2+1 roads to be scrapped

nordydan

I was reading in the Irish Times today that the NRA are going to scrap 2+1 roads for future plans in favour of dual carriageway or WS2. Good news if you ask me.
Schemes will be evaluated on an individual basis, eg the ballybofey-stranorlar may be D2 but the Dromod Roosky N4 scheme will be WS2. Other schemes planned would be the N17 Tuam bypassand the N21 Adare bypass. As both these are planned to tie in to DC, hopefully they will also be of this standard.

If anyone has a log in maybe they could post the article.

mysterious

So will the Adare bypass be DC? This route ties into the Existing N21 DC Northwest of Adare. Traffic through Adare meets demands of DC, on the NRA counter it's over 15,000 and inflated during the summer periods. The 2+1 is only a cock up. I've nothing against these schemes going ahead if they meet the requirements etc, but the NRA cutley scrapped DC on the N20 for the 2+1 as it's cheaper. To blatant to me.

It just get's to my goat. This load of barney crap with road desgns in this country on every main road. Every few miles on the same road is differnent from the Next. DC,M, HDDC, 2+1, WSC, SC, It;s bloody nonsense carry on. N8 and N7 have stupid desgns the whole lenght, it would be a grand standard to the rest of the world to know that we too can have a proper "MOTORWAY" connecting cities. We live in a country awash with money wtf is going on


2+1 is just another stupid example of the NRA cock ups

lostexpectation

I thought 2+1 was the latest actually usful import?

did they actually start the 2+1

nordydan

They are working on the N2 Castleblaney Clontibret bypass, its 2+1.

Of all the schemes I reckon the Adare bypass is the most deserving of full DC bypass. I think theres another scheme on the Limerick Kerry road. The entire N24 was to be 2+1, DC would not go amiss here.

Slice

2+1 roads are almost as safe as motorways and cost a fraction of the price - it seems odd that they should be scrapped given the fact that few roads in this country actually have usage levels that actually justify the incredible amount of money wasted on building motorways.

mysterious

lostexpectation wrote:

I thought 2+1 was the latest actually usful import?

did they actually start the 2+1

yes but its was out of the hat choice for the NRA. For god sake, the NRA would do anything to build a road cheaper than it is.

Again it's fine on routes that are not justified for DC or Motorway. or steep terrains. But the one in tuam and Rathdruff, were the first DC sections on there routes to go ahead, but error................ Nra majickally decided to put 2+1 schemes there instead:rolleyes:

Adare was and should have been DC but oh it was delayed for a few year and now it will be 2+1 how strange.

corktina

the rathduff one is odd in that most of the 2 lane sections seem to be on the downhill or level sections....which means if you are stuck behind a slow vehicle uphill, you are really banjaxed.....and it must be very annoying for residents to have to go past their homes and then double back or to travel the wrong direction for the first part of their journeys...

on the whole I say, get rid, lets have proper dual carriageways....

Hotblack Desiato

Slice wrote:

2+1 roads are almost as safe as motorways

Hardly, given the impatience of many Irish drivers, this creates the risk of accidents at the end of every '2' section as they try to sqeeze just one more overtake in.
Certainly not, if you're a motorcyclist, with all that cheesegrater wire.
Yes, wire rope is on motorways too, but alternatives are much easier to install on a motorway, and it's pretty certain that wire rope will eventually be banned it's really a question of when.
I've had a good deal of experience riding motorcycles on French barrierless 2+1 roads, which work well. Irish motorists can't in general be trusted to obey continuous white lines though...

Fool 5000

Two plus one roads could be more of a common feature in this country as the Government look set develop more of this type of road in favour of dual carriageways.

The two plus one roads consist of two lanes in one direction and one lane in the other. This system has proven to be a success in countries like Sweden.
Now, the Irish government look set to follow suit and construct more of these systems as they plan a road building programme for the next few years.

This is on www.irishtrucker.com .This is all a bit confusing!

Slice

ninja900

Hardly, given the impatience of many Irish drivers, this creates the risk of accidents at the end of every '2' section as they try to sqeeze just one more overtake in.

Well the Danish experience is that 2+1 provides comparable safety standards to motorways and there's nothing to suggest otherwise in Ireland so far, granted there are few 2+1s in this country at the moment.

Hotblack Desiato

Do Danish 2+1s have wire rope?

The risk of hitting the wire rope must be higher because of the way it cuts in at the end of the '2' section - right where merging accidents are going to take place - on a motorway it runs pretty much parallel to the direction of travel at all times.
I don't think anyone will dispute that Irish motorists are in general useless at lane discipline and lane changing / merging, it's no coincidence that most driving tests take place entirely on single lane roads.

murphaph

At least some swedish 2+1s are enforced using proper armco barriers, not wire rope, which I despise as a biker.

