sections of the Fermoy bypass.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 795 ✭✭✭jrar


    E92 wrote:

    I would like Motorways to have a speed limit of 140 at least, however not until such time as Irish people can drive properly.


    Looks like we're stuck with the 120 limit so - at least in our lifetime :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,147 ✭✭✭E92


    On the German sections of the Autobahn where there are no speed limits, the average speed is 150 km/h. So, it would seem that the Germans at least make some use of the fact that they have no speed limit.

    I've noticed that in this country we seem to drive slowly on M-ways(like at 90 or 100), and then those same drivers who are well under the speed limit decide that once they are off the Motorway and back onto single carriageway decide that they will now travel at 110!

    I don't exceed the speed limit on a Motorway(well the speedo says I'm doing more than 120, but speedos always over read by about 5%), but if there was no speed limit on a Motorway I would certainly drive a lot faster than that, as in as fast as my car would allow me to!

    I mean the truth of the matter is that no speed limits on a Motorway doesn't mean that everyone has to or will go flat out. It is expensive to drive very quickly (poorer fuel consumption once you go past around 130 km/h), and I admit that there are enviornmental issues with it(though the difference to pollution would be so small as to have no meaningful increase in CO2 emissions). Some people aren't interested in driving fast either, so why would they drive quickly?

    As I said already, the idea of no speed limits is a brilliant one in theory, but the pesky Irish drivers mean that if I could have no speed limits on Motorways in the morning, I'd say no way Jose! I don't think we're safe enough at anymore than 140 at the very most[130 would be the most we could get away with methinks](actually I have doubts about letting some Irish drivers drive at 100 never mind 120:D ).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,031 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    There's an environmental cost to travelling at 150km/h. If anything, speed limits on motorways (Europewide) will be cut in the future to something closer to 100km/h where vehicles operate more efficiently.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,491 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    E92 wrote:
    There is therefore nothing stopping any Standard DC from having a 120 km/h speed limit.

    If all standard DC's had 120 limits, I would have no problem whatsoever with them(I'm more bothered about the fact you can only go 100 on them than anything else).
    What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?
    it has been shown in Germany where they do drive properly that the parts of the German Autobahn which have no speed limit are every bit as safe as those with a speed limit
    Self fulfilling argument. The dangerous bits have reduced limits, the less dangerous bits have higher or no limits.


  • Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Victor wrote:
    What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?

    Self fulfilling argument. The dangerous bits have reduced limits, the less dangerous bits have higher or no limits.

    Too true, but a better approach is to have variable limits (Like the London M25) then when traffic volume exceeds a certain value the limit is changed from 130 to 110Kmh as volumes increase further down to 80 or even 60 and after the "glug" (well traffic modelling is similar to that of water in pipework) increase the limits back up to the maximum.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,147 ✭✭✭E92


    Victor wrote:
    What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?

    Well as I don't live in Dublin and in fact have never been on the Stillorgan Road, I can't tell you my answer.

    I mean the Cashel Bypass,that's a recently built standard DC.

    That deserves a 120 limit(not at the moment, but before they started working on it, I couldn't see any real difference between it and the N8 from Watergrasshill which is a HQDC). Having just come back on the M8, I can't undserrstand why it has a speed limit of 120, when the bit after it has wider lanes and margins, and yet only has a speed limit of 100? If anything, the N8 from the Cork end of the M8 to the Dunkettle is more deserving of a 120 limit than the M8 section(but I won't complain about it having a 120 limit:D ).

    As I mentioned already in a previous post, the NRA says the N1 Dundalk to the Border is a standard DC (not haviong gone on it I can't say whether that is true or not, but I take their word for it), yet it can have a 120 limit.

    The N18 Limerick to Shannon bit(don't know about the Ennis bypass bit) would be unsafe to have a 120 limit IMO, though 110 would be fine, because you can turn around at certain exits, and I don't think it is wise to have traffic travelling at 120 in the overtaking lane when people can enter certain parts of the said lane starting from 0 km/h.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,147 ✭✭✭E92


    murphaph wrote:
    There's an environmental cost to travelling at 150km/h. If anything, speed limits on motorways (Europewide) will be cut in the future to something closer to 100km/h where vehicles operate more efficiently.

    Indeed there is. I am aware of that. But the difference would be so small that it will make no meaningful difference whatsoever to the worlds' CO2 emissions.

    Perhaps if the EU spent less of their time telling car makers to redesign their cars so as to reduce their impact on pedestrians (these rules are reckoned to have increased the price of a car by as much as €5,000 , they force cars to weigh a lot more, be a lot bigger, be less aerodynamic etc which hardly makes cars more enviornmentally friendly), and let them get on with the job of reducing cars' CO2 emissions, then cars might actually achieve meaningful reductions in CO2, rather than this ridiculous proposal to have a speed limit of 100 km/h everywhere.

    I've heard that proposal before, and knowing the EU, they probably will be dumb enough to do it(eventually), which would be my worst nightmare.

    The EU have decided that the car is responsible for all the EUs emission woes, and so the car is the easy target.

    Of course, at the same time, they are the same crowd who make a big deal about having the open skies agreement, meaning a lot more flights, hardly the thing to do in order to reduce the worlds' carbon footprint, now is it?


Advertisement