I think 'proper' 2+1 using armco and not wire rope has it's place here. We simply don't have the traffic levels to justify fully grade separated DC's and motorways on most of our N road network, despite what people may think.

The ideal for me would be limited access WS2, but people here haven't the discipline to quit the dangerous overtaking habits which protected 2+1 ALMOST eliminates (I totally agree that last second cutting-in will be a widespread issue here).

So, all in all, we need more bloody policing of dangerous driving and the cops realising that there's a lot more to dangerous driving than just speeding and drink driving!

Slice

The Wiki entry for 2+1 roads has a photo of wire seperations on the Swedish model

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%2B1_road

bk

2+1 tend to be more dangerous for bikers for obvious reasons, however they tend to be far safer then non separated roads for everyone else and on the whole greatly reduce the number of road deaths.

The reason for this is pretty simple, they stop the worst sort of crashes, were a car or lorry crosses over into the on coming lane and hits an on coming car, with the resulting much higher velocity (if the two vehicles are travelling at 30 mph, then the resulting crash is equivalent to a 60mph crash).

Of course HQDC is preferable, however 2+1 isn't supposed to replace HQDC, it is supposed to be used on secondary roads that don't have the volumes for DQ but which can cheaply be used in place of 2 lane roads to improve travel times and improve safety to almost motorway quality.

Personally I find the 2+1 in Cork to be excellent, the road has vastly improved and it is now quicker and much safer then before. I was hoping it would be used extenseively on the secondary N roads not suitable for HQDC.

Chris_533976

bk wrote:

Personally I find the 2+1 in Cork to be excellent, the road has vastly improved and it is now quicker and much safer then before. I was hoping it would be used extenseively on the secondary N roads not suitable for HQDC.

Yeah I went up to Kanturk today through Mallow. Theres a big section of 2+1 on Cork-Mallow, you get about 1km of '2' and then a km of '1'. Some incredibly dangerous overtaking though. Jeez I thought one car was cutting it as I was forced into the hard shoulder, then 2 more came past me :mad:

Also, if you're behind a lorry on the '1' section, and some local access across the 2+1 appears, you get a 'turning lane' where the fast lane should be. So you dive into that lane thinking you're gonna get round it, only to see its just a bloody turning lane. Its desperately dangerous.

I'd scrap the 2+1, get rid of the big hard shoulders, and make it DC with a very small barrier in the middle. Would be safer, and theres room for it. It could also be done reasonably cheaply too.

bk

Chris_533976 wrote:

I'd scrap the 2+1, get rid of the big hard shoulders, and make it DC with a very small barrier in the middle. Would be safer, and theres room for it. It could also be done reasonably cheaply too.

I believe this is to happen on this road. The 2+1 was only temporary and sort of a trial of the idea in Ireland.

Chris_533976

Good

DC always seems to me to be nice relaxing driving. Not too much to worry about. On this 2+1 it just seems like a very scary drive. Inches from the barrier, lanes appearing and disappearing everywhere... you'd be exhausted from driving it.

Hotblack Desiato

Don't ya just love it when the government decides to use us as guinea pigs... it makes me angry that they decided to ignore all the evidence against wire rope because it is cheap (to install, not to maintain.) As we're putting it in, other EU countries are starting to remove it.

Sure the Swedes think 2+1 is a great idea but they've got Swedish drivers. That doesn't mean it'll work here.
Our problems here are largely due to attitudes and lack of proper training, in other words it's the drivers not the roads.

jlang

The new duallers aren't that stress-free to drive on either now that they can't afford the extra land for the grass medians we're used to and just have concrete inches from your mirror.

Our man in Havana

jlang wrote:

The new duallers aren't that stress-free to drive on either now that they can't afford the extra land for the grass medians we're used to and just have concrete inches from your mirror.

The Cashel Bypass springs to mind.

Capt'n Midnight

The dangerous bits on 2+1 are when the two lanes merge and people try to overtake before this happens. Though the barrier should help.

Large sections of our N roads have unused hard shoulders, so coverting them to 2+1 should in some cases just require paint and a lot of planning so the resulting lanes aren't dangerous. How do motorcyclists feel about the concrete barriers that appear on new link roads ?

In the UK they use narrow lanes, just wide enough for a car where land is tight. For trucks there is a sign that says - "wide vehicles to use both lanes". Not rocket science, but over here many urban and N roads have very wide lanes, far to wide to instill any lane discipline in the users. Most of our road users drive as far to the right as possible instead of keeping in to the left, moving out to pass parked cars and cyclists. This practise means that it can be very unsafe to overtake someone on a road that could have six narrow lanes on it !

bazzer06

I don't see any good in using 2+1 roads at all to be honest - the countries population is growing steadily and thus more cars are on the roads. This amount will continue to grow. What's the point in building a 2+1 when we have both the land and the money to build a DC??

Where is the future-proofing in all of this? Ffty years ago they built cities in the USA (for example) that were completely designed with the car in mind and look what happened there. 2+1 are a complete waste of time and money imo. This whole business of "this road doesn't warrant a dual carriageway" is really very annoying and short-sighted.

Slice

Well as much as the consensus appears to be in favour of dual carraigeway it remains the case that most Irish roads don't have high enough usage to justify DC/motorway standard on most national routes including those that are being upgraded to motorways at the moment, neither will there be in the medium to long term given this country's population. When most of the transport funding is put into building more and more roads it seems an incredible waste to spend it on roads that simply won't get used half as much as they should.

Hotblack Desiato

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

How do motorcyclists feel about the concrete barriers that appear on new link roads ?

A smooth concrete barrier is actually the best from a motorcyclist's point of view. Costs more to install but is effective against trucks and lasts for decades with little or no maintenance. Every time anything brushes off a wire rope barrier, a couple of km's are out of action until it's replaced and retensioned.

westtip

2+1 would better than the 1 + 1 we have on current national roads, what really p***es me off is on roads like the section of N4 from Carrick on Shannon to CastleBaldwin (an upgraded National Road) is the amount of space devoted to the "hard shoulder", which results in 50% of the road not being used. However it still doesn't deter those who want to drive at 45mph sitting on the white line in the middle of the road leaving enough room for a London Bus to pass on the inside, which of course would be illegal and absolutely no room to takeover if car is approaching on the other side. Why have a hard shoulder on a road which isn't a motorway (the usual reserve for hard shoulders), and how about some signs on the side of the road saying use your rear view mirror and pull over if someone wants to pass. My biggest worry with 2+1 will be drivee behaviour, and the N4 already has an example of bad driver practice; Part of this road is now 2+1 with solid white lines, going north just after the second turn off for Boyle, but you still get drivers sittting in the outside right hand lane refusing to pull over to the inside lane because they mistakenly believe this is the "slow lane or the truck lane" or they just don't look in their rear view mirror. The Garda are notorious for pulling on this section of the N4, they might do us all a favour if they pulled some drivers on the existing 2+1 section and simply reminded them of good driving practice, bad driving practices cause accidents. If 2+1 go ahead there needs to be an education campaign to get drivers to drive on them properly, ie to drive on the left in the left hand lane if the road ahead of you is clear. As for the "hard shoulder" issue, I suggest they narrow the existing hard shoulders on national roads to half their width - to encourage drivers to drive with their nearside wheel nearer the hard should yellow line, if they did this it would reduce (IMO) accidents on the national roads.

spacetweek

Bond-007 wrote:

The Cashel Bypass springs to mind.

Speaking of which I haven't been on it but it's supposed to be a HQDC which apparently is for all intents and purposes motorway standard. Can anyone who's been on it confirm this? What are the bends like? Sliproad lengths?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

mike65

Was on the N24 between Mooncoin and Carrick-on-Suir and it looks like 2+1 is being installed, they hav'nt finished the road markings but they have installed the barrier see what you think.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/mike65/21.jpg

Mike.

Chris_533976

I've decided I hate 2+1 with a barrier. Its just too damn dangerous and nerve wracking.

corktina

mike65 wrote:

Was on the N24 between Mooncoin and Carrick-on-Suir and it looks like 2+1 is being installed, they hav'nt finished the road markings but they have installed the barrier see what you think.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/mike65/21.jpg

Mike.

looks like it! mind that bit of road seemed to have had more than it's share of accidents, dont quite know why....

westtip

mike65 wrote:

Was on the N24 between Mooncoin and Carrick-on-Suir and it looks like 2+1 is being installed, they havn't finished the road markings but they have installed the barrier see what you think.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/mike65/21.jpg

Mike.

sure does look like a 2+1, could live with it as long as drivers use the left hand lane properly on the dual section, and in the single section drivers go at not less than 60 mph, and don't toddle along at 35 mph. I reckon with a good wind you could average 60 mph over a distance on these roads, which would be a vast improvement on the average speed you can travel on any long distance journey in this country - so roll on 2+1.

corktina

it's not fair to be expecting everyone to be doing 100km/h.....people are of different abilites and experiance and many are not capable of high speed driving...(or low....)

murphaph

corktina wrote:

it's not fair to be expecting everyone to be doing 100km/h.....people are of different abilites and experiance and many are not capable of high speed driving...(or low....)

In all fairness. If you can't maintain 100km/h on a good quality national primary route then you shouldn't be on it.

westtip

murphaph wrote:

In all fairness. If you can't maintain 100km/h on a good quality national primary route then you shouldn't be on it.

Absolutley spot on, a lot of accidents are caused by slow drivers not looking in their rear view mirror and allowing the rest of the world to get past them - the problem these 2+1 will create is the creation of slow convoys in the single carriageway sections and the chances of accidents where the road is about to go down to single from two lanes, when drivers want to just overtake that last car, van or caravan before going down to one lane. Say what you want about driver behaviour - it will happen.

dowlingm

on many parts of the Ontario highways I have been on outside urban areas, the "hard shoulder" is not smooth tarmac like the rest of the road. It's not an earth verge, I guess you could call it "unfinished road". Given that it's not a surface to be driven on, rather just to be parked on for emergencies, I can see the point in doing that as it probably saves quite a few bob when you add up the huge distances motorways cover here.

They also use grass medians with dips, some planted with trees, rather than narrow medians with armco barriers in those areas.

Slice

Did anyone figure out if 2+1 roads were actually being abandoned by the NRA or did we all go a bit off-topic on the issue? Also, if they are being abandoned then is there an NRA reason for why this would be?

mike65

No they are still being introduced see my post link above there are a few other on the way.

Mike.

corktina

murphaph wrote:

In all fairness. If you can't maintain 100km/h on a good quality national primary route then you shouldn't be on it.

im sorry but that is total intolerance...what about new drivers? drivers in an unfamiliar car? foreign drivers? elderley drivers?drivers looking for a turning? drivers with health problems? drivers with small, low powered cars? 100k is not a target, it is a maximum and anyone intolerant of other drivers are the ones who shouldnt be on the road.....

corktina

westtip wrote:

Absolutley spot on, a lot of accidents are caused by slow drivers not looking in their rear view mirror and allowing the rest of the world to get past them - the problem these 2+1 will create is the creation of slow convoys in the single carriageway sections and the chances of accidents where the road is about to go down to single from two lanes, when drivers want to just overtake that last car, van or caravan before going down to one lane. Say what you want about driver behaviour - it will happen.

probably true, but such accidents are not the fault of the slow drivers...they are the fault of impatient overtakers.......i know these guys are annoying, but they pay their road tax just the same as us....

Hotblack Desiato

corktina wrote:

im sorry but that is total intolerance...what about new drivers? drivers in an unfamiliar car? foreign drivers? elderley drivers?drivers looking for a turning? drivers with health problems? drivers with small, low powered cars? 100k is not a target, it is a maximum and anyone intolerant of other drivers are the ones who shouldnt be on the road.....

New drivers - if they're that inexperienced that 100km/h scares them, shouldn't they be on a minor road with their instructor until they're ready?
Unfamiliar car - the accelerator and brake are the same on all :rolleyes: why not take it round the block a few times instead of venturing onto a road like that.
Foreign drivers seem to me to be as capable as going fast as anyone else.
Looking for a turning - plan your route before you go. Also it's possible to observe more than 10 metres ahead but many drivers don't know this If I ever do get lost, I pull over or take the next exit then check the map.
Elderly drivers - if they're medically fit then they should have no problem, but again they have the option of sticking to more minor routes. Got to be less stressful than having a truck up your backside. Ditto for low-powered cars, but what car can't do 100km/h?
Yes, it's not a target it's a maximum but there's no reason not to do the maximum when conditions permit, a major part of IAM or RoSPA advanced driving is making maximum progress safely and within the law.
It's plain bad manners to hold up other road users unnecessarily.
There is no excuse for dangerous overtaking but there would be less of it happening if there were fewer people creating entirely unnecessary holdups.

Capt'n Midnight

ninja900 wrote:

Looking for a turning - plan your route before you go. Also it's possible to observe more than 10 metres ahead but many drivers don't know this If I ever do get lost, I pull over or take the next exit then check the map.

Or you could turn around at a safe location later and go back - if it's a right turn this may actually be safer.

And I feel very strongly that people not confident enough to drive on their own/on main roads should get more practise/instruction in quieter areas first. Driving is an earned privilage with a constant duty to the safety of other, not a right.

And if you are delaying others then pull in at a layby or similar to let the queue behind pass. If you drive slowly on the winding roads, then don't speed up on the straight as that prevents people overtaking you when it's safe to do so.

Don't hog the middle of the road, you are endangering anyone trying to pass you.

If more drivers had consideration for others then 2+1's wouldn't be needed as much as they are. 2+1's allow safe overtaking of drivers who would other wise obstruct traffic on most streatches of national primary route.

westtip

corktina wrote:

probably true, but such accidents are not the fault of the slow drivers...they are the fault of impatient overtakers.......i know these guys are annoying, but they pay their road tax just the same as us....

You are probably right, but there is nothing worse than having to sit behind them - More use of the public braodcsting services educating people on the use of teh rear view mirror would help.

road_high

I see on the KK county council roads section that the N24 Mooncoin bypass is to be classed as a dual carriageway. So it won't be 2&1 like the Piltown one (a pilot scheme).

Any other plans for the N24, pretty much all the sections from Boher-Tipp town (where i turn off) need attention. I believe if memory serves me correct the bits between Tipp and Cahir are in a shocking state. Certainly a road I would like to see get huge funding soon.

L1011

corktina wrote: »

im sorry but that is total intolerance...what about new drivers? drivers in an unfamiliar car? foreign drivers? elderley drivers?drivers looking for a turning? drivers with health problems? drivers with small, low powered cars? 100k is not a target, it is a maximum and anyone intolerant of other drivers are the ones who shouldnt be on the road.....

I do realise the post is 2 years old but the thread wasn't bounced by me...

Foreign drivers will be used to higher speeds on their main routes as it is; drivers with health problems that stop them being able to reach 100kmh shouldn't be driving; elderly drivers who can't cope with the speed shouldn't be driving; new drivers shouldn't be on national routes if they're that scared - their accompanying driver shouldn't bring them there - and you're not even allowed do the driving test in a car too emaciated to do 100kmh so I don't see how they're acceptable to use on national routes really.

I know its not a target, but anything under about 80kmh is unacceptable progress - which will fail you the test, oddly enough, and possibly get you charged under 'due consideration', although the chances of that are basically nil.

corktina

intolerant rot

cyclopath2001

MYOB wrote: »

drivers with health problems that stop them being able to reach 100kmh shouldn't be driving; elderly drivers who can't cope with the speed shouldn't be driving; ...

Says you. A civilised society accommodates people of different ability.

MYOB wrote: »

anything under about 80kmh is unacceptable progress .....possibly get you charged under 'due consideration', although the chances of that are basically nil.

Why do think that is the case? Could it be that the courts have sympathy for weak and vulnerable people?

Padraig Mor

corktina wrote: »

intolerant rot

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Says you. A civilised society accommodates people of different ability.

Why do think that is the case? Could it be that the courts have sympathy for weak and vulnerable people?

An elderly driver incapable of driving at more than 80k/h due to age. A young driver incapable of driving at more than 80 k/h due to drink. No difference in my eyes. If you're not capable of driving properly, you shouldn't be on the road.

E92

Padraig Mor wrote: »

If you're not capable of driving properly, you shouldn't be on the road.

+1

Padraig Mor

Padraig Mor wrote: »

If you're not capable of driving properly, you shouldn't be on the road.

True, as you will be a danger to other motorists (& cyclists).

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Says you. A civilised society accommodates people of different ability.

A civilised society doesn't let people who are unable to do something dangerous do it. Driving is horrendously dangerous. This is why there are medicals for driving past a certain age, and so on; and why theres a whole range of adaptions to cars which your licence can order you to have. If you can't have a vehicle adapted to your needs to allow you to drive safely, you should not be driving - end of.

Corktina - not sure you'll think of it as 'intolerant rot' when an old person smashes you off the road due to not being able to see properly, as I saw with a fairly serious T-boning on the Hazelhatch Road last night.

Irish and Proud

Basically, excess speeding and excess crawling are both forms of dangerous driving, and regarding the latter, this particularly applies on motorways (+ HQDCs) and other types of controlled roads (offline NP routes etc) where viable alternatives are available. At one stage, I came across a motorist doing around 65kph as we were approaching at 120kph on the M50 southbound at Firhouse. That guy could have caused a very serious accident - he was simply not fit to drive on a motorway - pulling no punches, it was reckless driving!!! :mad:

In short, if you can't keep up with the traffic, you shouldn't be driving, and if you can't drive without the desire for excessive speed, you're a lunatic and therefore shouldn't be driving. You have got to bear in mind: traffic laws, the traffic around you and the road conditions that are present (sightlines, weathers, pedestrian activity etc.).

Simple!